Just when you think things couldn’t get any worse for beleaguered Canadian gun owners, that’s exactly what happens. In this case, there were two events—a court decision upholding the country’s strict gun ban and the election of a new Liberal Party prime minister.
However, when you consider just how bad the country’s government was under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, particularly toward gun owners, it’s difficult to imagine it getting much worse.
“I’d actually sum it up as nothing has really changed that much,” said Blair Hagen, vice president and communications director for Canada’s National Firearms Association (NFA), an organization that has been fighting an uphill battle for years.
On April 15, a three-judge panel of Canada’s Federal Court of Appeals, in the case Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights v. Canada, unanimously upheld former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s 2020 ban on approximately 1,500 models of firearms characterized as “assault-style weapons” by the Canadian government.
At issue was the May 1, 2020, Order in Council SOR/2020-96, which immediately classified 1,500 models of firearms (and modified versions and unnamed variants), previously listed as “non-restricted” or “restricted,” as illegal “prohibited” firearms under the federal Criminal Code. In creating the ban, Trudeau bypassed the legislative process, and the order was not pre-published or subject to public input or comments.
Ultimately, the court ruled that the order didn’t violate Canada’s Bill of Rights or Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
“I have not been persuaded that the GIC (Governor in Council) erred in considering public safety in assessing whether the prohibited firearms were reasonable for use in Canada for hunting and sport shooting,” Chief Justice Yves de Montigny wrote in the decision. “It may well be that, from the sole perspective of a sensible hunter or sportsman, it makes no sense to ban firearms that are well suited or even specifically designed for hunting or sport purposes. But the GIC, because of its broader public policy role, must also consider other factors such as public safety.”
The NFA was hoping for different results in the court case, but Hagen is pragmatic about the ruling.
“Of course, we hoped for a better result,” he said. “But court cases in Canada regarding firearms are (often) a 50/50 shot, and usually less than 40/60. As you can probably imagine, Canadian courts are typically not friendly to firearms issues. But we felt we had to do it.”
Still, despite many guns being on banned lists, there is reason for gun owners to be hopeful. Hundreds of thousands of firearms on the banned list are currently owned by Canadian citizens, and the government’s ability to seize those firearms is problematic in several ways, particularly logistically. That’s why the government has established an amnesty period that ends in October of this year.
The deadline has been extended previously, and Hagen anticipates it will be extended again later this year.
“Basically, the government does not have the logistics or the budget to deal with that,” he said. “We’re talking about hundreds of thousands of firearms, and if they have to be turned in, they have to go somewhere. To construct facilities across the country would cost billions of dollars. Right now, they’re trying to downplay the costs associated with this because they don’t want to alarm people. A lot of people remember the old long-gun registry, where it was advertised it was only going to cost $2 million tax dollars, and it ended up costing $2 billion.”
Just a few months before the recent federal election, Canada’s liberal government added another 324 dubiously labeled “assault-style” firearms to the nation’s already lengthy list of banned firearms; however, as the election for a new prime minister approached, Canadian gun-rights supporters were cautiously optimistic that a change might be imminent.
Unfortunately, a shift in the political climate over the past few months leading up to the election resulted in Liberal Party leader Mark Carney defeating Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre, a victory that promises more of the same policy decisions as his predecessor. Carney posted on Facebook in April: “You can’t be serious about being tough on crime if you’re not willing to be tough on guns.”
According to Hagen, however, the positive aspect of the election results is that Carney won’t have the power that Trudeau did, since the Liberal Party failed to win a majority in Parliament.
“With this being a minority Liberal government, they’re very limited in what they can do,” he said. “I expect that this government will probably fall in the next two years.”
Still, despite lacking a majority, there’s little doubt that Carney and the Liberal Party will continue to advocate for a greater ban on guns.
“The Liberals like to run their programs to fruition,” Hagen said. “They have had a civil disarmament objective for decades.
“We’re already getting ready for the next election. We feel like with the government’s current agenda, they will not be able to achieve their goals, and that a political solution is on the horizon—a Conservative government. I believe that will be achieved.”
In the end, Hagen stated that Canada’s current situation should serve as a warning to American gun owners.
“I think our situation in Canada just reinforces a lot of things that American gun owners already know,” he concluded. “Be politically active at the state level and the national level, and don’t fall for pleas for licensing of firearms. Don’t fall for pleas to register firearms. Take a look at Canada, because that’s where it leads.”
