The issue of gun control and violence, both in Canada and the United States, is one that simply will not go away. If history is to be any guide, no matter what the resolution to the gun control debate is, it is probable that the arguments pro and con will be much the same as they always have been. In 1977, legislation was passed by the Canadian Parliament regulating long guns for the first time, restructuring the availability of firearms, and increasing a variety of penalties . Canadian firearms law is primarily federal, and "therfore national in scope, while the bulk of the firearms regulation in the United
States is at the state level; attempts to introduce stricter leglislation at the federal level are often defeated". The importance of this issue is that not all North Americans are necessarily supportive of strict gun control as being a feasible alternative to controlling urban violence. There are concerns with the opponents of gun control, that the professional criminal who wants a gun can obtain one, and leaves the average law-abiding citizen helpless in defending themselves against the perils of urban life . Is it our right to bear arms as North Americans ? Or is it privilege? And what are the benefits of having strict gun control laws? Through the analysis of the writings and reports of academics and experts of gun control and urban violence, it will be possible to examine the issues and theories of the social impact of this issue.
Part II: Review of the Literature A) Summary
In a paper which looked at gun control and firearms violence in North America,
Robert J. Mundt, of the University of North Carolina, points out that "Crime in
America is popularly perceived [in Canada] as something to be expected in a society which has less respect for the rule of law than does Canadian society..." In 1977, the Canadian government took the initiative to legislate stricter gun control. Among the provisions legislated by