Editor: At last weekend’s March For Our Lives I noticed two paradoxes. First was that people were petitioning their government to restrict their rights. I am not surprised, because these are the same people who use their free speech to protest free speech aka hate speech. The second paradox was that in North America we have one political group that wants to restrict access to guns, to protect children, yet they support abortions.
While the other political group wants to restrict access to abortions, to protect children, yet they support gun ownership.
With the Florida high school mass shooting, gun control advocates accuse gun rights advocates of not wanting to talk about changing laws to prevent these crimes. Well, here is a list of items that gun control advocates do not want to talk about.
1. There already were laws in place to prevent the shooter from buying a gun. The local police chose not to press charges for the crimes he had committed.
2. Gun-free zones. No one at the school challenged the shooter, not even the “only people who should be allowed to have guns” — police.
3. Psychiatric medication. Almost every mass shooter is on these mind altering drugs, which the manufacturers admit induce acts of homicide.
4. Defensive gun use. Every year thousands of Americans use their guns to defend their lives and property.
5. Prohibition of guns does not work. It did not work with alcohol or drugs and there is no evidence it will work with guns. Mexico has a ban on private ownership of guns and it is one of the most violent countries in the world.
The difference in gun crime between the USA and Canada has more to do with culture than our restrictive laws and Bill C-71 will do little to reduce gun crime in Canada.
Jason Bradner,
Abbotsford