Skip to main content

People participate in a vigil for victims behind the theatre where a gunman opened fire on moviegoers in Aurora, Colorado July 22, 2012.

SHANNON STAPLETON/Reuters

America's permissive gun laws, fetishized in their laxness as the epitome of American freedom by the powerful National Rifle Association, are a common denominator in mass shootings around the world. From Aurora, Colo., to Norway to Toronto and Mexico, the stubborn refusal to link the worldwide availability of American-supplied semi-automatic weapons, accessories and ammunition to tragedy after tragedy is a black mark.

In the case of the Aurora killer, James E. Holmes was able to order 6,350 rounds of various types of ammunition over the Internet without triggering any alarms. He may as well have been ordering housewares. He also acquired, unnoticed, a high-capacity machine-gun magazine that holds 100 bullets, plus bullet-proof pants and a vest, knives and magazine holders. His case is similar to that of the Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik, who killed 76 people a year ago. Breivik outlined in his "manifesto" how he purchased 10 30-round magazines – an item necessary to his goal of mass slaughter that was not available in Norway because of its rigid gun controls – from an indifferent American supplier via the Internet.

In Mexico, which has strict gun laws, the drug cartels have armed themselves like a paramilitary operation with easily available American assault weapons and used them to kill hundreds of innocent people. In Canada, a rising tide of American weapons spilling over the border is defeating the country's attempts at gun control.

Story continues below advertisement

The biggest tragedy, of course, is in the U.S., where only killings on the scale of Aurora now make the national news but as many as 15,000 die in gun homicides every year. The NRA's argument is that tighter controls would impinge on the constitutional right to bear arms without stopping mass killings. Their proof? Countries with strict gun controls like Canada, Norway and Mexico. It is time to start forcefully arguing the reverse: that gun controls do prevent mass shootings in these countries and, in fact, gun homicides in general – the rate of gun homicides per 100,000 people in the U.S. is almost four times that of Canada – and that the controls would be even more effective if they were not being sabotaged by American constitutional literal-mindedness.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

If your comment doesn't appear immediately it has been sent to a member of our moderation team for review

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.