Long on posturing, short on solutions when it comes to gun crimes.
CA NADIAN LEGISLATORS LONG ON POSTURING, SHORT ON SOLUTIONS
No matter how dysfunctional they are in other ways, people determined to kill other people somehow always prove capable of getting their hands on a weapon.
They may be repressed, anti-social, unable to make friends, hold a job, survive in normal society or deal with the world in an ordinary manner. They may have mental issues they can’t or won’t deal with. They may reject help or struggle with drugs. Whatever the handicap they’re burdened with, the one thing they always seem able to do is figure out where to get a gun they can kill people with.
One reason for that is that we live next door to the most gun-friendly country in the world. Even while Toronto was reeling from Sunday’s mass shooting, a U.S. appeals court ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects the right to openly carry a loaded gun in public, and Florida was declining to charge a man who shot a stranger to death over parking. America is unwilling to do anything about its gun fetish, no matter how many people are massacred as a result, and that will always put limits on how much Canada can protect itself from the spillover.
But we also get in our own way. Much tougher efforts to spot gun smugglers at the border might increase the rate of interception, but would be costly, intrusive, damaging to the easy flow of goods and objectionable to activist groups that would inevitably spot a pattern to searches and raise complaints.
Politicians are unwilling to pay the price of that. The proposals Canadian legislators raise when pressed for solutions are usually long on posturing and short on practicality. The federal Liberals demonstrated that with their ill-conceived longgun registry, which imposed stricter regulations on lawabiding gun owners but did little to deter illicit sales and usage. Toronto’s request for a handgun ban within city limits in the wake of Sunday’s tragedy is understandable enough, but of little greater utility, unless they plan to erect metal detectors at the city limits and screen everyone on the way in. Banning the sale of ammunition and building a high-tech “shotspotting” web holds similarly little potential, and already has the easily alarmed worrying that microphones meant to listen for gun shots would be used to eavesdrop on private conversations.
Much stricter enforcement of existing gun laws might have an impact, but as a society we have proved unwilling to accommodate that intrusion on individual rights, even if it might save lives. The communities where enforcement gets tightened resent the fact they are targeted. The intense opposition to carding — which allows police to collect information via random street checks — resulted from evidence that black or Indigenous people were far more likely to be stopped than white people.
The system seemed to work: Peel Region Police Chief Jennifer Evans said restrictions brought in by the provincial Liberals resulted in an increase in shootings. “This has empowered criminals, who think officers won’t stop them, they now are more confident that they will get away with carrying guns and knives. We have seen an increase in violent crime over the past year,” she said. But the pressure from community groups, activists and human rights organizations has proven more compelling to legislators than complaints from police upset at being stripped of a useful tool. And the police haven’t helped themselves by resisting measures that might help weed out the small number of bona fide racists and deadbeats from their own ranks, who stain the reputation of the police fraternity as a whole and give their critics the (rhetorical) ammunition they need.
Ontario has earned a dubious reputation as one of the most difficult places in Canada to get rid of a bad cop. It is almost impossible to fire a police officer in Toronto, and even blatant lawbreakers can spend years on full pay while efforts to free the force of their presence wind their way slowly through innumerable procedural and appeal processes. An attempt to introduce stricter and more effective oversight, due to take effect this month, was halted by the new Progressive Conservative government of Premier Doug Ford, even though it had broad support and the backing of police boards and the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police.
Police chiefs know who the bad apples are, but have been regularly stymied, while police unions have successfully lobbied to prevent stricter oversight. Ford himself was harshly critical of police investigations into his brother, Rob, during Rob Ford’s mayoralty. Bill Blair — then Toronto’s police chief and now the newly installed federal minister of border security and organized crime reduction — threatened to sue Ford over his allegations.
Ford’s shift in attitude has everything to do with Tory voters being big fans of law enforcement and cops in general. “Ontario’s hard-working police officers deserve to be treated with respect,” he proclaimed in announcing cancellation of the reform package. True enough, but showing respect doesn’t require unconditional indulgence, or unquestioning adherence to union demands. There is no need for the community to prostrate itself before the people they count on to defend it.
Ford is promising “a full and thorough review of the legislation” before a new version is introduced, and should follow through on that pledge. There is no question change is needed. Pandering and posturing will only produce additional delays to much-needed reforms.
Gun crime won’t go away, and communities won’t stop resisting needed enforcement actions as long as they lack adequate faith in the people doing the enforcement. Simply targeting bad guys won’t be enough in itself, either — much greater effort has to be put into addressing the alienation and anger that are root causes of the growth in gangs. The two work in tandem, but before that can happen there needs to be much greater trust on both sides. That is the real challenge facing the community if it wants to feel safe again.
SIMPLY TARGETING BAD GUYS WON’T BE ENOUGH IN ITSELF. — KELLY MCPARLAND