download - the National Firearms Association

firearms research papers appear to presume the conclusion
that violence is bad, when in effect it is frequently both
an effective and necessary response to defend life and
property. Self defence is about making a choice about who
gets hurt – the attacker or that person’s potential victim(s).
Anti-violence researchers are usually firmly opposed
to defensive use of firearms. Typically, they advocate
for increased control on civil access to firearms and for
restrictions and outright prohibitions on various types of
firearms as policy prescriptions to reduce “gun violence”
while often ignoring violence generally. The work of Gary
Mauser, PhD., and John Lott, PhD clearly demonstrates
that having more guns in the hands of the civilian
population provides a net benefit in crime reduction and
criminal violence. References to “gun violence” tend
to prejudge the conclusion, as if the tool was somehow
the origin or cause of a problem, when in fact the use of
firearms for defensive purposes may sometimes require
violent means to achieve positive ends.
Obviously, the real problem is not gun violence, but
criminal violence perpetuated by those seeking to prey
on society. Often people who use anti-gun language are
confusing criminal activity with the presence of firearms.
The firearms are merely tools and do not have any
exclusive claim to being the tools of the violent criminal.
Ill-intentioned people use many sorts of weapons including
their bare hands, automobiles and sharp things, and a host
of other improvised weapons – criminal violence has
many tools.
Unfortunately, the “Law” itself is no deterrent to criminal
activity in an environment in which the perceived rewards
of crime outweigh the chances of being caught and
punished. People who have chosen to engage in criminal
violence do not care about laws which are secondary
to their objectives – after all the activity that they are
undertaking is already against the law. The problem for
the Conservative is clear – how to maintain the support
of the firearms community in the absence of any firearms
law reform, beyond merely eliminating registration, while
at the same time appearing to address perceptions and
problems about criminal violence and gang activity.
The firearms community, as a whole, is not willing to
surrender more freedoms in exchange for false promises
of possible improvements in public safety. In fact, its
membership is increasingly demanding the complete
restoration of their traditional firearms rights, and most
will accept nothing less. This decades-old fight against
the gun grabbers has never been just about putting paper
certificates next to deer rifles and duck guns. It is far
more important than that. However things play out, it
will certainly be interesting to see how the Conservatives
address their own internal contradictions on this ever so
thorny issue. As such, new battles loom for NFA, and the
fight goes on for those of us still in the trenches. While the
death of the long gun registry may not signal an end to our
war against the gun grabbers, it does mark a significant
shift in the war’s momentum. It is up to all of us to ensure
that we do our part in the days and weeks ahead. So don’t
forget to renew your NFA membership, make a donation,
contact your MP and let them know about your views and
expectations on firearms law reform in a post LGR world
and let Minister Towes know your position.
www.nfa.ca March - April 7