Heyjað á blóðakrinum

Skotmaðurinn í Montreal hefur verið ofarlega í umræðunni hér í Kanada undanfarna daga, auðvitað eru skiptar skoðanir en að sjálfsögðu er fólk eðlilega nokkuð slegið yfir svona atburðum.  Það að einhver gangi inn í byggingu og fari að skjóta fólk af handahófi verður vonandi aldrei hversdagslegur atburður sem við venjums.

En það er oft gott að velta fyrir sér hvert umræðan stefnir, og hvert hún "fer".  Áður hef ég lýst hér hve gaman ég hef af því að lesa pistla Margaret Wente í Globe and Mail, í morgun skrifaði hún um fyrrnefndan atburð og olli mér ekki vonbrigðum frekar en oftast áður.

En í pistilinum sem ber titilinn, "Making hay from random gun crime - Montreal's shooting spree was barely over before the politicians opened fire", segir hún meðal annars:

"The other day, on a quiet suburban Toronto street, someone hacked a man to death with a machete. It's possible you missed the story, because it got barely a mention in the local media.

Machetes are not top of mind with the public. Nobody is demanding stricter controls on machete sales. On the other side, nobody is defending responsible machete owners from meddlesome bureaucrats. Nobody is asking how the killer got the weapon, or why nobody noticed that he was a deranged lunatic, or whether he liked violent video games, or had a taste for Goth, or if he'd been bullied in high school. No one interviewed the neighbours to inquire how traumatized they are. No one has called for a machete registry, or mandatory sentences for machete murderers. In fact, not a single politician has raised the subject. That's because there are no votes in machete crime.

Gun crime is a different matter. Last week's shooting spree at Dawson College was barely over before the politicians opened fire. Spewing rhetoric randomly in all directions, they left the impression that innocent college students were being mowed down by the hundreds. A teary-eyed Jean Charest, who was among the first to take aim, vowed a "tense debate" over Stephen Harper's promise to scrap the long-gun registry, even though long guns played no part in the bloody rampage of Kimveer Gill, and the existence of the registry is irrelevant to this crime.

Funnily enough, Mr. Charest wasn't always so fervent about gun control. Not so long ago his position on the gun registry was identical to Mr. Harper's. But that was before he faced re-election in the most gung-ho-for-gun-control province in the nation. (All the leading French-language newspapers have endorsed keeping the long-gun registry.)"

"You could almost feel sorry for Stephen Harper, whose promise to scrap the notoriously expensive long-gun registry has just turned into a political loser. But making hay from gun crime is a two-way street. Last December, when a teenage girl was shot dead in downtown Toronto, it was Mr. Harper who came out the winner. In that case people were inclined to blame weak law enforcement and a spineless justice system that allows gang members to get away with murder. (These suspicions were perhaps confirmed when a tender-hearted judge let one of the suspects out on bail.) "

"Personally, I hate guns. I don't see why anyone should have one in the house unless they hunt for food -- especially 25-year-old males with serious anger-management issues. But I also know that tougher gun laws don't seem to make a difference. As crime expert Gary Mauser wrote here yesterday, firearms still account for 27 per cent of homicides in Canada -- the same percentage as before the gun registry was introduced. Australia's exorbitantly expensive gun registry didn't make a dent in gun crime there either. Britain is having a serious crime wave in spite of stringent gun laws. But the gun control debate really isn't about logic. It's about the primal anxiety of parents everywhere. And anyone who fights this one on logic is going to lose. "

Pistilinn í heild má finna hér.