New gun-control law won’t really control guns

The federal Liberals’ new gun-control law completely misses the mark.

While Canada needs to do more to keep dangerous firearms out of dangerous hands, Bill C-21, as it now stands, won’t achieve this goal. Why, then, has the government brought forward what critics are rightly calling an “empty shell” of a law?

Since 2013, violent crimes involving firearms have been on a steep, steady rise in much of this country. The citizens of many of our large and even mid-sized cities are regularly witnessing the carnage caused by criminals firing handguns. Far too many weapons still flow across the border from the U.S. for illegal sale here.

When it comes to confronting these frightening trends, the mass shooting that claimed 22 lives in Nova Scotia last spring proved a turning point. Even though the lone shooter used illegally obtained weapons in his rampage, Justin Trudeau’s Liberals responded in May by banning more than 1,500 military-style assault weapons and their variants.

The Liberals stood on solid ground when they did this. No hunter, farmer or recreational shooter requires weapons such as these, weapons primarily designed for war and killing people. And, according to public opinion polls, an overwhelming majority of Canadians agreed with the government at the time.

But it’s in the government’s latest step to control guns that it stumbled so badly. The cornerstone of Bill C-21 was supposed to be a mandatory government buyback program. This would permanently take out of circulation all the military-style assault weapons that have been blacklisted, but remain in people’s hands. That made perfect sense because an estimated 150,000 to 200,000 of these kinds of firearms are still somewhere out there across the country. Unless something is done about them, they could be stolen or even illegally purchased by criminals with violent intentions.

Sadly, the legislation introduced last week ignores this reality. If Bill C-21 passes as is, the buyback will be voluntary. For years to come, people will be allowed to legally possess military-style assault firearms that have been deemed illegal for everyone else. Unless these owners willingly sell their weapons to the federal government, a serious threat to public safety will continue unchecked.

Just as problematic is the Liberals’ half-baked plan to give municipalities the authority to ban handguns. There’s an ongoing debate over whether handguns, which are already heavily regulated, should be outlawed for civilians. Rather than settle the debate themselves, the Liberals punted the challenge to governments that probably lack the resources to deal with it. Inevitably, the plan will create a confusing, ineffective patchwork of handgun bans across Canada. How helpful, for instance, would a handgun ban in Hamilton be if people can still legally own handguns in neighbouring Kitchener — and decide to drive to Hamilton?

Meanwhile, because municipalities are the creation of provincial governments, the Liberals’ plan is creating new federal-provincial tensions. Saskatchewan has already passed a law prohibiting its municipalities from banning handguns and Alberta intends to do the same. If there is to be a handgun ban, it should nationwide and mandated by Ottawa.

Considering all its flaws, it’s hard to tell if Bill C-21 is a poorly contrived attempt to mollify gun-control advocates without bringing down on the Liberals the wrath of responsible gun owners and the gun lobby. If that’s the case, the Liberals should think again.

What they’ve brought forward is a legislative dog’s breakfast that will satisfy no one and annoy almost everyone. If Bill C-21 is meant to stop gun violence, it needs a brake job.