An armed citizen saved school children in Oregon when he saw a man violently break into his children’s school’s locked front door with a shotgun. The citizen, who had a concealed carry permit, then followed the suspect into the school (which was a designated “gun free zone”) who he found had already murdered three children and a teacher and was preparing to kill others.
The police arrived at the school a few minutes later after learning that the “suspect had been shot by a community member who had seen the suspect enter the school and pursued him into the school and engaged him, shooting him several times.” Local Police Chief Mike Krantz said the Good Samaritan “bravely stepped in to stop the suspect,” and Oregon Governor Tina Kotek praised the armed citizen “who heroically intervened to stop further loss of life.” No punishment has yet been announced for his violating the school’s gun free zone.
Gun control is “citizen control” not “crime control”
Armed civilians benefit society, at least in the United States. However, Canadian firearm owners are strongly discouraged from contributing to public safety. Ottawa insists that firearms owners are a threat to public safety and need to be closely monitored. Since the 1960s Canadian authorities have passed numerous restrictions strongly discouraging civilians from owning or carrying firearms for protection. The Liberals’ ideology is illustrated by a quote attributed to former Liberal Minister of Justice, Allan Rock: “… protection of life is NOT a legitimate use for a firearm in this country sir! Not! That is expressly ruled out!” Presumably, the Liberal Minister of Justice assumed the police could use their firearms to protect civilians.
Criminalizing firearms ownership
In 1995, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien criminalized normal firearms ownership by requiring a firearm license when he brought in Bill C-68 which mandated the registration of rifles and shotguns. Concurrently, over one-half of all legally registered handguns were reclassified as prohibited (and grandfathering legal owners). Allan Rock, Canada’s Liberal Minister of Justice at the time was quoted in Maclean’s magazine (April 25, 1994) as stating, “I came to Ottawa with the firm belief that the only people in this country who should have guns are police officers and soldiers.”
Disarming responsible Canadians diminishes our ability to protect ourselves and our families from armed criminals or dangerous wildlife. An armed citizenry serves as a deterrent to criminals. Removing guns from the population emboldens criminals and increases the risk of victimization. An armed population also plays an important role in national defence. In principle, Canadian citizens are seen as a potential reserve force that can supplement the regular military in times of crisis or invasion.
Sir John A. Macdonald
The founder of Canada, Sir John A Macdonald blocked restrictive gun laws – repeatedly — because he believed they infringed upon the right of Canadians as British subjects to bear arms. This is another reason for progressives to want to remove statues of Sir John A and to erase his name from public buildings.
Canada’s founders believed Canadians as British subjects had the right to bear arms. The first serious restrictions on handguns had to wait until the Liberals won control of Parliament.
In 1877 the Liberal dominated parliament banned the carrying of pistols “without having a reasonable cause to fear an assault or injury to himself or his family or to his property.” The law was designed to catch working class men but allow “respectable citizens” to carry handguns to protect themselves. Unexpectedly, the 1877 law did not solve problems with armed gangs.
The 1877 law evolved into a police permit for carrying a handgun for personal defence. It is important to note that until 1969, a “permit to carry” allowed the carrying of a handgun upon the person outside of home or place of business for personal protection. Permits were issued by local police to people they knew to be of good character, such as local shop owners, retired police, bank clerks, or railroad employees.
For a deeper look at Canadian history, see my articles in The Dorchester Review where I explain how the Laurentian elite abandoned the right to bear arms.
In the 1960s the progressives captured Ottawa and quickly demonstrated their contempt for traditional Canadian virtues, including armed self-defense. Pierre Elliot Trudeau was the driving force.
When the Liberals took over in 1963, the homicide rate was 1.32 per 100,000 but soon jumped to 3.0 per 100,000 in 1977 under Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau. Trudeau was concerned about public unrest, particularly in Quebec and the West, but the Liberals used the high rates of violent crime to justify new gun laws.
The 1969 firearms legislation enabled the government to designate firearms that were “not normally used for hunting or sporting purposes” as either prohibited or restricted by Order-in-Council. This new power was not opposed by Canadian hunting or sport shooting organizations.
The increasingly slippery slope brought the Carney-Justin gun grab. If we don’t stand up for ourselves, who will?
