It’s probably safe to say part of Markham-Unionville MP Paul Chiang’s motivation for amendments to Bill C-21 are recent occurrences in large mobs of people both blockading major trade corridors with their own private arsenals and descending on capitals of both Canada and the United States to demand the unlawful removal of legitimately-elected governments — and vowing to do it again.
No government, be it a democracy or dictatorship, nor be it socialist, capitalist or libertarian, would ignore blatantly vocal threats to its sovereignty. But as much as gun owners would like to label Justin Trudeau and the Liberals as dictators, the fact this is a bill going through parliamentary and public debate demonstrates the opposite. If this were China, the guns would simply be gone and anyone who had a problem with it would probably disappear as well.
That being said, if you are a gun owner who keeps your tools locked up, stores your ammunition separately, P.R.O.V.E.s the weapon is safe every time you handle it, have all your vaccinations and happen to think the convoy protesters may have been overreacting, you’re getting completely screwed over again and are rightfully sick of having this never-ending argument.
It’s time Canada rethinks our approach to firearms control because after half a century, some aspects of the current strategy obviously aren’t working.
What does work, albeit frustratingly primitively, is the PAL system. It’s ludicrous we’re still mailing things in 2022 when the process could be done just as securely over the internet, but getting licensed to buy a firearm is stringent enough that it deters the level of casual-mass-shooter insanity seen in the USA. Courts can take away a dangerous person’s firearm privileges when necessary.
But the world’s largest undefended border makes the rest of Canada’s approach a dog and pony show. Mass shootings still occur in Canada and smuggled guns are frequently involved. Barring another pandemic, that border isn’t closing anytime soon. Until enough Americans get sick of their kids getting shot and actually vote for change, we’re stuck with their abundance of weapons.
If the goal is specifically to curb urban gun violence, then the approach should be tailored to urban centres. Instead of blanket-banning firearms arbitrarily, require all firearms in or near population centres over 50,000 people to be stored at proper firing ranges. Focus criminal law on those without proper credentials caught with a firearm in a city. This leaves rural hunters who have nothing to do with urban gun violence out of the equation.
Hunters and recreational shooters who live in cities could still pick up their firearms on their way out to the country. Armouries are standard procedure for firearm-using organizations from police to Parks Canada.
Under this system, the classification of firearm is doesn’t matter — they’re all in the same place and secured. Smaller municipal governments could then be given the freedom to determine if, where and how firearms are used in their own communities, enabling hunters in the North, as well as residents on the West Coast and the Prairies, to tailor rules that make the most sense to their own circumstances.
This would allow recreational shooters to continue their hobby, hunters to feed their families and police to focus on the dangerous elements of firearms — and it would stop punishing people who have been safely and carefully using firearms their entire lives. Gun violence in rural Canadian communities is rare enough that when it happens it’s national news. Bill C-21 and firearms bans in general should be scrapped.