ONE THING THE GUN LOBBY continues to assert is the enormous contrast between the use of firearms by the criminal element and the recreational use by law-abiding citizens

Time and again, we hear derision trained on Canada's hugely expensive gun registry, and there's little doubt that if the Conservatives get their long-sought majority of seats in the House of Commons the registry will be eliminated.

But the problem, as we see it, is that in reality there is no such clear distinction to be drawn between the "criminal" and "law-abiding" use of weapons capable of taking human lives.

This became dramatically clear last weekend with the murder of Heidi Ferguson and the suicide of her estranged husband Hugh.

Although they had been living apart for about a year, after being married for almost two decades, the Fergusons were seen by friends and neighbours as still on good terms, often at each other's homes, worked as a team and even went to their son's lacrosse games together.

But Mr. Ferguson, 42, was also an avid hunter, and he used a firearm from the collection at the former matrimonial home in Camilla, which included a handgun, to end his wife's life. And the same weapon was likely used ultimately take his own life.

The investigation of the murder-suicide will undoubtedly focus on whether police responded appropriately to Mrs. Ferguson's call for help roughly an hour before she was fatally wounded.

However, the tragic event should also trigger a coroner's inquest, at which the jurors would be asked to consider what measures might be taken to avoid similar events in future.

One thing to be considered is whether any personal collection of firearms should ever include a handgun. Another is whether a domestic disturbance in which one party is known to have firearms should automatically lead to immediate police seizure of the gun collection.