Have Gun, Will Grovel

 

Groove. As in, "we are settling into a groove for the fall and winter." The groove for many of us is that the first few weeks of school are out of the way--and there are already homework issues; the NHL exhibition season has started—and the Maple Leafs look as bad as usual. It is also starting to freeze at night, with all the whining about a missing summer; and our favourite leaders are back at each others' throats in Ottawa (instead of in the nation's pockets), after a summer of cruising the dominion for support.

Add to the groove the long-awaited vote on the long gun registry.

As you may not know, or may not care, I personally do not own a gun, have never fired a gun, and wouldn't know a big bore from a low calibre, unless we're talking politics. My kids may have guns, but in this new spirit of warped openness, I'll never tell. So registering or not registering my non-existent gun is a moot point. However, for hundreds upon hundreds of legitimate gun-owners scattered throughout this grand country of ours, I think the scant victory by the nay-sayers spells trouble.

Somewhere in the convoluted thinking of certain politicians and interest groups, there is the thinking that maintaining a long gun registry will create a safer environment for us, our children and our future. I can see it now: The crooks, deadbeats, and lowlifes will flock to the nearest police detachment at their convenience—or after they read this column-- to register their rifles, shotguns, pistols, and any other toy that goes "bang."

Talk about a "big bang" theory.

I tend to be fairly naive on these matters, but I can't possibly see how depriving good, solid citizens of their right to bear arms--both for protection and recreation—has any rational basis. A gunless society is a defenseless society. It is imperative that individual homeowners have that right to keep their families safe. Why should balanced, law-abiding citizens be smothered to death with useless paperwork, while the crackheads are free to shoot, mug, and burglarize at whim?

I am aware of the examples of school shootings, workplace wipeouts, and domestic violence argue for greater gun control. Would a long registry have prevented Columbine? Would the students at George Dawson be alive and less traumatized if gun control was truly effective. No; anyone who wanted to get a gun would get a gun, whether the registration was in place or not.

Before you flip out over my (alleged) defense of a right-wing militia, nothing could be further from the truth—or my perspective, for that matter. We're talking about common folk who have been the backbone of this country for decades upon decades. We're not talking about neo-Nazi skinheads who want to kill everything that moves.

I am not aware of any genuine statistics that shows the connection between tighter gun laws and safer streets. The base nature of man being what it is would easily find a way around the rules of the land, in order to do serious damage. It is pathetically simple-minded to assume all gun-owners will now comply with the rules.

The long gun registry has been a joke from the get-go. And part of that so-called humour is the fact that there are far more pressing issues on the part of the government. I don't have the precise dollar figure of how much money has been wasted in promoting it, maintaining it, fighting it, advertising it, and denouncing it over the years. And I don't sense that the battle is over finally, no matter what the vote was. For that matter, a puny 153-151 margin is nothing to gloat over. And I should add, kudos to those non-Conservatives who had the pluck to vote with their conscience against it.

It makes me want to step outside and shoot my water pistol off.