| Montréal,
le 10 octobre 1998 |
Numéro
22
|
(page 9)
page précédente
Vos
commentaires
|
MOT POUR MOT
LA MINISTRE DE LA JUSTICE
ET LE POIVRE DE CAYENNE
Le poivre est à la mode ces jours-ci. Un correspondant du QL
en Alberta, Peter Kearns d'Edmonton (kearns@compusmart.ab.ca), s'est
enquéri des raisons pour lesquelles la ministre fédérale
de la Justice, Anne McLellan, voulait bannir l'utilisation personnelle
des petites bonbonnes de poivre de Cayenne. Comme l'explique notre collaboratrice
Claire Joly ailleurs dans ce numéro,
ces petites bonbonnes sont d'excellents moyens de défense contre
les agresseurs. |
On dirait que le gouvernement libéral veut tout faire pour désarmer
les citoyens et s'assurer que seuls la police, l'armée, et bien
sûr les criminels, auront des armes pour se défendre... et
attaquer. M. Kearns nous informe que des rumeurs courent dans le comté
de la ministre à Edmonton, à l'effet que l'utilisation du
poivre de Cayenne n'est devenue une préoccupation ministérielle
que lorsque la soeur de son adjointe administrative a été
victime d'un voleur qui l'a aspergée avec la substance en question.
On peut évidemment douter que l'interdiction aura grand effet sur
les voleurs et les bandits – qui peuvent toujours se procurer ce qu'ils
veulent sur le marché noir. Les honnêtes citoyens – et en
particulier les honnêtes citoyennes –, par contre, perdront un moyen
de plus, un moyen relativement inoffensif faut-il le préciser, de
se défendre. Mais, comme le note notre correspondant, il semble
que si vous travaillez pour la ministre et que quelque chose arrive à
votre soeur, tous les Canadiens doivent en payer le prix, qu'ils soient
coupables ou non.
Nous publions ici la réponse envoyée par Anne McLellan à
Peter Kearns, où elle explique les raisons qui motivent l'interdiction
du poivre de Cayenne. Au lecteur de juger de leur pertinence.
Dear Mr. Kearns,
Thank you for your letter of June 29, 1998, concerning the substance commonly
known as « pepper spray ». At the
outset I would like to state that this government does not believe public
safety is enhanced by carrying weapons.
As you may be aware, any device designed to injure or incapacitate a person
by discharge of a spray, liquid, powder or gas is classified as a prohibited
weapon by Order in Council. This includes mace, tear gas and pepper spray.
This has been the case since the early 1970s.
Many pepper spray devices are labelled and marketed as animal repellent.
While most large capacity devices are clearly used only to deter animal
attacks, small, easily-concealed pepper spray devices have been used by
criminals to injure victims. This is the reason for the new proposed regulations
on pepper spray. The new regulations are intended simply to clarify the
law that has existed for almost 25 years – that pepper spray can legitimately
be used as an animal repellent but not against humans.
Recent Alberta police reports identify small pepper spray devices as a
major crime risk. The Canadian Police Association, the Canadian Association
of Chiefs of Police, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and Canada
Customs and Excise have all urged a ban on pepper spray.
The Government is proposing that small capacity pepper spray devices, which
Canadian police forces have identified as a risk to public safety, be prohibited.
Large capacity pepper spray devices (devices with a capacity of 225 grams
or 225 millilitres or more – that is, smaller than an average pop can)
designed exclusively for the control of wild animals such as bears, will
continue to be legal.
At the time of publication of the proposed regulations, interested parties
were invited to forward their comments on the proposed amendment. Many
comments were received and are currently being examined. As a result of
the responses, a number of individuals or interest groups will be contacted
directly to seek further comments before a final draft of the amendment
is made.
You criticize my commitment to preventing family violence. Contrary to
your opinion, ensuring that the weapons Canadians have are used for the
legitimate purposes for which they are intended is part of preventing family
violence. The Firearms Act will also bring improvements that will positively
affect women and family violence. I believe that I am keeping my commitment
and will continue to do so.
Thank you again for taking the time to write to me.
Yours sincerely,
A. Anne McLellan |
|
