Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian McIlmoyle
There was lots said that never made it into the show.. I managed to stay on message well enough that even with all the cutting.. what I wanted to say came out.
Its easy to say this was a "negative" peice .. and that the CBC "had an agenda" After talking to the producer for an hour on the phone before I agreed to let them in to FACT to interview me I felt that he was simply trying to get to the bottom of the irrational regulations governing imitation guns.
He had done some research ( quite a bit of it on ASC ) and wanted to show "responsible people having fun with imitation guns" As a counterpoint to the BAN position posited by SOME of the police"
You note that the officer from Durham region who was instrumental in getting their 18+ possession bylaw passed stated clearly " I have no problem with responsible use in the proper place"
I don't really think that public exposure of AS in main stream media serves our interest. However when Media focuses specifically on AS and imitation guns as this story did, I do think it is important to have the proper perception presented. That is why I agreed to the interview and agreed to let them video some of the action.
The next thing to do is find out who is in the government working group mentioned in the story and get talking to those people.
Does anyone know anything about this working group?
|
I applaud your decision.
It must have been very difficult to make a call like that but being heard is preferable to having only the alternative viewpoint expressed.
I think there are really two entirely separate issues here.
One is an entirely emotional issue, with police facing a moral dilemma in that shooting someone for appearing to be armed doesn't provide the same sense of justification as shooting someone who is actually armed with a RS weapon. The perception of threat is still there. Police are human beings. Human beings, especially those who elect to shoulder heavy responsibilities can have a great deal of trouble when they do their job and something horribly stupid results. One can intellectually separate legally justified actions and examine them objectively, but emotional issues and personal doubt are not so easily reasoned away. I'd be more concerned about police who don't wrestle with making peace with themselves over shooting some kid with a plastic gun, even if they were entirely justified.
We are in no way justified in attacking someone who has to live with something like that, but that doesn't mean either that we can't pose the objective opposing view. We should.
The hockey stick analogy, while perfect in every sense logically, doesn't address the part of human nature that wants a simple answer and absolution from guilt.
I personally have far less problem with someone holding up a store with an airsoft gun than using a RS weapon... Less chance of the victim getting hurt.
I also have no problem with a LEO then shooting that person twice in center chest for being a menace to society, and once in the head for good measure, for being an idiot and bringing a BB gun to a shoot out. Darwin wins, and it saves the taxpayers and the gene pool the cost of his further contributions.
The folks who then cry that he wasn't carrying a RS weapon, need to go for a ride-along and see that with which the police have to deal. Maybe too, seeing airsoft used as a non-injurious training tool to help police make good decisions in the field could give people a more objective perspective.
I'd also be more concerned about the effects of not having the media over for tea once in a while, even if they abuse it a bit. Good on ya for making a tough call.
The other problem is perception. Rational or not.
Though benign in appearance, a #2 Ticonderoga Pencil can be employed very effectively as a weapon... or for providing information.
An airsoft gun merely gives the appearance of hostility, without the ability to cause serious harm to others. With airsoft arms people lose track of where the Halloween Funhouse ends and reality begins. Is a thing dangerous by appearing to be or is the threat in its use or abuse?
The answer, I think,is that rather than to get all "up in arms," people should pick up their pencils. Rather than shy from this, I suspect that loudly and publicly supporting the police in the face of justifiable shootings will get more people thinking rationally and get a more positive reaction.
We have an honor based game... Candor is a good companion for Honor and more credible than silence.