“To possess a firearm is a right, and it’s a right that comes with responsibilities,” Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney said at a news conference in Powassan, Ont., July 23, while announcing planned changes to Canada’s gun laws.
The Canadian Press immediately jumped on Minister Blaney’s statement claiming it failed its “baloney-meter” test; CBC quickly echoed the slam on the Minister. If anything flunks the baloney-meter, it’s the idea that the Canadian media can be objective when reporting political statements by Conservative Ministers.
Whatever the Canadian media may think, a strong argument can be made that Canadians do have a right to own firearms. Canada’s founders, including Sir John A Macdonald, the first Prime Minister of Canada, most certainly did believe that Canadians had that right. During his tenure as prime minister, Macdonald generally opposed restrictions on guns by arguing that Canadians needed arms to defend themselves against violent criminals. Even professor Blake Brown, who is no friend of the National Firearms Association, accepts that Canada’s founders believed Canadians had the right to arms.
But who is a Canadian? In 1885, the Canadian government declared that the right to bear arms did not apply to aboriginal peoples or Metis, who were incapable of full citizenship. Since that time, Canadian governments have passed other restrictive gun laws in reaction to fears concerning Irish laborers, Italian immigrants, Japanese Canadians, and most recently rural White men.
In the present day, many believe that all individuals have the natural right to protect themselves against an unprovoked attack – whether from a violent criminal or a wild beast. Just as a mother naturally wants to protect her child from harm, so do we all have a right to defend ourselves from physical assault. This right existed before Canada, or any other government existed. With civilization came the rule of law and professional police which have made life much more safe. Unfortunately, since the police cannot be everywhere all the time, individuals must continue to be responsible for their own protection if attacked. While such attacks may be rare for most of us, some Canadians are more at risk than others. Guns are simply tools; tools that aid smaller people, like women, to be able to defend themselves against a larger, stronger aggressor.
Sir John A Macdonald was not alone in holding that Canadians had the right to own firearms in order to protect themselves. In the 19th Century, important Canadian leaders agreed with him, and many Canadians continue to do so. The renowned 18th century English jurist, Sir William Blackstone, in his Commentaries on the Laws of England, set out these rights. Importantly, Canadians have not lost these rights, neither by the creation of the nation of Canada, nor by the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms and not even by the empowerment of the Supreme Court to invalidate laws.
Blackstone elaborated on the fundamental rights of Englishmen that were set forth in the English Bill of Rights, one of which declared a guarantee of arms to men “for their defence suitable to their condition.”
“In these several articles consist the rights, or, as they are frequently termed, the liberties of Englishmen. . . . And, lastly, to vindicate these rights, when actually violated or attacked, the subjects of England are entitled, in the first place, to the regular administration and free course of justice in the courts of law; next, to the right of petitioning the king and parliament for redress of grievances; and, lastly, to the right of having and using arms for self-preservation and defence.
It should be no surprise that the Canadian media by and large have not been supportive of the right of citizens to own and bear firearms. Bloody victims are much more photogenic than an armed survivor whose courage has deterred the attack and remains safe and whole.
I don’t know if Minister Blaney agrees completely with Sir John A Macdonald, but, as a conservative, he certainly appears to believe that rights are God given, while the leftist media continues to imply that governments grant (or withhold) rights. To be sure, the Canadian Supreme Court has not supported the individual right to own firearms. But can courts erase natural rights? Now that’s really baloney.
Gary Mauser
Professor Emeritus
Institute for Canadian Urban Research Studies
Beedie School of Business
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby BC
References:
Brown, R. Blake. Arming and Disarming, a History of Gun Control in Canada. Osgoode Society, Toronto. (2012).
[url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/is-gun-ownership-a-legal-right-in-canada-1.2723893]http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/is-gun-ownership-a-legal-right-in-canada-1.2723893[/url]
Yale Law School. Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England.
The Avalon Project.
