|
|
|
December 28, 2005
Breaking the back of violence and other U.S. "exports"
In what appears to have been a gang-related dispute in Toronto yesterday, a girl was killed and six people were injured in a shootout in a crowded shopping center. Rather than blaming the individuals who did the shooting (or even gang violence), Toronto's mayor blames guns. And above all, he blames the United States: Mayor David Miller said almost every other type of crime is down in Toronto, but the supply of guns has increased and half come from the United States.I'm not much of an expert on imports and exports. However, Mayor Miller is right there on the scene, so obviously he knows more than I do about United States exports. If in fact we are exporting what he says we are, why not simply impose a huge tariff? Whenever guns or violence appear at the border, just tax them! No, that wouldn't work for guns, because they're already subject to considerable regulation. As the U.S. State Department points out, importing most firearms into Canada is severely restricted: Prohibited FirearmsAll handguns which are not prohibited are restricted, and according to the State Department are subject to lengthy bureaucratic delays: To be able to bring a restricted firearm to Canada in person, you will need to obtain an Authorization to Transport (ATT) from the CFO of the province where you will be entering Canada. If you are bringing firearms with you and declaring them with a Non-Resident Firearm Declaration, you will need to wait until your declaration has been confirmed, before you call the CFO to request an ATT.I'm wondering whether any of the guns used in yesterday's Toronto shooting were either prohibited or restricted. If they were brought in from the United States illegally, can it really be said that the U.S. "exported" them? What I'd like to know is how we manage to "export violence" to a country with which we're not even at war. Well, more prominent minds than mine have argued that the United States exported homosexuality into a country we invaded. Perhaps it's no coincidence that "Brokeback Mountain" was unveiled to wide critical acclaim at the Toronto Film Festival last September. Wow. I also see it was set for "wide release in Canada in December." (The same month as the shooting!) posted by Eric on 12.28.05 at 11:05 AM
Comments
CNN's version of the story has fuller quote from a dissenting Canadian voice: http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/americas/12/27/canada.crime.ap/index.html John Thompson, a security analyst with the Toronto-based Mackenzie Institute, says the number of guns smuggled from the United States is a problem, but that Canada has a gang problem -- not a gun problem -- and that Canada should stop pointing the finger at the United States. Dennis · December 28, 2005 01:23 PM Hugh: I don't see how tolerated (not yet "legalised", last I checked) marijuana is making Canada attractive to people "engaged in criminal activities". After all, growing and selling pot would be of no attraction to criminals if it was legal, and likewise there's no great connection, to my knowledge and in my experience, between the use of marijuana and being a criminal in any way other than the criminality of the use itself, in jurisdictions where it is criminal. (I agree that a disarmed populace and weakened systems of punishment would make the cost of crime lower, but I'm not sure that makes Canada "attractive" to the criminal element so much as making more Canadians into criminals directly, by lowing the cost of commiting crimes. Those people with no great moral objection to commiting crime will naturally commit more if the cost is lower; basic economics. But I don't know that Canada is especially attracting criminals from outside, as you perhaps unintentionally implied.) Sigivald · December 28, 2005 04:00 PM The strange thing is that USA now wants to export all this as a package in terms of "regime change" in other countries! jamal · December 28, 2005 09:37 PM |
|
March 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• War For Profit
• How trying to prevent genocide becomes genocide • I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight • Wind Boom • Isaiah Washington, victim • Hippie Shirts • A cunning exercise in liberation linguistics? • Sometimes unprincipled demagogues are better than principled activists • PETA agrees -- with me! • The high pitched squeal of small carbon footprints
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Canada seems to have adopted the notion that all things evil come from somewhere else and that if we have many social programs to provide the needs of people criminal activity will not occur.
Gun control laws, banning of hand guns, legalizing soft drugs, reducing and or eliminating penalties for criminal activities are making Canada an attractive location for people engaged in criminal activities.
Crime will always thrive in a softer more caring society.
Hugh