Doubt cast on tough gun law; No proof of less crime
Date: Jul 14, 2006 11:41 AM
PUBLICATION: The Toronto Star
DATE: 2006.07.14
EDITION: ONT
SECTION: News
PAGE: A2
BYLINE: Steve Rennie
SOURCE: Toronto Star
WORD COUNT: 326

————————————————————————
——–

Doubt cast on tough gun law; No proof of less crime, report says Tories
to go ahead with legislation

————————————————————————
——–

The Conservatives plan to push ahead with legislation that would impose
stiffer sentences for gun crimes, despite being told by the Justice
Department there isn’t much evidence it will lower crime rates.

In a May 2006 memo to Justice Minister Vic Toews, obtained by the
Toronto Star through an access to information request, the department
said a “high number” of studies “have shown that mandatory minimum
sentences for firearm offences have not resulted in a decrease in crime
rates.”

The memo was prepared the same day the Tories introduced legislation in
the House of Commons to toughen minimum sentences for gun crimes. It
says the department could find only one Canadian study, published in
1983, showing that tougher gun laws led to fewer firearm-related crimes.

The memo also cited five U.S. studies that established a link between
mandatory minimum sentences and lower crime rates.

Toews wasn’t available yesterday for comment, but his communications
director said the Conservatives won’t waiver on their election promise
to crack down on crime.

“We made a commitment during the election campaign to strengthen
mandatory minimum penalties for serious crime, including gun crime, and
we’re going to follow through on that,” said Mike Storeshaw.

Other documents obtained by the Star include a March 2006 report
prepared by the Justice Department summarizing research on mandatory
minimum sentences for gun crimes. That report examined 22 studies from
Canada, the United States and Australia – and most found no correlation
between tougher sentencing and lower crime rates.

Anthony Doob, a criminology professor at the University of Toronto, says
the Justice Department’s findings are in line with most academic thought
on the subject.

“The overwhelming number of studies would suggest that it has no
effect,” he said.

“In terms of deterrence, it’s the perceived likelihood of apprehension,
not the actual penalty at the end, because people don’t do crimes
assuming they’re going to get caught.”

Liberal MP Brian Murphy, the party’s associate justice critic, expects
that the bill, which passed second reading last month and is now before
a standing committee, will be softened before eventually becoming law.