Larry Whitmore of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association has spoken out strongly against Toronto Mayor David Miller's backing of a proposal to close gun clubs located on city property.

Whitmore has some strong words for the Toronto mayor.

Brian Kemp of CBCNews.ca sent a list of questions to Whitmore. Following are his responses:

With people being killed by guns in Canada's biggest city and other municipalities, why are you against Toronto Mayor David Miller backing an effort to ban gun clubs in his municipality? And how are you going to fight him?'To link legitimate firearms owners to the drug gangs is ludicrous,' says Larry Whitmore of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association in Vaughan, Ont.

Whitmore: Guns do not kill people, criminals kill people using a wide variety of weapons. The mayor is vigorously pursuing an initiative to ban guns from lawful collectors and sport shooters that are not and never have been a threat to public safety and certainly have no connection whatsoever with the drug gangs plaguing the city.

This has been a failed strategy in every municipality it has been attempted (including Great Britain and Australia), but Mayor Miller insists this notion will, against all evidence, somehow work in Toronto.

It will not and he is going after the wrong "target." Licensed firearms owners are the most law-abiding and regulated segment of Canadian society. To link legitimate firearms owners to the drug gangs is ludicrous, offensive and only serves to divert attention from the real problems faced by his administration.

The legal gun owner he so blatantly vilifies includes senior police officers, judges, lawyers, professionals, and law-abiding Canadians from all walks of life, including politicians.

Scapegoating and demonizing this segment of the population reveals how desperate [Miller] is to appear to be doing something about drug-related street crime when, in fact, it will do nothing. Since it is obvious that this initiative by the mayor will do nothing to reduce the drug gang violence on the streets of Toronto, the question must be asked: does the mayor share some responsibility for the blood of future victims?

Mayor Miller's proposals and slanderous statements against lawful gun owners has galvanized the recreational firearms community. We have instituted a "boycott Toronto" campaign as reflected in our new website: www.torontothebad.com. We are receiving support from organizations all over the world, particularly the U.S. We will also be vigorously analyzing the flawed staff study he is using to justify his attack on sport shooters. The results will be shared with the media.

Doesn't a ban on gun clubs send a strong message to people and to criminals that Toronto is serious about dealing with gun control in the city? And why should gun clubs be left alone?

Whitmore: It is laughable to think that a drug gang member will change his ways because Mayor Miller instituted a ban on gun clubs. Gang members do not shoot at gun clubs. They use the streets of Toronto as their shooting "range." It was also obvious to everyone that the media was not fooled by his proposals and, in fact, some attacked the new bylaws quite harshly.

Sports shooting and those that participate in the sport are highly regulated and have passed quite a number of investigations and background checks in order to obtain a firearms licence.

The clubs are regulated by the Chief Firearms Office and the Government of Canada, are inspected on a regular basis and, as stated above, pose no threat to anyone. The sport has an excellent safety record as evidenced by the fact that every member is covered by a $5-million liability policy for all recreational shooting activities worldwide. That coverage costs under $10 per year per member.

If the sport was as dangerous as the mayor claims, we would not be able to obtain any insurance, let alone at such a small fee.

How would you suggest Toronto go about controlling handguns and other firearms in the city? Can your group play a role and, if so, how?

Whitmore: Our association is a group of lawful recreational firearms owners. Crime control is neither our mandate or our focus. However, firearms are regulated by the federal government and as such are beyond the jurisdiction of the city of Toronto.

Guns in the hands of firearms licence holders are already highly regulated and need no more restrictions. The criminal element ignore the laws and it seems the only way to "control" them is to put them in jail and keep them, where they can do no more harm. In jurisdictions where mandatory sentencing has been implemented, with no parole, violent incidents have dropped dramatically.

We would very much support such a policy.

Guns are being stolen from collections. Some surely are being used to commit crimes, so shouldn't something be done about the problem?

Whitmore: The short answer is yes. The federal government has recently introduced two new offences to the Criminal Code: break and enter with the intent to steal a firearm and robbery with intent to steal a firearm. Both are punishable with harsh prison sentences.

What the mayor conveniently ignores, to the peril of Toronto, is that the black market in firearms is more than sufficient to supply all the needs of the criminal gangs for decades to come, irrespective of his new initiatives. The 2006 Toronto Gun and Gangs Task Force report, obtained under an Access to Information request, stated that only 5.5 per cent of handguns used in the commission of crimes were ever registered in Canada, not the 40 to 50 per cent claimed by the mayor.

Other government sources report as little as three per cent of crime firearms originate in Canada. Organized crime will always find ways to arm themselves to protect the guns and money smuggled in and out of the country.

Is there any way to balance the rights of gun owners with the protection of the population? If so, how?

Whitmore: Firearms owners have the same rights as the rest of the population. This question makes the assumption that legitimate firearms owners are a threat or have been a threat. It also makes the assumption that the population of Canada needs protection from legal firearms owners.

As the basis of the question is erroneous in nature, it is impossible to answer.