Gun control

I am about to write something that I hope will be viewed as an attempt to get people talking about the need for gun control in the wake of the Virginia Tech massacre. It is my understanding that while this tragedy has spawned much discussion on the topic here in Canada, it hasn't received much play south of the border. In fact, neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have voiced a position on this.

Here's how a similar incident was handled in the Land Down Under.

Did you know that in the 10.5 years since the 1996 incident that killed 35 people in Australia, there has not been a single mass murder? Do you know why? Because in days following that incident, all semi-automatic, rapid-fire weapons were completely banned in that country. The government bought back more than 600,000 of these weapons and destroyed them.

Here's what the law looks like as quoted from the British Journal of Criminology (BJC):

"After the 1996 mass killing of 35 people at the Port Arthur historical site, Australia enacted gun controls that are considered among the most stringent in the developed world. Briefly, the National Firearms Agreement (NFA), which was ratified by Federal Parliament in 1996 and implemented across all States and Territories by the end of 1997, prohibited certain types of firearms, in particular semi-automatic rifles and semiautomatic and pump action shotguns. To facilitate the removal of these firearms, a government-funded ‘buy-back’ scheme was designed, whereby owners were compensated for handing in their firearms. Over 600,000 firearms were subsequently destroyed by police.

"The NFA also introduced strict requirements governing the possession of firearms, such as the necessity to have a proven or ‘genuine reason’ for firearm ownership (self defence was explicitly excluded), compulsory written safety tests and the stipulation that all privately owned firearms must be registered through a State-controlled firearms licensing body. Additional components such as safe storage of firearms when not in use and 28-day waiting periods for acquisitions of firearms were included in the reforms."

What has happened since the ban?

According to a a CBC report this morning, (Pediatricians weigh in on gun control: http://www.cbc.ca/informationmorningns/interviews.html) a study published in the December 2006 issue of the Journal of Accident Prevention has found that:

1) There has not been a single mass shooting since the incident in 1996. (There had been 11 such shootings in the previous 10 years.)

2) Suicides by firearm had decreased (from 385 to 168: BJC stats) and have not been replaced by other forms of suicide.

3) Homicide by firearms have also decreased (from 75 to 32: BJC stats) since 1996. Other forms of homicide have maintained rates of between 213 and 276 per year (BJC stats).

In the meantime, this is what the picture looks like in the U.S. according to Henry Champ, the CBC Newsworld's correspondent in Washington, D.C.

"In reporting from Blacksburg, Va., I have frequently been asked by CBC program hosts what effect this terrible shooting at Virgina Tech will have on the gun control debate in the U.S.
It's a good question, a sensible, obvious question given the horrific bloodshed that's taken place here. I sense though, some surprise and even disappointment with the answer: Not much.
Consider that since the Columbine High School shootings in 1999, not a single major gun control law has been passed by Congress. In fact, restrictions on certain weapons have actually been relaxed.

"In 2003, Congress passed a measure that prevents local enforcement agencies from consulting police in other states regarding firearms traces.

"Then in 2004, the assault weapons ban enacted by the Bill Clinton administration expired. That expiration included the ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines, which allow as many as 33 cartridges to be loaded at a time to allow more rapid fire. The pistols used in Norris Hall had those high-capacity clips, which greatly increased Cho Seung-Hui's firepower.

"Finally in 2005, Congress passed legislation that prevented shooting victims or their families from instituting wrongful death lawsuits against gun makers."

This cannot be what the founding fathers had in mind when they included the Right to Bear Arms into the constitution. Even ignoring the argument that is made regarding the intent of this amendment, back then, they could never have imagined the fire power that would one day be available to us.

Something must be done to convince political leaders that NRA lobbyists do not speak for the American people. At least I hope this is the case.

If you still aren't convinced, consider this. Shortly after five Amish children were killed in their one-room schoolhouse in Pennsylvania a year ago, President George W. Bush convened a White House conference on school safety. Gun control and schools was not even on the agenda.

WTF?

Speak out. It's time to do something about this.

Colleen