Outside Dunning Hall, a “GUN OWNERSHIP IS A RIGHT” sign dared students to change their minds.
Stationed at the corner of University Ave. and Union St. just outside of Dunning Hall, Unify Canada 1867, a group supporting “individual liberty, free markets, the traditional family, and limited government,” set up a conversational booth to engage with students on political issues. The table was set up on Sept. 29 and was equipped with a “change my mind” sign, a camera, and a microphone, with the group aiming to engage students in a dialogue to post to their social media.
At the table was the group’s representative, Sarah, who chose to keep her surname anonymous following the assassination of Charlie Kirk. The same reason that drove her to hold this booth.
“The purpose of it [the discussion table] is to begin to talk about the issues that really impact students and Canadians. I feel like when there’s silence between two sides of an issue, then we start to kind of dehumanize the other side, and then civil war or violence can ensue, and I don’t want that to happen in Canada,” Sarah said in an interview with The Journal.
She also explained that Unify has started to go around to different major universities to speak with students, with the group being based out of the Kitchener-Waterloo area.
In a statement to The Journal, the University wrote that the event wasn’t sanctioned and that the group left without incident after campus security arrived.
“Campus Security and Emergency Services dispatched someone to investigate, and confirmed the group was set up on a city sidewalk. When informed their activity required a city permit and proper insurance, the group advised they didn’t intend to cause a disturbance and opted to leave,” Queen’s wrote.
As for her sign, she explained she’s seen efforts from the Liberal government to restrict guns, and expanded on the issue she takes with it.
“I think it’s a fundamental human right that we should be able to defend ourselves, and when criminals have guns, it only makes sense for the defendants to have guns as well, to defend themselves,” Sarah said.
One student who was watching the conversations, Henry Walker, ConEd ’28, agreed the event was important but questioned the motives behind it.
“I definitely see value in it [having conversations]. University campuses are spaces that are meant to foster discussion and thought, and all of that,” Walker said in an interview with The Journal. He later added that this event, however, seemed to revolve around someone “with a clear set of talking points,” and that they’re not looking to change their mind but rather “looking to tell people what to think.”
This perspective was echoed in a separate interview with The Journal by a student who spoke with Sarah, Daniel Wootton, ConEd ’27, who said he feels that the conversations are “pretty inflammatory,” and that “they definitely just want to rile people up.”
“I wish that I had more prep, and I wish that I was more prepared to talk about this kind of thing with more statistics and stuff like that, […] one of their assertions was that Elon Musk came to America with nothing, which I’m pretty sure is just like, genuinely false. His family is extremely wealthy,” he said.
“Conversation is good. I think conversation, specifically with the intent of actually changing your mind, is better. I think my big thing is that I didn’t feel like I got much out of that conversation, past just a few things being discussed. There’s not a lot of agreement or finding common ground here.”
Unify announced their campus tour on Sept. 18, but haven’t released an itinerary of their planned visits.
Tags
Campus Affairs, Gun Violence, Unify Canada, University
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to journal_editors@ams.queensu.ca.
John Sloan, Arts & Sciences, 1980.
She is a courageous person to take that stand. I am proud to say that I fully support her stand.
I abhor the murder of politicians and young people at the hand of extremists and mentally challenged people. I abhor the epidemic of murders and gang warfare in Canada. But disarming Canadians and taking away their property in the name of political expedience, particularly in the face of violent crime, is wrong. Not only that, but it will do little to solve any real problems or protect Canadians.
John Sloan
John Sherbino BAH , MIR
This article is interesting. Queen’s has never been very good at interdisciplinary communication. However, this issue is prime fodder for discussions involving law, economics, psychology, sociology and philosophy . The issue of ‘rights’ drifts around in all those spheres where academia collides with daily life. The issue of guns is ideal as it both hurts and fosters conflict in discussion, and lives out loud in the political world of life.
1ABNDT
Fully support this young lady speaking out on a subject that most Canadians no nothing about except what the main stream media & anti gun politicians feed them. Law abiding tax paying legal firearm owners are responsible for 0.001% of criminal shootings in Canada, Canadians are more likely to be unalived by a moose, than the most vetted members of our society.
We have stringent gun control that consists of licensing, training, life time background checks, spousal approval, Red/Yellow flag laws, safe storage & transport, RCMP/CSIS monitoring 24/7/365, firearm registration, & show of license to purchase ammo/magazines/firearms.
Canadian firearm owners do not possess “assault rifles/military style assault weapons/Weapons of War”(full auto/multi fire) those were banned back in the 70’s. And no military member would step on a battlefield with a “semi auto” civilian firearm going up against a full auto assault rifle.
They possess “semi auto” civilian firearms that are “approved” by the RCMP for the legal purposes of Hunting, Competition, Sport shooting, & Collecting.
The individuals God given right to self defense and to bear arms should not be relegated to someone’s emotions, or a privilege, for a false sense of security provided to us by a Gov, Politician, or LE pretending to be him.