Something has never sat right with me about this entire incident and the resulting (lack of) coverage. JT was practically salivating at the opportunity to enact further gun control measures, almost like he was just waiting for an event like this to happen. And when it did, we never really got much coverage of the incident itself. Your piece is pretty much the only time I've seen the guy's name in print in the last few years.
I think the focus on gun control was just opportunistic. There were red flags surrounding this man for years, but apparently nobody cared until it became politically beneficial for them to pretend to care.
Wortman did not have a firearms licence, all his guns were illegal so no amount of gun control would have prevented this massacre, what might have is if the RCMP had done there job long before it occurred and investigated Wortman after several domestic violence reports. Trudeau was just grateful to have horrible event to forward his political overreach against lawful gun owners
Even playing dress up with the car , is impersonating a police officer. Still, the RCM Police did nothing. The guy was a psychopath and hurt more than just his surviving wife. Trudeau stepped up and banned guns, and looked proud. Like Kristin wrote, nothing was done , and all 120 recommendations are gathering dust -- typical for Canada, a country once known as CAN ada has become CanNOT ada
Johns gave a press conference on the anniversary of the murders wherein he disagreed with the position of the MCC’s final report which highlighted the role of domestic violence, stating that domestic violence is not in fact an epidemic.
This is, of course, absolutely inaccurate and despite quick attempts to save his job by apologizing and reaching out to stakeholders, he resigned the next day. As he should have.
I'm sorry, but where is the evidence that domestic violence is currently an epidemic? The expert report linked to in the article was authored by the Canadian Labour Congress (really? the CLC are now experts in DV??!!) and is little more than an advocacy paper with respect to workplace issues. Further, on a full reading, the main thrust of the paper is that things were exacerbated during covid due to people being locked in their homes and declining shelter spaces, again for covid related reasons (accompanied by calls for legislative changes affecting employment).
In addition, the VERY FIRST SENTENCE of the report reads: As is the case in many other countries, domestic violence has likely increased in Canada since lockdowns began.
So, no actual PROOF that DV actually HAS increased (just it has "likely" increased) and an inference that IF IT HAS, the reasons are related to covid lockdowns. Again, where is the evidence that DV is an epidemic in this Country? This strikes me as similar to claims that racism has never been more rampant when it is obvious to any honest observer that there has never been less racism. Do we want to reduce DV and racism? Yes, we absolutely do. But I for one won't take seriously your suggestions/recommendations for dealing with any issue if you make unsupported claims about its prevalence. I am open to (and even welcome) receiving evidence that DV actually is an epidemic in Canada.
My only quibble is using the term epidemic to describe domestic violence or DV.
I agree DV is a large problem that requires more attention and focus as an underlying cause of murder and mass murder, but the word epidemic is a medical term.
Domestic violence is not an infectious disease that one can contract like influenza.
DV is an aberrant, repugnant, often learned behaviour rooted in a loss of self control and/or in devious, disrespectful intent to exert control or inflict harm to one's partner, children, or other family member(s).
Also repugnant (and unfortunately not aberrant) is the Canadian police and political response to DV, which is usually to deny it's a factor in murder and mass murder, and instead to reflexively push to ban legal firearms while ignoring the ongoing proliferation of illegal guns.
23 were killed in the bombing of Canadian Pacific Air Lines Flight 108.
It was not a shooting, but it was, I think, the "deadliest mass-killing event in Canadian history", and another example of domestic violence (the perp was murdering his wife).
He had help from a couple others. All three of them were tried for murder and executed.
Studies without follow up action. To steal one of the best lines from the brilliant mini-series "Chernobyl", we should put that on our money. That has become the Canadian identity. Thank you for writing this. I know it came with a price...again.
Something has never sat right with me about this entire incident and the resulting (lack of) coverage. JT was practically salivating at the opportunity to enact further gun control measures, almost like he was just waiting for an event like this to happen. And when it did, we never really got much coverage of the incident itself. Your piece is pretty much the only time I've seen the guy's name in print in the last few years.
I think the focus on gun control was just opportunistic. There were red flags surrounding this man for years, but apparently nobody cared until it became politically beneficial for them to pretend to care.
Wortman did not have a firearms licence, all his guns were illegal so no amount of gun control would have prevented this massacre, what might have is if the RCMP had done there job long before it occurred and investigated Wortman after several domestic violence reports. Trudeau was just grateful to have horrible event to forward his political overreach against lawful gun owners
Even playing dress up with the car , is impersonating a police officer. Still, the RCM Police did nothing. The guy was a psychopath and hurt more than just his surviving wife. Trudeau stepped up and banned guns, and looked proud. Like Kristin wrote, nothing was done , and all 120 recommendations are gathering dust -- typical for Canada, a country once known as CAN ada has become CanNOT ada
From the article:
Johns gave a press conference on the anniversary of the murders wherein he disagreed with the position of the MCC’s final report which highlighted the role of domestic violence, stating that domestic violence is not in fact an epidemic.
This is, of course, absolutely inaccurate and despite quick attempts to save his job by apologizing and reaching out to stakeholders, he resigned the next day. As he should have.
I'm sorry, but where is the evidence that domestic violence is currently an epidemic? The expert report linked to in the article was authored by the Canadian Labour Congress (really? the CLC are now experts in DV??!!) and is little more than an advocacy paper with respect to workplace issues. Further, on a full reading, the main thrust of the paper is that things were exacerbated during covid due to people being locked in their homes and declining shelter spaces, again for covid related reasons (accompanied by calls for legislative changes affecting employment).
In addition, the VERY FIRST SENTENCE of the report reads: As is the case in many other countries, domestic violence has likely increased in Canada since lockdowns began.
So, no actual PROOF that DV actually HAS increased (just it has "likely" increased) and an inference that IF IT HAS, the reasons are related to covid lockdowns. Again, where is the evidence that DV is an epidemic in this Country? This strikes me as similar to claims that racism has never been more rampant when it is obvious to any honest observer that there has never been less racism. Do we want to reduce DV and racism? Yes, we absolutely do. But I for one won't take seriously your suggestions/recommendations for dealing with any issue if you make unsupported claims about its prevalence. I am open to (and even welcome) receiving evidence that DV actually is an epidemic in Canada.
Good article on an important issue.
My only quibble is using the term epidemic to describe domestic violence or DV.
I agree DV is a large problem that requires more attention and focus as an underlying cause of murder and mass murder, but the word epidemic is a medical term.
Domestic violence is not an infectious disease that one can contract like influenza.
DV is an aberrant, repugnant, often learned behaviour rooted in a loss of self control and/or in devious, disrespectful intent to exert control or inflict harm to one's partner, children, or other family member(s).
Also repugnant (and unfortunately not aberrant) is the Canadian police and political response to DV, which is usually to deny it's a factor in murder and mass murder, and instead to reflexively push to ban legal firearms while ignoring the ongoing proliferation of illegal guns.
23 were killed in the bombing of Canadian Pacific Air Lines Flight 108.
It was not a shooting, but it was, I think, the "deadliest mass-killing event in Canadian history", and another example of domestic violence (the perp was murdering his wife).
He had help from a couple others. All three of them were tried for murder and executed.
Studies without follow up action. To steal one of the best lines from the brilliant mini-series "Chernobyl", we should put that on our money. That has become the Canadian identity. Thank you for writing this. I know it came with a price...again.
This article should be widely circulated to all elected officials who are in a position to affect change.