| |
Blog of Adam Daifallah -- author, journalist, law student. Lover of politics, writing, golf, curling, fitness, fashion, bacon and maple products -- not necessarily (but probably) in that order. Partisan of the Anglosphere. Contact me via email at adam@daifallah.com. This summer I am joined by Keir Wilmut and Omar Soliman.
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Gunfire in Toronto
This past weekend was another bloody one in Toronto: several shootings, including one that resulted in the death of Ephraim Brown, an 11-year old boy.
Mayor David Miller has decided that US guns are the cause, and convincing the US government to change their gun laws is the solution:
"It's time for the Canadian government to say to the U.S. 'we are good friends, but your gun laws are exporting a problem to our country and it is not acceptable any more and you need to take action,'" he said Monday.
This is… well, somewhat naïve, is perhaps the politest way to put it. Let’s assume for a moment that US guns are the source of Toronto’s problems, and that tightening gun laws in the US would cause the violence to stop. Is there anyone – including Mayor Miller – who seriously believes that the Canadian government has the ability to influence US gun control policy?
Gun ownership is the US is a complicated issue. Entrenched in the Constitution, the right to bear arms is viewed by large numbers of Americans as inalienable a right as the right to free speech. A powerful gun lobby advocates on behalf of gun owners, while an almost-as-powerful anti-gun lobby has fought for decades trying to restrict gun ownership.
Given the massive amounts of money in play, and the gun-issue voting blocks that can make or break candidates for office south of the border, it is not realistic to believe that chiding from the Canadian government would have any effect on American gun policy.
What, then, can be done about gun violence? Is there anything within the control of the Canadian government that ought be considered to try and reduce the gunfire? Perhaps… oh, I don’t know, a look at the criminal justice system?
The two [accused] men, just out of their teens, have a history of criminal charges. In Mr. Eubank's case, those charges include weapons offences, allegations he assaulted a police officer and, on one occasion, eight counts of failing to comply with bail conditions.
In the summer of 2005, Mr. Sappleton was arrested and charged in connection with the notorious drive-by shooting that wounded four-year-old Shaquan Cadougan — charges that were withdrawn by prosecutors. Both men allegedly have gang connections. Both are well known to police.
All accused are innocent until proven guilty, and a series of unproven criminal charges does not mean these two men are guilty of anything. But the string of violent charges coupled with the repeated failing of at least one of the accused to comply with bail charges does raise issues about the efficacy of the Ontario justice system when dealing with known gang members.
Let’s look closer to home before we embark on a quixotic quest to change American gun laws.
# posted by Keir Wilmut : 12:13 PM
|
