Dear Misters McGuinty, Miller, Tory and Hampton:

I do not doubt that you want an end to murders like those that have recently occurred in Toronto.  However, I am deeply concerned by the statements and press releases you have issued concerning how to respond to such murders.  In my opinion, some of your politically correct proposals, if actually acted upon, will be both be ineffective (in some cases, politically opportunistic) wastes of time and money, and will actually cause problems.  At the same time, some of the statements that you utter concerning this matter, while a attempting to be politically correct, are actually offensive to a large number of individuals in Ontario.

Can we please just cut the politically correct crap, as it were?  Must we turn a spate of murders into an opportunity to increase taxing and spending?

Murders will not be stopped by building recreation centres for the poor.  Moral people do not murder out of boredom.  Poor muscle tone does not inspire a drive-by shooting.  Almost none of Ontario's poor will ever commit a murder: poverty is not the cause of murder, and more wealth redistribution is not the cure.  Nor is skin colour relevant to the issue: enough with the "problem in the black community" slurs already, okay?

Mr. Tory suggests that only 5% of guns crossing the border are ever detected, and he wants a crack-down at the border.  Before trying to be 20 times more rigorous and time-consuming in searches at the border, would at least one of you please talk to Ontario's automakers and other exporters?  You might not believe me, but perhaps you will believe them when they explain that slowing border crossings threaten Ontario's economy.  And, if you absolutely must cling to the belief that poverty causes murder, at least think how much more poverty you will cause by making Ontario a costly place to do business.

Playing to anti-gun sentiments by calling these murders "Gun Violence" might win you all some votes, but it is a disservice to the public.  The focus must be on murderers, not on the weapons they use: stop the murderers, and the guns will take care of themselves.  Consider that ten out of ten hit-men would agree heartily with your implications that guns, not gangsters, murder people: what are you telling Ontario's children about personal responsibility, and about morality generally,  when you utter such nonsense? 

Characterizing this as a gun problem is also an insult to everyone's intelligence.  Do any of you truly believe that a man at a crowded, celebratory street event could not just as easily be murdered with a kitchen knife?  Consider that in gun-controlled Britain, which does not share a border with the USA, almost half of all murders are committed with kitchen knives.  Should we ban the sale of Henckels chef's knives in Ontario?  Who shall carve the holiday roast, and how?  Even the Monty Python comedy group recognized the damage that can be done with a mere "point-ed stick".

Nor will tougher sentencing stop these gangsters from murdering.  Twenty years of imprisonment is hardly something feared by a man who expects to be dead before he is thirty.  Consider that many of these criminals actually take pride in the belief that they will go out in a blaze of glory; that they are living "fast and furious"; that they are exciting warriors constantly looking death in the eye.  It is but a part of the macho act that gets an otherwise entirely immoral, boring, and ignorable individual some attention, the odd misguided date, and a twisted substitute for respect.  Moreover, if nothing else, please remember both that criminal sentencing falls under federal jurisdiction, and that there is little sign that Prime Minister Paul Martin cares what any of you think about the subject.

Might I suggest that you all stop misleading the public about the nature of the problem?  The single problem that lies at the root of all of these murders is a lack of morality in the minds of the murderers.  The murderers among us recognize no code of ethics.  They are entirely amoral, and - I suspect, in many cases anti-moral.  Civility has no value to them: to the contrary, they are advocates of the law of the jungle, and they are seeking an expansion of their animalistic jurisdiction.  We, the victims of their occupation, are viewed by them as suckers who are destined to lose this de facto war because - unlike them - we refuse to do what is wrong: they view themselves not only as physically powerful but as philosophically superior.  And, it is unlikely, in the extreme, that they will ever gain any respect for life, for liberty, or for property. 

Money is no replacement for morality.  A basketball court does not teach you the difference between right and wrong.  The ownership of a tool - be it a gun, a knife, or a pointed stick - does not turn a good person into an evil one.  A longer wait at the border will not result in an outbreak of knowledge concerning moral philosophy.  Getting the political endorsement of the police union by promising to get them more dues paying traffic cops might win you a "law and order" street rep in an election campaign devoid of ideas, but such opportunism does little but raise questions about your own morality and the honesty of politicians generally.

The murderous gangsters among us are parasites, and they will continue to feed on all that is good in Ontario until nothing but misery and fear remain.  Police action, not politicians' ribbon-cutting ceremonies on inner-city basketball courts, will prevent the spread of this menace.  These gangs must be infiltrated by our police.  We need to know who the criminals are: we need names, not skin colours.  We need to make the tools they buy and use - their cash, their weapons, their vehicles - traceable, so that when we fail to prevent a murder, we can help ourselves to find the murderer.  We need to more strongly and routinely enforce minor violations of the law by those who have been identified as criminal gang-members.  And we need to build trust between our police officers and the folks who are living in and around the places most plagued by the murderers, so that witnesses can take a more positive view of police presence, have less fear about co-operating with police, and feel good about calling the police when they expect crime to occur or when they have witnessed a crime. 

Anything less will be little more than a political photo-op. 

Regards,

Paul McKeever
Leader, Freedom Party of Ontario