Brock's Book Blog

As we enter the final day of 2012 I wish to apologize to my readers for not being more prolific, I have been away from writing for a couple of months. Periodically I need a break and literally vegetate, doing nothing while recharging mental and physical energy banks. I’m back and will try to blog more consistently this year.

As a final post for 2012 I feel compelled to tackle the contentious issue of firearms. I carried a gun for twenty-seven years in the defense of others. I have been threatened with firearms, shot at and stared down mental patients carrying guns. I am well acquainted with the recoil of a firearm. My body has carried the smell of cordite reeking from heated weapons chambers, and sensed the adrenalin rush of rapid fire aftermath. I have friends who have shot felons in the line of duty and  seen how the experience permanently changed their personal and family lives for the worst. For years I  experienced nightmares about being shot or shooting others. Thank God neither of these recurring dreams came true.

In short, I have a leg to stand on when I voicing my opinion.

There is a purpose and a place for firearms. I willingly carried one and currently own a couple of sporting weapons. However I gladly support their restriction and control . I cannot stomach  civilian ownership of any form or semi automatic assault weapon. This includes machine pistols as well as AK47 like long guns.  I would be delighted if handguns had never been invented. In my opinion they were designed for one purpose only, to kill humans. Hand guns are useless  at any respectable range, hunting targets rarely appear within ten paces of the muzzle.

The chance of the average North American being attacked by wild animals is insignificant unless they so choose to pursue daily activities in the wild. Even then, most animals flee the scent of humans. The argument for self-defense is therefore directed against other humans. Wouldn’t it be grand if we didn’t have to worry about the other guy being armed with a Colt 45?  I live in Canada and carried out my peacekeeping duties within its dominion. When I first joined I was issued with a Smith and Wesson six-shooter and 6 extra rounds of ammunition. I was forbidden from carrying any other weapon and wasn’t even allowed to have a speed loader in my possession. In those distant days that was sufficient to maintiens le droit. My Canadian readers will recognize the motto of the RCMP, it is french for maintain the right. No my friends to the south, it isn’t we always get our man. I can remember the controversy in Canada when we went to open holsters and the public could actually catch a glimpse of the naked gun butt. Unfortunately the bad guys soon armed themselves with pistols which had nine and ten shot clips. For a variety of reasons,including in order to be competitive, police forces in Canada adopted pistols with fifteen shot clips. Well, bad guys responded with machine pistols and assault rifles.

Need I point out the pattern …

Unfortunately I’ve misplaced my magic wand. I can’t wave away that which I dislike and the bad guys are still armed to the teeth. Even if it were possible, no government is going to confiscate all firearms. But there must be a better way. We have got to stop this ridiculous arms race. Why do we need weapons with increasingly obscene capability for death and destruction? What kind of society have we created  in which we have to debate the merits of arming ourselves so we can conduct everyday social interaction safely?

World War l, the war to end all wars, led to WW II and countless spin-off disasters. One of the stupidities which caused this initial conflict was a global race to build the biggest navy with the most deadly battleships. The cold war and its flexing of megaton muscle almost brought mutual destruction. Is North American society working on a domestic repeat of this international folly?