Anyone who pays any attention to the news atall should not have missed the fact thatrecently a number of shootings in Toronto havegenerated considerable notice. As in manycases in Canada when a shooting occurs therehas been the rash of obligatory hand-wringingand whining from predictable sources about howgun violence is such a problem for Canada andit’s about time we did something more about it.

More, of course, in the case of Canada meanseventually a total ban on firearms since eachtime we do more there is less to do short ofthat. The honest people suffering from afirearms phobia will admit that. Theirargument is who needs firearms anyway? They donot like them and do not see why anyone elseshould either.

Others are not so straightforward. Eitherthrough intentional deception or ignorancethey will say that a total ban on firearms isnot on the table. Well, maybe handguns, ormaybe this type or that type, always anothertype until there are no types left. And forthe types that they haven’t got yet? Well,maybe just register them, change thisrequirement or that requirement, add morepaperwork, tack on a few more fees, so on andso on.

This kind of approach, as we have seen, hasbrought us a volume of costly firearms rulesthat has wound up costing the country billions.And for what purpose? Certainly not toprotect us or solve a firearms problem.Although Canada may have the occasionalincident involving firearms it does not have afirearms problem, at least not outside of theminds of those with an irrational firearmsphobia.

The proponents of banning firearms like tonarrowly focus on firearms without puttingthem into context with the overall view of thecountry and its problems.

Canada has over 30million people. Total deaths caused byfirearms in 2002 was 816, hardly a significantnumber by itself, but even less so when youfactor out suicides which may well havehappened with or without a firearm.Statistics Canada calculates that about 80 per cent ofthe annual number of firearms relatedfatalities are due to suicide. Factoring outsuicides leaves us with fewer than 200 deathsper 30 million people to worry about, and mostof them were homicides.

In 2002 the homicidecount with firearms was 152, in 2003 it was161 and in 2004 it was 172. If we factor outthe number of illegal firearms that would beinvolved in those figures regardless of anylaws the only logical conclusion to be reachedis that so little damage is caused bylegitimate firearms in our society thatincreasing regulation on them is at best awaste of time and money.

Not only have our firearms regulations createda cumbersome and expensive burden for thegovernment and firearms owners, it has harmedour social safety net and done harm to many ofthe people that its proponents say they aretrying to protect. One can argue reasonablythat women in particular have been harmed byill-conceived, needless and costly regulation.

Just looking at the firearms registry alone isenough to prove the point. Estimates have thecost of the program currently at $1-2 billionwith fears that it may climb to $3billion. What else could have been done withthat money? On average way fewer than 100women per year are victims of homicide with afirearm, while a much greater number arekilled by other methods.

How can we justifyspending billions chasing firearms andalienating a large portion of the law abidingcitizenry when even total success asenvisioned by the anti-firearm radicals wouldbarely make a minute dent in improving thesafety and security of women in this country?Think, instead, of what $1-2 billion wouldhave done had it been used for establishingand improving women’s centres and shelters,for day care and otherwise providing moreservices and support for women?

In comparison to firearms, alcohol in Canadais a problem. More people are killed byimpaired drivers than by legal firearms, andover 50 per cent of accused murderers have arecord of drug and alcohol abuse. No doubtalcohol also plays a significant role in casesof abuse of women. So, one must ask, how muchmore would society in general and women inparticular benefit had some of the moneywasted on firearm regulations been spent onsolving alcohol problems instead.

Licensing people to possess and operatefirearms is a valid idea; registering firearmsand over-regulating them is a waste ofresources. Every person in Canada concernedabout our national wealth being used toprovide better healthcare, education,protection for the vulnerable and other vitalissues should be outraged at the waste ofresources that has occurred to solve a problemthat we do not have.