An unstable, troubled individual is drawn to a cause motivated by ancient strains of hate.
It is, unfortunately, not something that Canada or other countries haven't experienced before. Sadly it is now part of our nation's conversation this week.
The killing of a young soldier in our country's capital on Wednesday, and the murder of another soldier in Quebec, purportedly incited by the call to revenge by ISIS, has shaken our country, our political leaders and our neighbours.
Beyond the heartbreaking loss of young good lives filled with promise, it is making us question our security systems in Parliament and ponder just how far we should go to protect our institutions from future isolated attacks by unstable individuals or potential organized acts of terror.
The thought of going down a path that emulates the high-security systems in place at U.S. institutions is, frankly, upsetting.
Images of armed soldiers guarding Parliament, of barricades and fences around our prime minister's residence, is not a Canada that we would recognize or welcome.
But we also can't remain naive about the potential for much more damaging assaults. We, like others, think about what might have happened on Wednesday if the lone deranged attacker was able to procure some of the automatic weapons available in the U.S. The fact that he had either a shotgun or long-barrelled rifle certainly limited the potential for much more loss of life.
Last week the Justice Institute here in New West held a simulation of a shooter running amok in a public building. The enactment allowed emergency personnel to practise their medical skills, communications skills and policing strategies. It was eerily prescient given what happened this week.
Sadly, we expect to see more such training sessions, more armed guards, more and higher security measures in public. Even sadder, they may be necessary.
