Where do you suppose the guns are coming from? Estonia?

I think Chris' point was that His Worship was elected to serve as Mayor of Toronto, not Minister of Foreign Affairs nor Ambassador to the United States. Those positions have already been filled.

Somehow the constitutionally-protected rights of another sovereign nation don't typically fall within the average Mayor of Toronto's purview.

That old chestnut by Dr. Reinhold Niebuhr seems appropriate... The strength to change what he can, the courage to accept what he can’t, and the wisdom to know the difference, etc.

Hugh, guns have always been available from the US, and their use has been glorified for as long has I have been alive. What is happening in Toronto is fairly new however. Blaming the US in convenient, particularly when they probably won't notice, but I doubt its constructive. Just what the heck is happening?

Chris --

Miller knows what his jurisdiction is.

A big part of any mayor's job is to put pressure on the other levels of gov't. He should keep raising this point.

It's not about the "constitutional rights" of U.S. citizens. It's about guns coming across the border.

Of course Toronto also needs to do its part, and enforce the laws here. I don't see Miller (or anyone else) doing much on that front.

Huge,

Wouldn't it behoove a sane mayor to await a verdict on where this particular firearm came from before directing his opprobrium stateside? Especially considering how devoted Miller is to "root causes" - which in this case presumably are in Toronto - I find this approach exceedingly odd.

Miller did not specifically link this particular incident to the U.S. He rightly linked the phenomenon of handgun violence to guns coming from the U.S.

Huge,

You're splitting hairs.

Surely the real problem here is the willingness of Canadian teenagers to actively seek out and USE handguns. Blaming this on the U.S.--or indeed blaming handguns themselves--is like blaming the Germans, or Porsche, for high-speed car accidents.

Guns, no doubt, are a problem, but only insofar as they facilitate the EFFICIENT murder of Canadians by other Canadians. Were we under the impression that Jordan Manner's killer would've just shaken his hand if he hadn't had a gun? That if he couldn't get his hands on a gun, he wouldn't instead have equipped himself with, say, a knife? A sharpened spork?

Do we believe, if this were the case, that the Mayor would then bemoan "the phenomenon of spork violence"; condemn the "spork culture" that has gripped our youth?

To the extent that handguns, really, are the secondary issue here, Miller's exclusive emphasis on them and their supposed origins has the effect of making the argument a manner of lie. Guns are an expedient, not a cause. And the cause, it seems to me, definitely IS within Miller's jurisdiction to deal with directly. (And to take at least some responsibility for.)

Yes, Miller needs to do something about the gang violence. And speak about it. I know he's at least given lip service to 'youth unemployment' as a root cause or something. I'm not sure what else he has actually attempted, or accomplished. Or what the possible solutions are.

Having said all that, there's nothing wrong with Miller mentioning the problem of guns coming across the border. It is one of the contributing factors, even if it's not the magic answer to Eric's question 'what the heck is happening?' in the Toronto Caribbean community. The borders are something we do have somewhat in our control. It's something. Other steps are not as obvious, or as likely to produce short-term quantifiable results, something politicians like.

No, of course there's nothing wrong with Miller mentioning the problem of guns coming across the border. Though I'm a little leery of the implied suggestion that the Americans actively condone or are even indifferent to the illegal export of handguns. I mean, it seems to me that what Miller is playing on here is not the idea that Americans aren't vigilant enough in preventing the unlawful traffic of firearms, but on a quintessentially Canadian prejudice: that Americans, at a cultural level, are trying to corrupt their morally superior neighbours. Honestly, given--as Selley mentions--that we have yet to get our hands on the gun in question, the issue of where it came from is totally and utterly moot. To make the accusation anyway, and to offer--in this particular instance--no other explanation, stinks of scapegoating ... No, in fact, I don't think there can be any doubt that it IS scapegoating, pure and simple.

"Other steps are not as obvious, or as likely to produce short-term quantifiable results, something politicians like."

Indeed. But can I point out: either you're a terrible cynic, or we are in agreement that David Miller is more concerned with the appearance of delivering results, than actually delivering results.

Sorry - but I seem to have lost the thread; just when did we outsource Canadian border security to the US of A?

I'm a little leery of the implied suggestion that the Americans actively condone or are even indifferent to the illegal export of handguns.

Well, I agree... I'm sure that ordinary Americans don't condone it. I'm just as sure that the U.S. government is equally far from indifferent about it, and condones it absolutely - given the complete lack of controls over the secondary market for guns in the U.S.

However, dcardno's comment is the one most on the nose... those guns don't come into the country via a transporter beam.