Article content continued

I was also present at the École Polytechnique massacre in Montreal in 1989. At the time I was chief resident in the Emergency Medicine Residency Program at McGill. Fourteen promising, young, high-achieving women were killed and 13 others were injured by a deranged misogynist. I entered the premises with a paramedic crew and pronounced a number of victims dead on scene. I then helped to extricate and transport some to the Royal Victoria Hospital. I had a two-year-old daughter and a seven-month-old son at the time, and I slept on the floor of their room for six months afterward.

I have had two relatives commit suicide, one by handgun.

I have also owned rifles since I was 12 and have in the past decade become an avid hunter and competitive pistol, rifle and shotgun enthusiast. My wife and two of our three adult children attend competitions in Canada and the United States. I am also a qualified Range Officer with two pistol shooting disciplines (IPSC and ICORE) as well as with the Canadian Shooting Sports Association (CSSA).

I have owned rifles since I was 12 and have in the past decade become an avid hunter and competitive pistol, rifle and shotgun enthusiast

Given the above, I think I have something to offer on the unfolding debate. And it’s not something my colleagues in the CDPG want you to hear.

The term “assault weapon” is bandied about in the public domain with a less than clear understanding of its meaning. A military assault rifle is different from the various semi-automatic sport and hunting rifles in that it has fully automatic fire and high-capacity magazines that are banned/illegal and virtually unavailable in Canada (Canada has a five-round limit). With the exception of some individuals who owned now-banned weapons prior to our new laws being introduced in the 1990s, no one in Canada today can buy such a rifle. Calling for their banning isn’t just superfluous, it’s misleading. They’re effectively banned already.