Everyone knows legally owned firearms are not the cause of violence in our streets. So why is the government trying to restrict them so heavily? The answer can be found in one long word: disenfranchisement.

“Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” It’s the simplest argument — and still the hardest to fight. Of course, you can amend it to make some concessions: “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. With guns. And with other things too.” But it’s not quite as catchy and doesn’t fit as well on the front of a T-shirt.
Violence on our streets is up. I live in Edmonton, where it is a real problem, as it is in Vancouver, Toronto, Regina — and well, I don’t know of anyone living in anywhere larger than say, Carrot River, SK, who doesn’t think about street violence at one time or another.
It seems our government thinks about it too. They have spent billions brainwashing the public into believing the path to a Utopian society is through heavy handed firearms laws and red tape that makes it practically impossible to legally own, buy and sell firearms. It’s all leading us down the path to one thing: the end of gun ownership in Canada.  The fact that gun clubs were outlawed in Toronto this week simply proves this.
Most of the folks sipping Starbucks in our cities’ downtown cores honestly believe the end of all guns in Canada is a good thing. Once hunters like you and me have our rifles taken away, violence will be a distant memory, right? They believe this because they have no experience with firearms, except from what they have seen on CSI Miami, the national news and, God forbid, perhaps one or two of them have even seen the business end of some black-market revolver in a Toronto back alley. You can hardly blame them for painting all gun owners with the same brush — after all to them a gun, any gun, equals violence.
You and I know how ridiculous that is. I also know that despite some of the moves our elected officials have made in the past, they’re not stupid; they know how ridiculous that is too. But there is one nefarious reason the government is restricting our firearms: once the legal owner is disenfranchised, no one will be left to stand up for gun rights and the government can erase these rights without contention.
Don’t believe it? Well, why do you think the Feds offered up simple, easy-to-obtain “Possession Only Licences” (POL) in recent years? When the new firearms regulations came into place a few years back, existing gun owners were granted these licences without having to take a firearms course. The tricky part is, POLs don’t allow one to obtain or sell firearms. And with the aging of the hunting and shooting crowd, the Feds knew that gun owners with POLs would die off, leaving fewer and fewer people left who could legally buy a gun.
Think about it — if guns are outlawed, there will be outrage among the leftover ethical gun owners. But what about the next generation, the generation who never owned a gun? Who will even care? Once there are no more legal gun owners, the Firearms Lobby and the firearms activists will cease to exist and our government can wash their hands of it all. Of course, people will still be getting murdered in the streets, but at least our government can then say, “We tried our best — we outlawed guns. What more can we do?”
And the mad thing is — in this not-too-distant-future, the non-gun-owning-public will nod their heads in agreement as they will have no concept to the contrary. After all, the last gun they heard about anyone legally owning was in the hands of their Great Uncle Webb, and he’s a crazy old ex-deer hunter now. “Guns are bad,” they’ll chant — and no one will be there to argue. No one left to stand up and speak of the freedom to ethically and legally hunt and shoot in a free country.
And with that handled, the government can safely move on to stripping us of our other rights too.