Justice and human rights

Science to one day shoot gun policy in the foot

/ Heather Caulder / Leave a comment

I have lived in Toronto for around two months now. Since my arrival in May, gun violence has dominated the headlines and sent the city, province and country into a flurry of discussions over potential solutions.

The aftermath of the Danzig Street shooting (Image courtesy of the National Post).

First, in June, there was the Eaton Centre shooting that left two dead and seven others injured after someone opened fire in the mall’s crowded food court. Then, at the beginning of July, a Scarborough street party erupted into a shootout that killed two people and injured 23 others.

And these are just the high-profile stories.

Some blame gangs and drug dealers. Others single out policy and policing strategies.And then there are those who have started calling this summer the “Summer of the Gun 2.” Summer 2005 earned the name “Summer of the Gun” when 24 people where shot and killed between June and September.

Regardless of the cause, violence and guns will probably always be a problem in large cities like Toronto.

Looking ahead

As a researcher for Discovery Channel, I learn a lot about technological and scientific advancements that are changing the way people live – some for better and others for worse.

I’ve read about things I never fathomed were possible. The manufacturing of guns with 3D printers is one of those things.

The harmless 3D printer can print guns (Image Courtesy of the Car Connection).

Policy makers beware. If you think gun violence is rampantly out of control now, what will it be like if people can easily print their own weapons? Forget worrying about gun enthusiasts hopping the US border to purchase guns at the nearest Walmart. Instead, pay more attention to the backyard, basement, attic gun-lovers who will create their own guns on once-harmless printers.

“‘HaveBlue,’ a member of the AR15.com gun enthusiast forum, which is named after a common semi-automatic rifle, claims to have carried out the first successful test-firing of a 3D-printed gun,” according to an article in the New Scientist.

HaveBlue said they printed a receiver, combined it with an existing pistol and fired more than 200 rounds. So, even if law-makers banned guns entirely, someone would find a way to keep making them.

Recycling old solutions

I’m not trying to create a scary, dystopian view of the future. Rather, I came across this technology in my research and thought it added an interesting dimension to the gun violence conversation.

We already know people can easily find ways to purchase firearms. We also know that a common response to escalating gun violence is either increased policing or changes to existing laws. Toronto has chosen to deploy hundreds of extra police officers during the month of August in an attempt to curb further acts of violence.

But while more police could help in the short-term, perhaps we should also look to other solutions. Science and technology could help to form solid, long-term policies now. The best thing law-makers can do is to stay ahead of what could be possible five years from today – things like printing guns.

Risking life to tell a story

/ Heather Caulder / 2 Comments

I read an article in the Guardian about a Cambodian journalist a few weeks ago and wanted to share my reactions. I follow the Khmer Rouge Tribunal (KRT) and acquired an interest in Cambodian history after living in the country for a month in 2010.

Journalists take risks every day, but only a select few gamble their lives in the pursuit of truth. Cambodia’s Thet Sambath has wagered everything – home, family, life – in order to expose the facts behind his country’s violent past.

Between 1975 and 1979, the Khmer Rouge attempted to shape Cambodia into a utopian, agrarian society. Millions perished due to forced labour, starvation and torture.

The United Nations (UN) helped establish a tribunal intended to bring justice to the struggling country. So far, only one regime leader has been sentenced.

Memorial stands in Choeung Ek, Phnom Penh, but many Cambodians do not know the history of the Khmer Rouge and its brutal regime (here pictured in early 2010).

Planning for the tribunal began in 1998.

Snail-paced justice

The tribunal has experienced many setbacks. Judges have resigned, the Cambodian government has clashed with international officials and documents have been disputed. Such setbacks have left many wondering if justice will ever prevail.

Thet Sambath is one of those people. He has taken the pursuit of truth into his own hands. He is a senior reporter at the Phnom Penh Post and, in the last decade, has interviewed 1000 former Khmer soldiers, according to the Guardian.

He conducted these interviews in his spare time. The end goal is to expose what really happened during the Khmer Rouge years.

In an interview with the Guardian, Sambath claimed he wanted to know “why” these atrocities happened. He revealed the “how” in his prior documentary, Enemies of the People.

Truth is expensive, even in Cambodia

Sambath’s pursuit of truth has a hefty price tag. He has spent $10,000 USD, has no savings and lives in fear that the government is trying to make him disappear.

“I know too much about what really happened. They want me dead,” he told the Guardian. “Fear is always in my heart. I am worried where I am going, who is behind me, watching me, following me.”

Sambath’s fears are justified. The international community expressed anxiety over government corruption from the planning stages of the Khmer Rouge Tribunal. The UN insisted the tribunal include a mixture of Cambodian and international judges to safeguard against corruption. This mixture has been the source of many clashes and stagnation in the tribunal.

Risking it all

With no end in sight for the KRT, Sambath continues his quest for truth. But the question then becomes how far should a journalist go to get the story?

Foreign correspondents have died while covering war-torn regions. Without them, many stories would remain untold. But Sambath is not a foreign correspondent. He is a journalist reporting fearfully from his own country.

In the Guardian article, he shares stories about car chases and his constant need to move and hide from the government. Threats allegedly started after the release of his first documentary.

Sambath said he will not abandon his project, but he does plan to escape Cambodia prior to the documentary’s release.

His story begs a major question of journalistic practices and standards. How far should a journalist go to tell a story to minimize harm if it means increasing harm to him or herself?

If you want to know more about the Khmer Rouge, please also take a look at my other blog entries on thethunderbird.ca: Khmer Rouge trial proves justice too expensive for Cambodia or Khmer Rouge Tribunal sets new standard with first life sentence.