NOTE: A version of this article also appeared today in the Regina Leader Post
and the Calgary Herald.
PUBLICATION:
Edmonton Journal
DATE:
2004.03.17
EDITION:
Final
SECTION: News
PAGE:
A1 / Front
BYLINE:
Ryan Cormier, With files from Mike Sadava and Tom Barrett
SOURCE:
The Edmonton Journal
DATELINE:
EDMONTON
ILLUSTRATION:
Colour Photo: Journal
Stock / Ralph Klein
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge's
ruling not a call to arms, Alberta gov't says
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EDMONTON
- Albertans shouldn't rush out to buy guns despite a judge's comments that
people need firearms to defend themselves from criminals or carnivores, the
provincial government warned Tuesday.
Premier
Ralph Klein and Justice Minister Dave Hancock said Albertans do not need
firearms for self-protection, a day after the release of a controversial ruling
from St. Paul provincial court judge Don Demetrick.
Demetrick
overturned a decision by a provincial firearms officer to deny a firearms
possession and acquisition licence to a northern Alberta woman with a history of
violence, alcohol abuse and psychological problems. In his written decision,
Demetrick said people need guns to protect themselves from predators, human or
animal.
"I
would hope we're not at a stage where the public takes those comments as
encouragement to go out and arm themselves to protect themselves," Hancock
said. "We're in a pretty safe society." Hancock would not comment on
the appropriateness of the judge's remarks.
Klein
was also careful not to criticize the judge. But he made it clear he disagrees
with Demetrick's sentiments.
"Do
Albertans need firearms to protect them? You're asking my opinion? No, they
don't," Klein said.
The
Canadian Firearms Centre, which denied Brenda Pogson the licence in the first
place, said it is now considering its legal options. Spokesman Thomas Vares said
it's too early to be more specific.
Demetrick
wrote that people living in "the coniferous forests of rural Canada"
are sometimes killed by bears and cougars if they don't have guns to protect
themselves.
"Similarly,
in the concrete jungles of urban Canada, ordinary persons sometimes urgently
require a firearm for use in lawful self-protection against the lethal attack of
two-legged predators such as homicidal rapists or robbers, and of those mentally
ill persons who on rare occasion engage in mass homicide for no rational
reason."
Those
comments concern Wendy Cukier, the president of the Coalition for Gun Control,
who pointed out that guns are required to be kept unloaded and under lock and
key.
Cukier
noted that guns that originated in Alberta killed two RCMP officers, Const.
Dennis Strongquill in December 2001 and Cpl. Jim Galloway last month. "The
lack of attention to gun control in Alberta comes with a price," Cukier
said. "One can only hope that the average person looking at this will know
it's not in the public interest."
Demetrick
ruled that Pogson, 40, should be granted a firearm licence because the fact that
police officers opposed her application was irrelevant and the evidence
presented by firearms officers was old and unreliable. That decision may be
reasonable, even if Demetrick's broader opinions on firearms aren't, said
University of Alberta law professor Sanjeev Anand.
"The
point he's making, and perhaps it's a valid one, is perhaps this individual is
no longer a risk to herself or others," he said. "It's reasonable to
look at the most recent evidence and say the situation may have changed."
Last
December, Pogson testified she had been sober for six months and had been coping
with depression.
Firearm
licence applications specifically ask about violence, mental illness or alcohol
abuse to red-flag applicants who may require investigations before they are
allowed to own guns.
Hancock
said any concerns about the decision should be directed to the judicial council,
which deals with complaints against judges.
Alberta
Chief Judge Ernest Walter, who heads that council, couldn't comment on the
ruling during the 30-day appeal period. He said no one has yet filed a complaint
about the ruling.