Bill Blair, the federal Liberals’ minister of Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction explained why the government had decided against banning handguns. “I believe that would be potentially a very expensive proposition,” Blair said, referring to the potential costs of a massive buyback of almost a million lawfully owned guns and their related accessories. “But just as importantly,” he told the Globe, “it would not in my opinion be perhaps the most effective measure in restricting the access that criminals would have to such weapons, because we’d still have a problem with them being smuggled across the border.”
I guess the federal government needed almost a full year of study to conclude what was always blindingly obvious — the supply of firearms to the gangs responsible for most of the shootings in Canada’s largest cities comes from the United States. Some handguns can be traced back to Canadian owners (individuals, institutions or even gun stores). These guns can be stolen or unlawfully diverted onto the black market. But the evidence has long been clear that the U.S. remains the main supplier, and there’s zero evidence to suggest (and no reason to believe) that any tightening of the supply of guns from Canadian sources wouldn’t be instantly offset by an increased supply from the U.S. Guns sold on the black market in Canada can already sell well beyond the market value a target shooter would pay for it in a gun store. This is because selling guns, like any other controlled object, is lucrative. Banning Canadian guns would enrich smugglers, not reduce crime.
No comments:
Post a Comment