Gun laws make a difference

In dealing with COVID-19, Premiers Scott Moe, Jason Kenney and Doug Ford recognized that governments sometimes need to curtail individual freedoms to protect the public at large. They deserve our thanks for deterring people from behaviour that would endanger others.

Our legal system has to define a balance between individual freedom and protection of others, and then create deterrents that will reduce the incidence of dangerous behaviour. For example, laws against drinking and driving have deterred many from driving after drinking.

It is frightening to see people marching around with assault rifles in government buildings, and puzzling to watch them protesting guidelines that were put in place to reduce the number of pandemic deaths. Unfortunately, when it comes to guns, Premiers Moe, Kenney and Ford have reverted to the mantra that less government is always better, and only harsher penalties will deter gun crime.

Of the deadliest mass shootings in the U.S., twothirds of the shooters died by suicide or were killed by law enforcement officers. For people willing to die, there is no legal penalty that will deter them. Arguing that law-abiding people should be allowed to have any weapon they choose ignores the fact that some guns are not needed by any civilian, and also ignores the fact that a mass murderer is often “law abiding” prior to the crime.

On a per-capita basis, in 2017 the U.S. had about six times as many homicides with guns as Canada had. Laws make a difference.

David Steele, Regina