Gary A Mauser, PhD, is Professor Emeritus at Simon Fraser University.Armed civilians benefit society, at least in the United States. Canadian firearm owners, however, are strongly discouraged from contributing to public safety. An armed citizen with a gun can save school kids in Oregon, but Canadians, such as Toronto-area homeowners, have no way to protect themselves or their families. A citizen with a gun saved school kids in Oregon on October 15 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 — a designated “gun-free zone” — where the suspect had already murdered three children and a teacher. Another teacher tackled and struggled with the suspect before the armed citizen shot him. 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.” Deschutes County District Attorney Steve Gunnels said Kaylub Giamanco will not face criminal charges for his actions.Gun control is ‘citizen control,’ not ‘crime control’Canadian firearm owners are strongly discouraged from contributing to public safety. Ottawa insists that firearm 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 ownershipIn 1995, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien criminalized normal firearms ownership by requiring a firearm licence when he brought in Bill C-68, which mandated the registration of rifles and shotguns. At the same time, over one-half of all legally registered handguns were reclassified as prohibited (legal owners were grandfathered). 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 a potential reserve force that can supplement the regular military in times of crisis or invasion.Sir John A. MacdonaldThe founder of Canada, Sir John A. Macdonald repeatedly opposed restrictive gun laws 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. 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.The Trudeau progressivesIn the 1960s, the Progressives captured Ottawa and quickly demonstrated their contempt for traditional Canadian virtues, including armed self-defence. Pierre Elliott Trudeau was the driving force. 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?Gary A Mauser, PhD, is Professor Emeritus at Simon Fraser University.
