Terahertz

Dan Gardner has been a consistently good columnist for the Ottawa Citizen and he nailed it today with his comments on the gun registry:

Benefits? There’s lots of rhetoric and high-minded intentions. But that’s not evidence of actual benefit. And as far as I can tell, there is precious little of that.

Of course, this is very similar to what I said almost a year ago when I compared the arguments for the registry (and against it for that matter) to religious and vacuous arguments.

I think my current position is supportive of Layton’s compromise and fix it approach, while allowing those in the caucus who feel strongly to vote against it. However, if the registry falls tomorrow, are we actually suggesting that people are going to run around shooting innocent women and children with their unregistered rifles?

However, the registry is costing a fair amount, although as Gardner points out, the numbers are contested, and that money could go elsewhere.

In the end though, Gardner’s conclusion is important:

The problem with these culturally loaded debates is that they can rob attention that should go to far more important matters. Remember all the talk about gun crime during the 2006 election, particularly after a sensational murder happened in Toronto? Perceptions were way out of alignment with reality. Indeed, even as the politicians were hammering away, gun murders in Toronto were plummeting.

Something else was going on, too: The military was moving to Kandahar in preparation for its toughest mission since the Korean War. But that was almost completely ignored during the campaign.

So what will we miss this time if we waste an election talking about an inconsequential registry?