Political Theater

 

I understand that Trudeau has introduced a bill regarding guns in Canada. I believe this was the reform he promised in the wake of the recent mass shooting in Nova Scotia, Canada's worst mass shooting to date.

Guns raise emotions to almost extreme pitches, and as such, the debate about guns tends to hardly be any debate at all, just a series of rabbit holes. On the whole, gun control tends to be an urban stance. The rural areas and hinterlands have a much different relationship with guns- for a farmer, say, a gun is often just another piece of necessary equipment for the farm. 

 

I myself do not own a gun and have no desire to own one at this time, so on that front I have no skin in the game. My only concern is for the safety and welfare of my family, so rather than getting into issues/ rabbit holes of needs or rights or definitions, I'd rather ask another question: Would the reforms in this bill, which has been done in the name of stopping another shooting like the one in Nova Scotia, have in fact stopped the shootings in Nova Scotia had they been in place at the time? From what I know of the shooting, and from the limited information that has been released about where the shooter's guns and bullets came from and how he got them, the answer seems to be 'no'. Which begs the question, Why, then, are we doing this?

 

This sort of thing seems to be the norm for governments these days, I'm afraid. I call it 'political theatre'. When confronted with a problem to which there either is no good solution, or to which the solution is complicated and will take time, the governments prefer to pretend for the voters that they are in fact doing something, even if it won't work. This has the added bonus that, when their political opponents point out the flaws, the governing body may claim that since the other guys oppose this proposal for the public good, they must therefore be against the public good. So win/win for the party.

 

You may argue that this law has merit. You may argue that it has none. But if you think this law will prevent another tragedy such as the one in whose name this law has been proposed, I believe you are mistaken.