Lost in reporting

Garbage in - garbage out. I might put up with media bias, particularly at the CBC and its online outlet (the "garbage in"), if it were not compounded by readers' asinine commentary and just as asinine "approval" ("garbage out"). While other lefties waste elbow grease befouling news items and congratulating their ilk on their vandalism of truth, I prefer putting my neurons in gear and discovering what, if any, the CBC does not want its readers to know.

In a story about StatsCan reporting a decrease in homicide rates, including gangland murders, the pet topic of objectivity-haters from sea to sea was missing. I am talking, of course, of the Long Gun Registry and its influence, if any, on firearm crime. Commenters brayed about the LGR being successful, or the government suppressing the data, or other drivel I won't waste bytes on.

The CBC literally copy-pasted the entire Statistics Canada report, excluding the sections on registered firearms and spousal homicide.

Read and weep. Of murder weapons recovered between 2005 and 2009, 7 out of 10 were unregistered. In the four-year period considered, only 253 guns were recovered and checked against the registry.

In 2009, out of 179 firearm homicides, 122 (68%) were committed using a handgun, 29 (16%) using a rifle and 14 (8%) using a saw-off (14 are, apparently, undefined).

Assuming the proportions remained the same year after year between 2005 and 2009, registered and recovered murder firearms were split as follows: 67% rifles, 22% handguns and 12% saw-offs.

Compare the proportion of handguns used in murders (68%) to the proportion of handguns recovered and identified as a registered murder weapon (22%).

Want to make the long gun registry effective? Stop pretending it to be a deterrent. Remember that between 2002 and 2008, including five years since the implementation of the LGR, gun crime went UP.

Focus on its potential as a crime-solving tool for those 3 murders out of 10. Make it a one-off fee, merge the database with the firearm license database already kept by the RCMP and for the love of God make it contain the sole truly useful bit of information: the gun's signature on the bullet.

Let's rejoice that murders are down in Canada. And, while we're at it, let's keep it at that.

Guilty as charged

More accountability, making youngsters face the consequences of violent action, you summarize it, I'm for the proposed amendment to the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Tackling crime is a Tory natural monopoly, since we do not seek justifications for a person's behavior but believe everyone is both free and responsible.

It is not the intent of such legislation to criminalize youth, as many Liberal weeping hearts will no doubt attempt to make Canadians believe. In the same fashion it will not necessarily mean destroying a person's life for a crime committed at an early age. Education and training in prison are a reality, and the focus on rehabilitation is still present throughout the system.

This amendment is potentially a great deterrent for both youth crime and adults using youngsters to carry out the dirty work. Many of the comments on the CBC website point this out. What needs to be inserted into the legislation is punishment for carrying weapons.

Britain realized all too late that a knife culture was spreading among its youth, and now the consequences are dire. Preventing such trends from germinating in Canada is a step in the right direction.

Toronto gun crime - get society back on track

Rising gun assasinations in Toronto are balanced by an increased clearance rate - Globe and Mail

Statistics is a good way to lie since its inception, but this one will not fool anyone. The aim of any city authority and any government is to prevent homicides from happening, not just uncovering the culprits.

Normal people don't go around with loaded guns shooting their peers. Normal people resolve disputes peacefully, they use the justice system, they sometimes give each other a punch in the face. To take a gun and aim it at another person is a voluntary act of senseless violence that stems from a lack of civilization. Be it a gang execution or an act of madness at the end of a heated dispute, it is the ultimate disrespect of the value of a human life.

So a big thumbs up for Toronto investigators for bringing culprits before Themis, but thumbs-down go to everyone involved in forging the bonds of a civic society that doesn't inculcate the principle of the sacredness of life into people's heads stronglynough.

While Toronto is swayed by gun murder, England experiences killings by youngsters and regular "just for laughs" stabbings. It all started when Government started meddling with parenting and the school system, making everything lenient and shielding everyone from the utter reality of failure or wrong. When everything started to be easy and guaranteed, when one couldn't be brought back on track for good, when responsibility became an opinable concept.

Whatever goes on in Toronto, it better get back on track, or we will have to get ready for more tears and gunshots. Gun murder is a symptom of society breakdown, one way or another. Do something about it before the situation gets too hard to fix.

Should we deport foreign criminals?

This is a speech I will try to make at tonight's Debating Society event, where the motion to be debated is "This House would deport all foreign criminals immediately".

-----------------------------

First of all, why is there a State? It is not a god-sent overlord that came to rule over us. It is the institution called to deal with matters that individuals and associations can't deal with on their own. One of the most important of these is the protection of people's rights from abuse by others, and the removal from society of such abusers.

The State has prisons, which serve the purpose of isolating an offender from society. If the offender is a citizen of that State, he or she will be released on completion of the prison sentence back into society because the State cannot deport its own citizens. But the State has no such obligation towards foreigners who have broken the law.

By coming as a foreigner into Britain you agree to abide by British laws, further your interests and by doing so contribute to the progress of British society. When you infringe on the rights of others, you break this agreement and have no right to stay.

I therefore find it ludicrous that we debate this issue while good old common sense would tell us that who has come here and broken the law has no place in this country any longer.

---------------------------

If I get the chance, then I'll post the reactions. If not, then you know my view anyway!