Large Fierce Mammal

Back in March of 2018, I published an article here titled Smoke, Mirrors, and a Soldier, the inspiration for which was summed up in its first paragraph:

I read an article the other day written by Josh Makuch and published last Friday to Vice with the title, “I’m a Veteran In Favour of More Gun Control — Gun owners could learn a lot from how the Canadian military treats their firearms.” This was, of course, trendy because the Trudeau government is only this month rolling out the latest federal tweak to Canadian firearms laws in keeping with a campaign promise to combat “gun violence” by revising, yet again, the laws governing those who legally own, or wish to legally own, firearms.

Remembering that was early 2018, you can imagine my surprise when two days ago I found myself reading a CBC News opinion piece by yet another former member of the Canadian military — Tony Keene — titled, Why Canada should ban the sale, ownership of handguns — There is no conceivable reason why an ordinary person needs a handgun, writes Tony Keene, and that I realized I could react to here, if I so chose, by simply editing my 2018 article for appropriate changes of names and dates. However, as I meditated on that CBC News piece in comparison to the one from Vice I’d written about previously, it felt to me as though some editor had done that very thing. Of course, let the record show I’m sure that’s not what happened.

A bizarre realization nonetheless, and the similarity was striking enough in lyrics and melody that, had it been a song, I believe Vice would have a valid reason to go to court for copyright infringement.

For my own part, I regard it as nothing more than exploitation of a previously made point, built atop the same flawed argument, released into the wild in search of relevance with an audience that may have missed it the first time.

Never let it be said that I am above such exploitation myself, and so what follows will be my 2018 article, in its entirety, only this time with the aforementioned changes of names and dates, provided in bold type to illustrate just how little editing was required. While I do sometimes say that some of my utterances almost wrote themselves, this one literally did.

Smoke, Mirrors, and a Soldier

Version No.1, Mk.2

(Being an ever so slight rewrite of Version No.1, Mk. 1 published 25 March 2018, and incorporating all necessary changes to names, dates, cited links, number, and gender.)

By LFM

I read an article the other day written by Tony Keene and published last Friday to CBC News with the title, “Why Canada should ban the sale, ownership of handguns — There is no conceivable reason why an ordinary person needs a handgun, writes Tony Keene”. This was, of course, trendy because the Trudeau government is only this month rolling out the latest federal tweak to Canadian firearms laws in keeping with a campaign promise to combat “gun violence” by revising, yet again, the laws governing those who legally own, or wish to legally own, firearms.

This time, the motive is allegedly to stop armed amateurs from literally shooting themselves in the foot, and otherwise getting in the way of those who have been, “… properly trained, by the police or the military. ….” — read Gang murders bucking trend toward a less violent Canada, summit told,
Fewer Canadians are shooting each other than a generation ago — but gang life is as violent as ever, published by CBC News on 7 March 2018 — and the means of doing that appears, for the most part, to be by extra-parliamentary revision of certain aspects of the previous government’s amendments to firearms legislation. Remember, because governments never forget, that those predisposed to obey the laws of the land, no matter how onerous, misbegotten, and demonstrably worthless those laws may be in accomplishing their stated purpose, represent the lowest of the low hanging fruit when governments want to be seen to “do something”.

My first reaction to the main title of the CBC News article was, “So what?” To the subtitle expressing Mr. Keene’s opinion that, “There is no conceivable reason why an ordinary person needs a handgun,” I contributed a snort of derision and a repetition of the same utterance.

Normally I would read something like this — or not — and ignore it — or not. Not, in this case.

In fairness, this is an opinion piece written from Mr. Keene’s personal perspective as a 40 year reservist in the Canadian Armed Forces, but notwithstanding the respect he has earned and is owed from that, his past military service does not bestow any particular enlightenment in the area of firearms management beyond that required of him by his former employer.

Why should Mr. Keene give a shit what I think of his opinions? No particular reason beyond what two Men may respectfully argue over beer, and my only reason for even addressing it today is that in addition to its timing, this particular piece was couched in terms evocative of a few pet peeves of mine. So I felt compelled to read it more than once, and eschew silence thereby.

First, making the assumption that a Soldier’s opinion should hold more weight than that of the average citizen in the matter of laws governing civilian firearms ownership will make perfect sense if you don’t think about it too much.

Or at all.

It makes as much sense as assuming Police Dog Handlers to be experts in Dog training and behaviour, and that as such their ranks represent a well of knowledge from which governments may draw when crafting legislation to govern Dog ownership in society.

The average soldier “knows” firearms the way the average Police Dog Handler knows Dogs — by way of extreme familiarity with what’s been specifically selected for you by those further up the chain of command. It’s their job to define yours for you, make sure you get the necessary training, and the tools to do your job properly. As I once wrote:

“… In my own experience, both as a qualified firearms training instructor, and experienced dog handler/trainer, members of the public – including the media – routinely believe police officials to be in possession of knowledge and understanding that is not even remotely present. Using a Dog related example, Mrs. LFM and I have consulted in Dog behaviour cases wherein the people involved had first sought assistance from a Police Dog handler of their acquaintance. This has cropped up several times, and certainly not all Police Dog handlers will get involved in something like this, but of those that have, we have yet to encounter a case in which the problem was subject to any improvement whatsoever. Why is this? Well, I can assure you it has nothing to do with incompetence on the part of the Police Dog handler as a Police Dog handler. It comes from the fact that he or she is a specialist in working with a specific Dog – usually one chosen for them by other specialists who do that for their organization – for a specific set of purposes within a specific set of operating guidelines. They train together with their assigned Dog to become a seamless Team that is poetry in motion, but their occupation is a part of a very narrow and specialized field. This should come as no surprise because in many more areas of endeavour beyond K9 work, there are a myriad of examples of specialization. It must never be forgotten that exceptional aptitude on the part of a specialist in one field does not automatically translate into anything approaching the same level of performance in another, even a related one. As Socrates said, “Better to do a little well, than a great deal badly.”

“And so it is with firearms. I know a few active and retired members of law enforcement who have an interest in firearms outside of occupational necessity, and these will be more than willing and able to give straight word on what the law does and does not permit. But these are in the minority, and for most, their service firearms are necessary pieces of hardware that they must tote around, maintain, and periodically qualify with, and that they would be just as happy to do without if possible. Some of this group would prefer that nobody else have them either, but that is not a choice to be made on the law enforcement level ….” ~ What in the Name of Hell IS an Assault Rifle Anyway? Part 3 – Lock, Stock, Barrel, and Hyperbole

If you, as a Soldier, Police Dog handler, Butcher, Baker, or Candlestick Maker, have a deep and abiding interest in a subject beyond what’s required on the clock, then you may actually come to be an authority to some — even the highest — degree, but the specific occupation that puts food on your table, and any title it may bestow upon you, carries with it a very contained focus of application.

Second, there is the pesky area of references to statistics, specifically this from a British source describing U. S. “gun culture in charts”. In the current debate over firearms regulation, statistics offered by the Trudeau Liberals have received a less than stellar reception from people who actually compile and use statistics professionally — read Liberals’ claim of ‘steady increase’ in gun crime rests on a ‘drastic’ comparison to a low-crime year published 22 March 2018 by no less than the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

With regard to the aforesaid examination of a society that only superficially resembles Canada, Mr. Keene holds it up as evidence to support his assertion that:

“The more guns in society, the more gun deaths. Legal guns have a way of being stolen and becoming illegal. And even a law-abiding gun owner can cross over to the dark side under stress, delusion and paranoia.”

In another opinion piece remarkably similar in messenger, message, and tone, and previously referred to in these pages on 25 March 2018, the argument is based on police supplied “public data“ from 28 November 2017 and speaks to measures being undertaken in British Columbia to combat gang violence. It mentions, in part:

British Columbia is creating a police squad to pursue gun trafficking after a task force report found more than half of the illegal firearms seized in the province over three years originated from inside Canada.

Police data indicates almost 60 per cent of the guns seized in B.C. were purchased, traded or stolen in Canada, Public Safety Minister Mike Farnworth said Monday.

He said most people might think illegal weapons come from the United States or other countries, but it is common for weapons purchased legally in the country to end up in the hands of criminal gangs.

“Domestically sourced illegal firearms in Canada are now a significant factor in illegal firearms trade,” said Farnworth at a news conference.

“Individuals with no criminal record and with a firearms licence (sic) could legally acquire firearms and divert them to the criminal market.”

This allegation that legal firearms sales and purchase represent a major vector of supply for organized crime is turning up a lot lately, and gets generally accepted as gospel on the grounds that the police said it and so it must be true. Well, the police say a lot of things, including what was said in a 22 September 2010 National Post article by Tom Blackwell titled Contraband capital; The Akwesasne Mohawk reserve is a smuggling conduit, police say — in part:

Straddling the U.S.-Canada border, Akwesasne is Canada’s contraband capital, and the heart of the aboriginal tobacco industry that has flourished lately on a handful of reserves, producing a flood of cheap cigarettes so vast it might have stalled the decades-long slide in smoking rates.

Police allege the cross-border conduit is being used, as well, by organized crime to smuggle marijuana back into the United States and harder drugs and firearms to Canada. Security experts have long fretted, too, about its potential for facilitating more ominous threats, like terrorism.

It’s not particularly PC to discuss what legacy this situation may have, and whether it’s still having an impact in 2020. Easier to imply absent that pesky thing called context.

Anyway, Mr. Keene speaks from extensive experience with firearms drawn exclusively from an environment in which the regulations don’t change every time the government does, and in which his training was grooming him to shoot people in a horrifically chaotic environment without any of those people being himself or other friendlies. I applaud his dedication and service to Canada, but not his posturing as someone by whom I may be sat down and talked sense to because it’s the Army way.

Well now, wasn’t that a fun exercise?

Don’t go far, we’re not done yet.