“The Dead Knows Better”
During the summer, I have read 3 different columnists and their outlooks on current world issues. One of which included the works of Jon Dougherty who was a political based science major from Missouri. His writings contain a very informal style of writing with his casual style of speech within his articles, saying words like “eh,’ or “guy”. Along with his sarcasm and irony, his articles can make for a humorous take on real world issues when paired up with his provocative speech. Although it seems unprofessional, he makes up for his informalities with his citations and analogies which allows him to force his points onto the reader. Allowing for an easy to read but informative article.
The article that I read from Jon Dougherty was titled “Canadian gun laws: The dead know better”, and it talks about how Canada passing a law that bans citizens from legally possessing a firearm without a good reason. Jon Dougherty immediately expresses his opinions on the situation, calling Mayor Miller and Prime Minister Paul Martin idiots for passing this. The reason for them doing this was because American guns were “making its way up north” and the Mayor Miller had gone out and said “The system you have in place in the U.S. is causing violence to be exported to my city,” blaming the situation on us, rather than admitting they just don’t like guns. Jon Dougherty found out that the more believable reason was that the city is just soft on crime, and the people being convicted for gun charges are immediately released within the next hour. The issues that Jon Dougherty is concerned about is the potential increase in crime rate involving guns after the restrictions. Comparing this situation to a very similar one in Britain, saying that “British authorities saw a 35-percent increase in gun violence in 2002 alone.” Now every citizen up in the north must get their firearm legally registered if they already possess one. With the Prime Minister adding in that he would “Like to ban all handguns” He then closes out his article by stating that “Canada’s ‘no self-defense allowed’ policy is demonstrably unsound, impractical and not conducive to public safety.”
Discussion Questions: Do you believe that blaming another country for an increase in crime is a valid argument, or should there be other factors into blaming another country? Do you agree that “fewer guns in the hand of law-abiding citizens” wouldn’t lead to a increase in public safety?
I don’t think that blaming an entire country is the right or valid argument, especially in a scenario like this. I think the people to blame are the ones who are bringing guns into Canada from the U.S. because they could be part of the people who are causing an increase in crime. Personally, I don’t think taking guns away, or denying a perfectly eligible person the use of a gun/firearm is the right approach to increase public safety. A lot of people want guns to protect themselves, their families, and their home, others hunt, and some people just like to have them because they’re fascinated with them. Whatever someone’s reason is for wanting one, I think they should be allowed the chance to have one if they are eligible. That being said, if someone wanted to do harm with a gun, they will find a way to get one. Whether if its smuggling one through the border, illegally purchasing/selling one, stashing one, stealing one, etc if someone wants a gun badly enough to do something, I believe they will do just about anything to obtain one.
Blaming other countries for a rise in crime oversimplifies a complex issue and fails to address the root causes within a society. Crime rates are influenced by a multitude of factors, including socioeconomic conditions, education, and law enforcement effectiveness. Pointing fingers at external sources ignores the importance of internal efforts to improve these factors. Additionally, it’s worth noting that the relationship between the number of guns and crime isn’t as straightforward as it might seem. While some countries with stricter gun control measures have lower rates of gun-related violence, there are also instances where crime remains prevalent despite gun restrictions. A comprehensive approach to crime prevention involves addressing systemic issues and promoting responsible gun ownership, rather than relying solely on the reduction of firearms to solve the problem.
To blame another country for its increase in crime is not a valid argument and there shouldn’t even be any other factors to blame that country either. The only cause for a country’s rise in crime rates are usually because of the people who live there and the way the country operates. In my opinion, I don’t agree with the thought that having fewer guns wouldn’t increase public safety because I believe that it would actually help with the growth of public safety and even decrease crime rates. If countries are able to firstly educate their people the dangers of weapons, when to use them in case of emergency, and why they are needed then it would help making the public become more aware and understanding of firearms. Then enforcing laws would engage in having restrictions so people would actually follow the rules. Seeing how the world has been affected by guns, I wouldn’t say there’s a pattern but it seems like countries who aren’t as strict or educated with them tend to have more issues with their weapons.