Large Fierce Mammal

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Sadly, when it comes to meddling with firearms law, the apple didn’t fall far from the tree. (Source: CBC News)

All these weeks into the global clusterfuck spawned by The Pestilence, it seems natural that as governments have become comfortable with the new reality (notwithstanding whether or not the body politic has) they would revert to the old habits inherent in partisan politics and party defining ideologies going back to great great great granddad’s generation.

And so has it come to pass for the minority Liberal government of Justin Trudeau which yesterday enacted and announced an Order in Council that bans more than 1500 “military-style assault weapons”. A sweeping “final straw” move attributed to the recent killing of 22 Nova Scotians by a man driving a perfect replica of an RCMP cruiser, and credibly dressed as a Mountie in actual components of RCMP uniform. Unlicensed to acquire or possess firearms in Canada, his crimes were facilitated by an assortment of handguns and long guns, all obtained illegally, most from the United States. At the time of the killings, people in the affected areas had been made aware by one means or another of an active shooter and several structure fires left in his wake, but police were still coming to realize the perpetrator looked exactly like one of them, meaning people would be naturally cooperative and easy targets. By the time they figured it out, all the damage had been done.

The scab is barely dry on the wound left by those heinous events, but it is safe to say that even if the present ban, which Public Safety Minister Bill Blair says includes two types of firearms used by the killer, had been put into effect a decade ago, it would have changed nothing. The investigation quickly disclosed that he had violated every current Canadian law and regulation that relates to firearms licensing, registration, training, acquisition, importation, storage, transport, and use. An already strict set of laws sold to Canadians in the first term of the Trudeau Liberals as necessary to “make Canada safer” was completely ineffective in stopping, or even impeding, the gunman’s clearly very lengthy period of planning and preparation.

And how could they be otherwise under the circumstances now known to have prevailed in the course of those terrible hours?

Sentiments about firearms and their ownership in Canada run a scale from open the floodgates and let the good times roll on the one hand, and calls for their complete uninvention on the other. Somewhere in between are people with an interest in firearms that is no more an indication of evil intent than that of one who appreciates fast cars. Pursuing their interest requires education, training, and accreditation in best practices and legislation governing when and under what circumstances a firearm may be uncased, loaded, and discharged. It also means being a target yourself for every government that wants to substitute “gun control theatre” for intelligent thought.

Wherever you fit in that continuum, it’s not open to dispute that we already have laws forbidding the acquisition and possession of firearms by unlicensed Canadians as well as their transportation or importation across international borders by anyone lacking official authorization to do so. Likewise, it is already very illegal to conspire, plot, or commit murder by any means, and to do so while disguised as an officer of the law is to be frowned upon from the highest level.

Had the killer survived to stand trial for his crimes, the legion of his offenses would have far transcended those that breached the Firearms Act. Enacting a dramatic ban on certain firearms will stop law abiding Canadians from acquiring, using, and transferring them to others, but those are not the people this move was touted as being the fix for.

Before this tragedy came to light, the Trudeau Liberals were hot on the trail of another killer that hasn’t limited itself to Nova Scotia, but still stalks all of us. I would suggest they stop wasting time and treasure on worthless dramatics until there is time enough to revisit what measures could have intercepted and prevented 22 murders. When that time comes, I believe it would be prudent, before any new laws are proposed, to begin with a sober examination of just why it was that existing ones were so absolutely ineffective. Perhaps with that answered we can move forward with laws that don’t share such impotence, through built-in acceptance that laws affect only the law abiding, and those of other sorts who are unlucky or incompetent enough to get caught breaking them. To go forward with laws that exist to define the consequences of non-compliance, that don’t simultaneously impose burdens on the compliant just for keeping faith. How great would that be?

Until next time Goode Reader, and in the interests of utmost clarity, I will close with this flow chart which you must click to enbiggen and release all its fragrant springtime goodness.