AlterNet: The Right to Bear Arms: A View from Canada

[marmar]

The Right to Bear Arms: A View from Canada

By Tim O'Driscoll, AlterNet. Posted June 4, 2008.

The Second Amendment: Twenty-seven ill-chosen words, three badly-placed commas, one unrivaled legislative botch-up.




The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Twenty-seven ill-chosen words, three badly-placed commas, one unrivaled legislative botch-up.

Being a Toronto-area lawyer, I certainly can't speak for the average Canadian on the subject of the Second Amendment; few of my countrymen, naturally, would have a clue as to its contents or that of its twenty-six siblings. I'd expect, though, that those of the informed few who read of a pending U.S. Supreme Court decision reacted as I did -- by taking off their mythical toques and scratching their heads.

In late June, the Supreme Court is expected to hand down its decision in District of Columbia vs. Heller. At issue in the case is D.C.'s handgun ban, the strictest of its kind in America. Struck down by the Appeals Court last year as violating the Second Amendment, the ban will now fly or die based upon the Supreme Court's interpretation and application of these twenty-seven words and three commas: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Opponents in the gun-control debate ascribe very different interpretations to the amendment. To gun-control advocates, it is nothing more than the protection of a state's right to maintain a militia; to the pro-gun gang, it is nothing less than confirmation of an individual's constitutional right to own a gun.

Things certainly are different above the forty-ninth parallel. While we admittedly have our fair share of gun-control issues and controversy in Canada, at least our law-makers aren't faced with an arguable gun-ownership right being inscribed in our constitution in all-but-indelible ink.

Canada's current gun-control legislation -- which the Supreme Court of Canada upheld in 2000 -- contains harsh penalties for crimes involving firearms, and requires licenses to acquire and possess them. All guns must be registered, and handguns can only be owned by police, security officers, and approved target shooters and collectors. As you read this, the mayor of Toronto is waging an internet campaign, entreating Canadians coast-to-coast to sign an on-line petition for an extension of the ban to include the latter two groups. ......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.alternet.org/rights/87042/

[jody]

1. Handguns are the tool of choice for self-defense by over 800,000 sworn US law enforcement officers.

My guess is handguns are also the choice of Canadian LEO.

Handguns are also the tool of choice for law-abiding US citizens who are responsible for protecting themselves since government is not obligated to protect an individual.

It's disappointing to read that Canada says "handguns can only be owned by police, security officers, and approved target shooters and collectors."

[jaybeat]

3. And, of course, Canadian individuals die from violent crime at a much higher rate

than their well-protected neighbors to the south...

NOT!!!

:rofl:

[jody]

4. Canada's suicide rate is higher than the U.S, perhaps it's culture. Please visit DU thread below.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3338680

[jaybeat]

9. Sweeden's is pretty high to

Maybe because it is DARK and COLD two-thirds of the year!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

2. Wow, I'd never thought of the commas before

They're all in places where they shouldn't be, which really makes interpretation of this amendment difficult.

See, kiddies? Punctuation is important. :evilgrin:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

5. Don't you love it when foreign pundits give opinions on our way of life?

Isn't this something that the US is condemned for on a routine basis? We are always told to mind our own business. It would be nice if they weren't so hypocritical about it.

David

[depakid]

6. American exceptionalism

FACT is that America is a dysfunctional nation- in MANY ways (firearm obsession being only one of them) and it's hardly hypocritical to point out the obvious.

Oddly enough, Canadians and Australians- while having very similar backgrounds and frontier histories, never developed an obsession with firearms- nor are they in denial about the consequences of proliferation.

I find that fascinating, if somewhat sad- because like health care, there's very little that can or will be done to ameliorate the problems, due to structural impediments built into the American political system.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

7. Only hypocritical when we do it eh.

[jaybeat]

8. We usually only tell people how to live when they're poor (and not white) (nt)

[Doctor_J]

10. The mountains of data over the last 50-100 years are hard to dispute

1. Our health insurance "system" is a world-wide joke, meant not to provide health care but to make lots of money for "insurers"

2. Our gun culture is a world-wide joke, meant to provide gun-lobby money for our endless political campaings, as well as a wedge issue to give the downtrodden something to cherish - much like religious hucksters. As one might put it, bitter Americans clinging to their guns and bibles while their jobs are downgraded or sent away, their health insurance disappears, and essentials are priced out of their range.

As our empire crumbles, you can expect to see many foreign critiques of what went wrong, and many of them, like this one, will be quite cogent.