VOICE OF THE PEOPLE

NO NEED

Dan Doucette’s letter (“Guns weren’t legal,” May 4) was shocking to me, to say the least. It reads like something written by the uniquely American National Rifle Association. The idea that MORE guns for self defence in the hands of a supposedly trained citizenry would make us safer is preposterous.

In the case of the recent mass killing, how would you have responded to what appeared to be an RCMP officer stopping your car — would you pull out your gun and ask for ID?

A young black man was recently shot and killed while jogging in Georgia by a father and son who thought he looked like a suspect in a string of break-ins. They thought they were acting within the state’s citizen arrest laws.

I moved to Nova Scotia from the U.S. 27 years ago. One of the many reasons I am happy to be here is that guns are never in evidence: you don’t see armchair Rambos strutting around with AR-15S; you don’t have to wonder whether the guy in the next car has a Glock in the glove compartment.

Is the federal government’s ban on military-style weapons justified? I don’t know. I do know (as a former gun owner and military veteran) that there is no need for civilians to own weapons like this.

Ben Robertson, Windsor

VICIOUS CIRCLE

I am tired of hearing people say and write that you need guns to protect yourself and your family. Protect against what? The answer is against other people with guns.

Take a look at our neighbours to the south, who have the right to bear arms enshrined in their constitution. I find the gun culture that exists there to be shockingly absurd. Per capita, the U.S. has six times as many gun-related deaths as Canada. In a typical year, Canada will have 600 deaths while the U.S., which has roughly 10 times the population of Canada, will have at least 30,000 — go figure.

It seems that the more guns you have; the more you need ... in order to protect yourself and your family. Eric R. Jones, Bedford

DO THE MATH

I found the following statistics in Wikipedia regarding firearms. In the U.S., there are 120.5 guns per 100 people, and 12.21 deaths by gun per 100,000 people, from accidents, suicides and homicides. Homicides account for 4.46 deaths per 100,000 people. In Canada, we have 34.7 guns per 100 people, two deaths (including 0.75 homicides) by gun per 100,000 people. In Japan, there are 0.6 guns per 100 people, .06 deaths by gun/ zero deaths by homicide per 100,000 people.

Readers that disapprove of the Canadfian government’s policies regarding military style weapons have a beautiful option: move to Japan. As I understand it, a permit for a firearm there can take as long as three years, several medical and police interviews, proof of need such as farming or hunting, proof of adequate storage, and weapons handling courses. The Japanese government can still deny the permit at any stage.

A. Bouchard, Lake Echo

GOOD START

Peter Mackay is missing something with the new firearms restrictions. I know of no law-abiding citizen who needs an assault rifle. I have yet to see anyone use such a weapon to bring down a deer. The Harper government destroyed the previous gun registry, a Canadian archive, that was paid for with my tax dollars and they did nothing to increase the security of Canadians from such weapons during their time in office. This ban on assault weapons is a start.

David Sollows, Yarmouth

MAJORITY BACKING

I find it quite amusing to hear Peter Mackay calling the federal government’s timing “crass and beyond the pale” with respect to recent changes to our gun laws. How are his comments any less “crass and beyond the pale?”

Equally interesting, but not as amusing, are Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer’s comments concerning the ban: “That is wrong.” Assuming the recent Angus Reid poll is reasonably accurate, and I have no reason to believe it is not, 78 per cent of Canadians support the ban on civilian possession of assault weapons. If my math serves me correctly, 78 per cent would represent an overwhelming majority in any election. I suspect Scheer or Mackay would be very happy with 78 per cent of the vote in the next election.

I think that’s called democracy in action.

Clarence Guest, Dartmouth

THINK IT THROUGH

Re: not selling used police cars to the public.

It doesn’t seem to me that would be an answer to anything. When those vehicles are sold at auction, they are just white cars. All decals are removed. The decals make them a police car. Most white cars today look alike, and could be made to look like a police car.

Does that mean no more white cars will be sold? We need reasonable reactions to a terrible tragedy.

David Thompson, Wilmot

DON’T JUST COMPLAIN

In the past week, two submissions to Voice of the People have bemoaned the garbage issue we have in HRM. The writers indicated that during their walks they see lots of litter along the roadside. Both writers have placed the onus on the city and even the garbage collectors to help solve this problem.

During the same time frame, I have seen and heard several instances of the public helping to curb this problem. Through social media, several residents have challenged other residents to the “one bag challenge.” If every resident filled one bag on their walks through the affected areas, we can help to solve, or reduce this issue.

In particular, I would like to celebrate a lady on Rocky Lake Road in Bedford, who has filled dozens of bags with garbage, and has placed them curbside for pickup on the next garbage day. She is being part of the solution.

If we could all expend our energy addressing the problem, as opposed to complaining about it, we would likely have a cleaner landscape in HRM.

Peter Merrill, Bedford