Liberals Seek to Prohibit All Semi-Automatic Centrefire Firearms Capable of Containing More than 5 Rounds

In today's House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety hearing Liberal MP and former police officer Paul Chiang introduced a motion to amend Bill C-21 to prohibit nearly all semi-automatic centrefire firearms. In a series of amendments looking to codify the prohibitions created by the May 2020 OIC, these definitions legislate the same broad categories of firearms previously declared prohibited (bore over 20mm, muzzle energy over 10,000 kilojoules) as prohibited firearms, with the notable change that it also seeks to prohibit all semi-automatic, centrefire firearms that can accept a magazine capable of housing more than 5 rounds. This would obviously include the vast majority of semi-automatic firearms.

In the ongoing hearing, CPC MPs (and Public Safety Critic) Raquel Dancho raised the tremendous scope of the amendments potentially being beyond the scope of Bill C-21, and took issue not only with the incredibly broad scope of the new ban but also the method of its introduction - specifically taking umbrage with the introduction of these clearly premeditated amendments when it is no longer possible to call witnesses and have a fulsome debate. CPC MP Glen Motz said "it's embarrassing," and drew his own policing background into the discussion, asking the members of the committee to return to the matter of public safety, and expressed disgust with the clearly partisan aspect of the policy.

CPC MP Dane Lloyd questioned the timeline of the amendment, divulging from Justice staff witnesses stated that no new consultations were carried out prior to these amendments being introduced and that the government has not updated its analysis of Bill C-21's potential compliance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to reflect the new amendment. He also raised the issue that a total lack of consultation means that no First Nations were consulted, and that such a ban without First Nations consultation could contravene Canada's obligation as a signatory to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).

UPDATE: 2:39 PM PST

Dancho raised the issue of the financial impact of such a ban, but the Point of Order was declined by the committee Chair, Liberal MP Ron McKinnon, as beyond the scope of the amendment before the committee as the financial impact would obviously be pursuant to a buyback or other such program that is, at this point, not formally being discussed or introduced. Liberal MP Taleeb Noormohamed closed the discussion around the Point of Order with a partisan shot that Mrs. Dancho was welcome to introduce a buyback amendment if she wanted to discuss it.

UPDATE: 2:46 PM PST

MP Dancho asked for clarity on timelines and quantities, leading to the government officials testifying interestingly that they estimate the schedule of prohibited firearms created by the May 2020 OIC to have prohibited roughly 40% of all non-restricted firearms, while also claiming that they do not have any estimate on the volume of firearms this amendment will ban. Justice officials on hand were also unable to provide any list of the thousands of models of firearms this amendment will prohibit. At this point, the government asked to take a brief recess, and the meeting has suspended.

UPDATE: 3:10 PM PST

Justice staff refers to the amendment's section G, which specifically seeks to prohibit semi-automatic centrefire firearms that can accept magazines that can hold more than five rounds, as a new "evergreen" definition for prohibited firearms that will prevent future firearm designs from legally entering the market. The discussion has continued largely attempting to get a handle on the scope - or perhaps more accurately, ensuring that the public has a grasp of the scope. Government officials testifying remain unable to provide or even comment on the impact of the amendment, and their unwillingness to discuss the scale is notable.

UPDATE: 3:15 PM PST

The meeting wraps with Dancho getting a return salvo at Noormohamed by pointing out that a buyback would require funding and thus can't be brought forward by the CPC, and continues with questions about the impact of the ban and the hundreds of thousands of Canadians who stand to be unfairly impacted. Discussion to continue at the next meeting.

Comments

comments