Tuesday, June 12, 2007

What happened to good old common sense?

Not much time, but I did want to draw your attention to the editorial in today's Post - More gun control isn't the answer.

To me, this is a classic. It addresses the mindless simplicity of McGuinty and Miller yelling for a ban on handguns every time there is a murder in Toronto, and also manages to take a swipe at Layton as well.

There are some great lines here:

...But why is it the first instinct of most liberal-left politicians to go after the property of law-abiding citizens when the problem is so obviously the actions of criminals? Confiscating the former will have no impact on the latter..


...Rather than holding the United States up as a bogeyman, Mr. McGuinty and his ministers might want to look at what American authorities are doing well and apply it to the growing crime and violence problem in their own backyard...


...NDP leader Jack Layton, too, railed "We don't want to be hearing more about young people losing their lives to guns in our cities. So let's call on governments to pass the laws to stop the guns from coming across the borders."
But, Mr. Layton, gun smuggling is already illegal. Guns are crossing our borders because criminals are prepared to pay a premium for the tools of their trade, not because of some loophole in the criminal code....



...If Messrs. McGuinty and Layton really want to reduce handgun deaths in Canada, the Premier will pressure his Liberal cousins in Parliament to support the Tories' crime bills, which raise sentences for violent offences. And Mr. Layton will get back to Ottawa and encourage his caucus to do the same.


Indeed. But that would require common sense.



* * * *

Update: More great articles at Daimnation! The "pigs" are the real enemy.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

I fail to see how tougher sentences will deter crime. It has not worked in the past and surely will fail yet again.

Yes McGuinty and Layton are posturing (with some rather idiotic comments) but this Post editorial is not much more profound than their dribble....

Jeff Davidson said...

common sense would suggest that fewer hand-guns result in fewer shootings, no?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

If the criminals are in prison, it's less likely they will kill innocent citizens (while they're there anyway).

Fewer handguns in Canada would just mean they would get into the country by organized crime. Also kids can make them right in their basements. There was a case recently of a kid accidentally shooting himself from a home made gun. The police found several in the home.

Dave Hodson said...

Jeff, criminals having fewer handguns may result in fewer shootings, but passing more laws to ban handguns will not actually result in criminals having fewer handguns. They will still acquire their guns, regardless of the restrictions you place on them.

As to Joanne's first question of what happened to common sense? It's been my experience that common sense is not all that common, and quite a rare find among Liberals and Dippers.

Anonymous said...

Common sense in Ontario went out the door by way of Mike Harris. Little in the way of common sense in Ontario with most issues these days.

Catch the London Free Pres this morning and learn about how school boards are starving for cash, yet fewer students, and how elementary teachers want more money for YOUR kids.....total bs. Not exactly the message the Liberals are touting for sure.

Healthcare? Same thing. McGuinty says "wonderful" "low wait times" common sense of those on the ground suggests another story.

Go ahead choose any topic........

Anonymous said...

Couldn't we all just do both: ban handguns and impose tougher jail sentences?

It doesn't have to one or the other.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

It doesn't have to one or the other.

Well, o.k., but how is that fair to the collectors, etc. who obey all the laws?

mark said...

How about we ban or limit handgun bullet sales? Can't shoot someone with no bullets. This wouldn't affect the collectors and target shooters could buy bullets at the gun range. I'm sorry but I don't know if rifle bullets can be used or modified for handgun use. I know shotgun shells can't.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Mark, interesting thought.

Anonymous said...

"common sense would suggest that fewer hand-guns result in fewer shootings, no?"

Common sense would suggest that less Liberal MP's would mean less taxpayer money stolen,no?

liberal supporter said...

mark, I recall the NDP was talking about that when they were in power in Ontario. Not sure if the idea just went away or there was some good reason it won't work.

I've read that in Switzerland, every adult has military training and is required to keep their issued firearm at home. Bullets are also issued and must be accounted for. The only problem is at gun ranges you get handed a bunch of bullets and nobody counts them when you turn in the ones you didn't use, so you could sneak a few home. Still, it's not like you could have hundreds or thousands of rounds stashed away very easily.

You do need a FAC to buy ammo, as far as I know.

PGP said...

First reaction to the news about the gangsta bank robber and his shootout was ...... How long will it take for the moonbats to howl about gun control?

CP - answered by bringing it up in the FIRST report as Breaking News!

The rest just fell in line.

Stupid - Stupid - Stupid!

RGM said...

Mmmm common sense, how little we see of ye in the public spectacle.

Mark, I think you'd like Chris Rock's solution: make bullets $5000 a piece. People would think long and hard about shooting somebody then eh?

The problem with banning guns, registering guns, etc., is that the NRA's cliche does become true: if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. Classic prisoner's dilemma stuff: if I have a gun, and my enemy has a gun, and we make a deal to give up our guns, and he cheats, I'm dead, so I have little incentive to honour the deal. The problem as it stands now is that there are too many guns on the illegal market to make any serious clampdown effective.

It's a horrible situation, and there is no easy solution.

Concerned said...

Note to Mark:
On the suggestion of "ban or limit handgun bullet sales", .22 caliber ammunition is probably one of the most common calibers which will fit probably 50 to 60% of most rifles and handguns in the public domain. There are other cartridges that also will work in handguns and rifles (e.g. .44 cal. and others). This approach would be very difficult to implement with any effectiveness. This doesn't even take into account the people that reload their own ammunition.

Anonymous said...

Morons Miller & McGuinty have no empathy for law-abiding people, they'll screw them over with bans, taxes and regulation. Criminals on the other hand, especially dark skinned criminals, get all the empathy and the highest regards from our elected morons.

David said...

In reading these comments I haven't seen anyone address the common sense fact that it in countries that have strict gun control and/or ban handguns less people die from guns. It is also a fact that many handguns are stolen from "law-abiding" collectors. There is simply no reason for anyone other than the police to have a handgun in Canada. As someone sensibly said already, restriction and punishment are not mutually exclusive approaches.

Gayle said...

"You do need a FAC to buy ammo, as far as I know."

Some ammunition is prohibited - not sure what, but I know I was recently dealing with a young person who was convicted of possessing shotgun shells.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Criminals on the other hand, especially dark skinned criminals, get all the empathy and the highest regards from our elected morons.

There definitely appears to be a fear of so-called 'racial-profiling'; which has had the result of bending over to the opposite extreme of turning a blind eye to investigating any possible links between violence and black youth culture in large cities.

This fear of racial profiling is evident in other areas of our society regarding other issues and races such as with terrorism investigation, etc.

Political correctness has become an impediment to the solution.

Brian in Calgary said...

Indeed. But that would require common sense.

The least common of the senses.