Canada's government is clearly uninterested in finding innovative solutions to gun violence

The federal government has finally accepted what cities have been complaining about for years: we're not doing enough to tackle gun violence.

Last month, Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale convened a summit on gun and gang violence bringing together law enforcement, medical professionals, gun control and gun rights activists, Indigenous communities and community activists all in hopes of finding innovative ways to reduce gun violence.

But when the government introduced Bill C-71,which amends the Firearms Act to enhance background checks, record-keeping and changes the ways the RCMP can classify firearms,it became abundantly clear that the government has again decided to rest on its law enforcement-heavy laurels. It's doing the same thing as always, and hoping for better results.

Broadening the scope

If Canada truly wants to decrease gun violence, we must start by considering all types of gun violence including suicides, accidents and police shootings and rely on experts outside of law enforcement who have greater influence in potential victims' lives.

The typical government approach to communities with high incidences of shootings and gun homicides has been to increase police presence through specialized task forces,such as the Toronto Anti-Violence Intervention Strategy (TAVIS).

However, not only have these efforts been ratherineffective at curtailing gun violence Toronto had594 shooting victims in 2017, more than double the number of victims in 2014 they've also led to significantresentmentand distrust in the police because ofheightened police surveillance. Indeed, TAVISwasdisbanded after critics insisted it too heavily relied on carding African Canadians.

Chicago-basedCure Violenceis one example of a smarter approach. The program employs ex-offenders instead of police officers to intervene and de-escalate potentially fatal conflicts in communities. Cities where this program has been implemented have seen areduction of up to 70 per centin shootings, violent confrontations and homicides.

Although gun homicides tend to cause the most panic publicly, approximately three-quarters of gun-related deaths in Canada are suicides, andpeople arethree times more likelyto complete suicide when they have access to a gun. This is why it's essential for doctors to take proactive measures to determine whether their patients (especially teenagers) with depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation have access to a gun, even if it's not their own gun. And to work with families to find ways to restrict that access.

Almost every day in Ontario, a child or young person isinjured by a gun, usually accidentally.To confront this, provincial governments should update school curricula to incorporate gun safety in classroom instruction, similar to teaching about illegal drug use. Although there are few accidental shooting deaths each year, severe injury such as loss of sight and loss of limbs in children do still occur, meriting some sort of coordinated response.

• Liberals propose tightening Canada's firearms law with new record-keeping practices

• Hunting activist says gun reform more about U.S. than Canada

Then there's gun violence by way of police shootings. Since 2000, there have beenon average27 police shooting deaths each year in Canada. The vast majority over 70 per cent of victims suffered from mental health and substance abuse problems.

Idil Abdillahi, professor of social work at Ryerson University, has been championing an alternative method that would lessen the number of interactions between people in mental distress and police, and thus create feweropportunities for fatal encounters.

Under this model, unarmed social workers trained in methods of de-escalation and interaction with people in emotional distress would be the first responders to calls with people in crisis, with police officers only serving as backup when needed. Many victims services agencies across Ontario offer similar crisis response intervention programs, which dispatch counsellors in the immediate aftermath of crimes.

The government's new bill, however, steers clear of these sorts of innovative solutions. Instead,it gives police officers access to firearms sales records, and italso brings in stronger regulations involving restricted firearms, such as requiring owners get a permit before taking their gun to a gunsmith for repair. These regulationshave, predictably,drawn the ire of gun owners' associations.

Lack of consultation

Despite the government's interest in public consultations, there seems to have been few consultations done on this file. There was the summit as mentioned above, and Minister Goodale does have afirearms advisory committee, but that committee ismandated only to meet a minimum of once a yearand deliberate in secret.

What's more, it's unlikely that any of the information "shared" at last month's summit went into Bill C-71, given the bill was introducedtwo weeks later. When it comes to tackling gun violence, the government is clearly uninterested in finding bold and innovative solutions.

As long as we continue to view gun ownership as a suspicious and criminal act, an approach that centres on law enforcement will always seem the most responsible.Governments should instead rely on other people in communities doctors, social workers, educators and ex-offenders who are closer to and may have greater trust from potential victims.Canada doesn't need a guns-first approach. Canada needs a victims-first approach.

This column is part ofCBC'sOpinion section.For more information about this section, please read thiseditor'sblogandourFAQ.