More gun control won’t make crooks law abiding

This is the year of the gun in Canada, or more correctly, the year of the gun- control debate. Again.

Although the debate will be long and loud, its impact on government plans will be zilch since anyone who opposes the federal government will be whistling in the wind.

The Liberal government has pledged to live up to election promises related to gun control. The vague promises seem to boil down to a commitment to do “something.”

Here’s Ralph Goodale, public safety minister: “When I put forward the legislative package, I want to make sure that it’s a package that will succeed.”

Experience will not slow the feds down one bit. The fact that the Liberals’ last foray into gun control — the long gun registry — cost well over $ 1 billion and accomplished next to nothing will be meaningless.

Make no mistake, there is violence related to guns in our country, particularly in the cities. In a recent 12- month period, there were 375 shootings in Toronto, resulting in 565 victims. Not surprisingly, 39 of Toronto’s 61 murder victims in 2017 were killed by guns.

In spite of that, The Canadian Press reports guns are not involved in the “vast majority of crimes in Canada.”

Handguns, the weapon of choice for urban miscreants, have been tightly controlled in Canada since the 1930s. And yet there seems to be an abundance of them on the streets in the Big Smoke.

It’s not brain surgery to figure out criminals care not a whit about the law or whether or not the gun in their possession is legal. No new law is going to change that.

However, facts don’t always matter much in emotion- based arguments. A recent poll found that 69 per cent of respondents believe there should be a strict ban on guns in urban areas.

How do we introduce a strict ban on guns that have been subject to a strict ban for decades?

Polls such as that are misleading because the question suggests there are easy answers to tough questions such as urban gun violence.

The rural- urban divide becomes a chasm in gun- control discussions. Here’s how The Canadian Press described the divide: “Urban Canadians view the issue far differently than rural dwellers who use guns to hunt for food and protect themselves in remote regions beyond the every- day reach of law enforcement.”

That kind of misrepresentation of rural Canada doesn’t help.

Our rural property is well within reach of law enforcement.

One of the few times guns have been used on this farm was to kill a rabid fox that was eating our ducks and attacked one of our horses.

Had I not had ready access to a rifle, the fox likely would have passed the disease to every other critter on the property.

We don’t draw a bead on strangers coming up the drive, but we do live in an area where wildlife can be a serious threat. Plus hunting is a way of life for many of our neighbours.

Maybe the feds will find a way to enshrine the rural- urban divide into legislation. It’s more likely the patterns of the past will prevail and rural residents will have to figure out how to live with the laws designed to appease urbanites.