(This
column was published in the North
Shore News on
Jan. 17, 2001)
Gun control
funding a waste of our money
By Leo Knight
IF
the government of Canada had decided against their stupid new
gun control legislation, what might they have done with the
money instead?
Surely
a half a billion dollars (or so) could have had some positive
effect?
For
instance, they could have put the money into health care and,
for example, purchased more than 140 MRI machines. This move
might have actually reduced the waiting times for this important
diagnostic tool down to a week or two. Not the existing two to
six months depending on where you live in this country.
How
important is that? Well it could mean the difference between
getting a cancer diagnosed early enough to survive and dying
from the disease. That's all. Just life and death in many cases.
How
many lives will the much-vaunted gun control legislation save?
None. Not one. But, they have managed to create another bloated,
shiny, new bureaucracy. Well, stick with what you're good at, I
suppose.
But
MRI machines are not enough by themselves. No, the money could
have been used to hire and train about 5,000 more nurses the way
they used to, by using teaching hospital programs. No, they
couldn't do that. Then they would have to actually open all
those closed-down ICUs and operating theatres. And then where
would we be?
Or,
it could have funded an additional 8,000 front-line police
officers. Or indeed, it could have paid for the activities of 40
units the size of the Organized Crime Agency of British
Columbia. Of course we don't need 40 such agencies, so what
about funding just one in this country with sufficient resources
to actually have an effect against organized crime instead of
being a mere annoyance.
Do
we need more police officers? Well, let me put it this way --
police today cannot attend most motor vehicle accidents, leaving
the drivers to sort it out themselves, which usually leaves the
insurance company the ability to simply blame both parties and
the heck with the truth.
Nor
can they actually investigate a burglary. These days it is more
about simply getting a list of stolen property for their records
and giving out a file number for insurance purposes.
Get
stiffed by a con artist? Sure, the police will take a look at
it. But only if you lost over $5,000 and you can wait the six to
12 months it will take to get to work its way to the top of the
pile.
Police forces today can barely meet their minimally acceptable staffing levels for the uniformed first response, never mind keeping sufficient experienced police officers available to conduct the follow-up investigations on all but the most serious of cases.
What
else might the government have done with our half-billion
dollars? What about funding more than 12,000 new probation and
parole officers so those responsible for watching the
prematurely released convicts in Canada have a manageable
caseload so they can actually pay attention to those wreaking
havoc on our streets.
Better
yet, build 20 more federal penitentiaries to keep the a*****es
where they rightfully belong in the first place.
Or
they could have purchased and maintained 150 police helicopters
and never had to again debate the ludicrous "to chase or
not to chase" every time some genetically disenfranchised
excuse for a human being kills an innocent person while running
from a police officer trying to do his or her duty.
Now
I realize that none is this is as easy as all that. Police
officers have to be trained and equipped. As do nurses and
probation officers. There is no quick fix. But, the salient
point here is that there are a whole lot better uses for that
money than a gun registry and licensing law that accomplishes
absolutely nothing at one hell of a cost.
Conversely, they could put two more fountains in the river in Shawinigan.
-30-