A column in today's paper, "The Star" in Toronto, took aim at Canada's conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper who seems to suffer from an empathy deficit, or is at least selective. "Empathy and this prime minister are mostly strangers," said the author James Travers.

"That same cold mix of political calculation and ideological certainty is evident when Conservatives balk at gun controls. Reversing Liberal policies and playing to a core constituency are more compelling than the now serialized stories of shootings and senseless death...

Instead the discussion turns on the freedom of the individual to own something private citizens don't need and society can't reasonably afford. As is surprisingly often the case with a government led by an unusually cerebral prime minister, it's an emotional argument about symbols that tilt to partisan advantage and away from sound public policy."

Ah, there's the rub. We have two thoughts.

1) Gun Guys believes that guns are powerful symbols used -- and abused -- more for politics and identity than for shooting.

A book review of Joan Burbick's stellar book, "Gun Show Nation" stated it clearly:

"In the war of symbols, guns reign supreme in America – meaning, owning a gun says more about your politics than how you use it. ..... The symbolic meaning of owning a gun is to reclaim political power, demonize minorities, distort the issue of crime in America, express contempt for women gaining access to power, and distract Americans from the real issues of democracy."

2) No public policy debate about public safety, crime, and obviously guns and violence should ever be removed from the "human factor". The "gun guys" toggle between emotion versus reason depending on their agenda. But gun violence prevention advocates who have good, reasonable policies should also never cede the "human factor' when debating the gun issue.

Yes, on some level, public policy is inherently sterile. But no government or legislation should ever remove the real world impact of policies, especially pertaining to gun violence, from the equation.

Gun advocates fear the power and voice of gun violence victims because their personal stories inherently turn their contrived theories of "guns as protection" on its head.

Gun advocates prefer to play on their own turf -- a sterile, theoretical debate -- and live in a disconnected reality of symbols, wrapping themselves in their guns, god, and flag.

Symbols are powerful stuff. They cloud reality and push out the real world impact of too many guns in a culture or nation.

We hope that one day we will acknowledge that a gun is just a gun -- we simply project our own values and identities onto them. That would be a giant leap towards curing our "empathy deficit."

Guns don't shoot symbols -- they kill real life people.