There has been much confusion about the pending gun ban; with the amnesty ending in a scant two months and the government nearly silent on details, Canadian gun owners are getting rightfully anxious about the prospect of becoming criminals by May. So, after parsing hundreds of websites, job postings, LinkedIn profiles, flow charts and documents—and one very interesting conversation with an anonymous source—this is what we’ve learned.

First and foremost, we know the government plan for this process, or Program as they call it, is to occur in five stages: Notification & Declaration, Collection, Transport and Warehousing, Destruction, and Compensation. This is clearly laid out in the primary source for the majority of the information available on the gun ban: The recently released report obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation entitled "Comprehensive Program Design Options Final Report." Published on the 14th of May 2021, one year and two weeks after the OIC’s announcement in 2020, the IBM-authored report outlines the entirety of the program and presents the government with various specific options at some junctures, but the entire document has been heavily redacted. 

In fact, nearly the entire Collection section has been removed - leaving the report devoid of a key component. Without it, much of the report’s been relatively difficult to make sense of, between the heavy redactions and various seemingly intentionally vague wordings in the remaining text. But now we think we may answers to some more questions. First, though, we’ll start at the beginning,

You’ll be Notified of your Newly Prohibited Firearms, and asked to Declare them on “Surrender Forms.”

According to the final report tabled by IBM, the process they’ve been contracted to propose will begin with gun owners being notified that they are in possession of a “Newly Prohibited Firearm,” (NPF) and likely asked to log into a significantly updated Individual Web Services portal of the Canadian Firearms Program. Somewhat of a separate matter, this update is substantial and has required significant investment in information systems to support. In fact, the RCMP currently “requires the services of a level 3 Privacy Impact Assessment Specialist in order to develop a comprehensive Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) for the Canadian Firearms Program (CFP), particularly as it pertains to the Canadian Firearms Digital Services Solution’s (CFDSS) new and evolving capabilities, which will be incrementally implemented over the next five years.”

One of just many new positions and contracts, this particular one is likely being recruited to address specific issues of information and data privacy raised by IBM in this very report. Alternatively, the IBM report also identifies risks around gun owners not having access to the Individual Web Services portal, and so supports the deployment of a hybrid model where the 70% of impacted gun owners with email addresses will be contacted thusly, and any remaining or non-responsive individuals will be contacted by (likely) registered mail.

Upon logging in (or somehow completing a form, likely with telephone prompting or assistance) you will be asked to enter your banking information (for payment), then identify your NPFs, and their condition. It appears that you will then upload photos of the NPFs to the portal, work through some agreed-upon pricing documentation, identify any culturally or historically significant NPFs that you’ll be surrendering, and attest that you did not acquire any of them after Justin Trudeau said you weren’t supposed to on May 1, 2020. You may also be asked to upload a selection of pricing documents, in support of your compensation package, for lack of a better term.

This entire process is laid out nearly verbatim in the report, on the Process Flow chart laid out in Figure 3. The process flow contained is a draft, but being the final version of a multi-million dollar report, one can expect it to be relatively reflective of what the future holds. The report also, interestingly, cites “Data collection early in the Buyback Program, through the Declaration process, drives forecasting and decision making as well as facilitates program monitoring and success measurement.”

This is particularly relevant given the preceding pages of the report indicate that IBM, and Public Safety Canada, believe there to be approximately 144,000 NPFs in Canada; 110,000 AR-15s and roughly 34,000 combined CZ858/VZ58s, M14s, Swiss Arms, .50 BMGs etc. To anyone that’s been engaged in the Canadian gun community for any length of time, that figure is comically low—the volume of non-restricted rifles banned in Canada vastly outstrips the volume of AR-15s in reality.

However, by maintaining an absurdly low figure for non-restricted NPFs, the government allows registered AR-15s to make up the vast majority of the NPFs they claim to be banning. Since they are eminently traceable, the government will be able to claim an artificially high compliance rate, due to the artificially low volume of non-restricted (and thus unregistered NPFs) considered to be out there. 

But it gets worse. By front-loading the data capture, and applying a time limit to declare your firearms (which they are likely to do after they notify you of the need to declare your surrendered firearms), Public Safety and the RCMP may be able to be seen to meet the end of the amnesty on schedule - by effectively requiring gun owners to “surrender” their firearms on paper before their collection is accomplished. This is, after all, the same government that has referred to 110,000 AR-15s as “banned” although they remain in gun safes around the country. 

Likewise, the admission that the data collection allows for superior forecasting and decision-making tells us that the data collection effort is likely going to be divorced from the rest of the process; at least divorced enough to allow for data inputs gained during the declaration process to influence future decisions within the program. And why would they point that out? Because the issue of the non-restricted NPF’s has to represent a substantial economic risk to the Liberal Party. Having only recently managed to remove the expensive albatross known as the Long Gun Registry from about their neck, the Liberal Party has been extremely cautious around the costs of this program, so we can interpret this clause to be IBM effectively dog-whistling to the Liberal cabinet that this program will allow them to avoid that particular pitfall by adapted to changing conditions as data rolls in, but before collection, when owners officially lose possession of their firearms.

A Gun Ban by Cash-on-Delivery

This is where the report is most heavily redacted, with just a single page remaining. In fact, it holds just four sentences: “Collection refers to the process by which Newly Prohibited Firearms (NPFs) are physically transferred from individual owners or businesses into the care and control of the Crown. Any collection option should consider the disbursement of registered NPFs throughout Canada. The majority of NPFs are concentrated in Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia. Table 4 below shows the population breakdown of registered NPFs by business and individual owners across provinces from highest to lowest distribution.”

From this simple paragraph, one can surmise some simple things: That the collection process is, for the purposes of this report, considered limited to the process of getting guns physically from you into the care and control of the Crown. It doesn’t involve compensation, destruction or documentation; just the act of physically getting the guns from you to the Crown as quickly as possible. Remember that; it’s key. Next, the page on collection continues by basically saying that any good collection plan should both consider the vast amount of distance that separates many of these guns, while pointing out that there are four major identified areas where the majority of the registered NPF’s are. Again, remember that.

The next 18 pages, comprising the entirety of the IBM report’s section on firearm collection, are entirely redacted.

However, last week we were informed by what we consider to be a reliable source that the government’s intention is to collect these Newly Prohibited Firearms by way of mail; specifically Canada Post. 

Public Safety’s comment, when asked about this mail-order ban plan, was brief; “Officials are currently in the process of refining requirements and developing options for program design and implementation. Further information on the design of the buyback program, including compensation will be communicated to Canadians in due course.” Canada Post simply did not reply.

But after spending days poring over the IBM report in-depth and trying to find any and all additional information on the ban program, what is available certainly appears to lend some credence to the allegation that firearms collection may occur by mail. First and foremost, on page 44, under the heading “Cost Groups Overview,” is this: Program Cost Group includes, but is not limited to, the following: Waste Disposal Contracts, Security Contracts, & Postage XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, where the x’s represent the end of the sentence having been redacted. Additionally, the report repeatedly raises the issue of Canada’s large size, and relatively low population density leading to issues around the attempted buyback. 

However, the IBM report also extensively uses the term “collection events,” and demonstrates significant effort has been put into researching these events, as they were carried out by Australia and New Zealand. They identify that partners would likely be needed to complete these events, and outline numerous issues with collection events; most of which centre around the unpredictability of said events. Thus, it seems likely that the recommendation made was for a hybrid model that leaned most heavily on a digital platform supporting a mail-driven logistical chain, with select collection events in those urban areas identified as having a greater density of banned firearms.

There are some additional oddities too that could be explained by the use of Canada Post as a courier for the RCMP’s Firearms Program. For example, for those familiar with government jargon, the quote with which this article opened reads “the respective price to be compensated to the owner or business upon transferring the NPFs to the collection authority for processing and destruction. The actual compensation commitment will be validated once NPFs are received through Collection which then triggers acceptances of compensation.”

Note the lower case “collection authority,” and capitalized “Collection”—an easily missed but significant disparity that would seem to infer that the receipt of a firearm by the “collection agency” does not, in fact, constitute “Collection.” That is further highlighted by the sense that the sentence is quite literally attempting to draw a distinction between the process of submitting NPF’s to the “collection authority,” and the formal process of “Collection,” specifying that it is only after a firearm progresses through the latter that “triggers acceptance of compensation.” In plain English? You can expect to give your gun to a collection agency, who then enters it into the formal process identified as “Collection,” which is likely delivery to a central firearms receiving centre and staff.

Finally, there is some evidence that this may be the intent externally as well; more specifically from the shipping industry. Two weeks after this report was produced, Canpar, the leading logistics company handling firearms and ammunition shipping in Canada, unexpectedly announced the termination of that portion of their business. Notably, competitor Loomis made the same announcement at the same time, and no explanation was provided for either closure - to say nothing of their simultaneous nature. But since UPS and Fedex had pre-existing prohibitions on firearms shipments already in place (for years), the removal of Canpar and Loomis effectively reduced much of Canada’s population to but a single carrier for firearms-by-mail: Canada Post.

But perhaps that shouldn’t have been surprising, given the law quite literally requires Canada Post be used for shipping firearms, as SOR/98-209 states firearms may only be mailed if “the firearm is posted using the most secure means of transmission by post that is offered by the Canada Post Corporation that includes the requirement to obtain a signature on delivery.” So it would appear that two weeks after this report was published, Loomis and Canpar were likely reminded of that particular law, which would have the effect of ensuring all consumer firearms would be pipelined through Canada Post.

Now, Canada Post hasn’t exactly been resting on its laurels either; in May 2020 they updated their own firearm policies to restrict all shipments to age-verified. This was reportedly in response to the COVID pandemic making signatures impossible to obtain, but also followed a relatively benign story of a minor receiving a parcel - lending some credence to the need for a revised policy. 

However, there was no such explanation given for why Canada Post’s updated firearms protocols also began to resemble the transportation requirements for prohibited firearms; namely that all automatic firearms must have the bolt removed. In fact, Canada Post’s shipping terms for firearms, and the Criminal Code are nearly verbatim:

From the law:

“An individual may transport a prohibited firearm only if:

(a) it is unloaded;

(b) it is rendered inoperable by means of a secure locking device;

(c) if it is an automatic firearm that has a bolt or bolt-carrier that is removable with reasonable facility, the bolt or bolt-carrier is removed;

(d) it is in a locked container that is made of an opaque material and is of such strength, construction and nature that it cannot readily be broken open or into or accidentally opened during transportation.

From Canada Post:

- Unload the firearms. There can’t be any ammunition in the firearm or in the package (bullets, cartridges, and other ammunition are dangerous goods).

- Attach a secure locking device to the firearms.

- Lock the firearms in a sturdy, non-transparent container.

- Remove the bolt or bolt carrier from any automatic firearms (if removable).

Adding to the intrigue? Canada Post instituted these policies, in their entirety, in 2020. However, in conversation with staff at Canada Post’s own non-deliverable mail centre in Scarborough, the enforcement of the edict that guns must be shipped in the same manner as prohibited firearms be transported is much more recent. Lending credibility to that argument is Canada Post’s own website communicating these policies, which was updated as recently as June 14, 2021 - one month after the IBM final draft was provided to officials and a full year after the policies were formally updated internally.

And, as luck would have it, we have had some personal experience that led to that conversation with the Scarborough non-deliverable mail center staff, on account of having an unlocked rifle get caught up in precisely these regulations. In conversation with various employees over the four months the rifle was stuck, we first learned the system is incredibly backed up (hence the four-month timeline) due to “a ton of guns'' being diverted through the Scarborough centre in recent months; so many in fact that the lockable Plano cases and padlocks being used by Canada Post to send guns back to owners (after Canada Post staff unboxes them, locks them, and then locks them into the cases) are currently in short supply with Canada Post. At one point, I directly asked a manager if the enforcement of these policies was being done in preparation of Canada Post’s involvement in the gun ban, but the answer was non-committal and followed by an immediate change in topic.

Masters of Destruction

Now, moving on from collection, the process continues with firearm destruction. “Definition of Destruction is to render collected NPFs unable to fire and to be destroyed beyond repair or reassembly in a safe and environmentally conscious manner. Destruction can be performed in several different methods including crushing, bending, or cutting a firearm with an oxy-acetylene torch to render it unusable and unrepairable. Options considered must follow Government of Canada policy and regulation of the disposal of Crown Assets. Depending on the method of destruction, the material may still superficially resemble a functioning NPF, which would require security to control these destroyed NPFs until a more thorough destruction is performed.”

That’s how the IBM report opens the section on Destruction. Beyond the depressing nature of the gory details, the section continues with Risk Assessments and a thorough dissection of comparable options; clearly preferring to recommend “Immediate Destruction at Collection Event” to “Disablement and Later Destruction” or “Long Term Storage for Future Use / Sale.” However, it does note that even the Immediate Destruction option has some risks, including that all staff charged with destroying firearms will require knowledge of how to destroy all the 1,500+ varieties of banned firearm - if that list doesn’t grow. But more on that later.

Long Easy Terms

“Compensation Processing is initiated with a commitment by owners and businesses to participate in the Buyback Program through a formal declaration that documents what NPFs will be surrendered, and the respective price to be compensated to the owner or business upon transferring the NPFs to the collection authority for processing and destruction. The actual compensation commitment will be validated once NPFs are received through Collection which then triggers acceptances of compensation. The Compensation Processing is then completed through a central processing centre that may transact payment through direct deposit, cheque, email transfer or mail cheque.”

In other words, you will declare the guns you want to surrender, an agreed-to compensation amount will be set, and payment provided after the guns are surrendered, confirmed, and destroyed. In terms of payment methods, the IBM report heavily favours direct deposit due to the low cost and high satisfaction rates, hence why the Declaration process begins with the input of your banking details. However, the report does state that additional payment options should be made available, right down to a mailed cheque.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it appears that the gun buyback can be expected to take a largely digital form, and involve the following steps for gun owners:

First off, gun owners will be notified that guns they possess or may possess, are now prohibited. A deadline will likely be provided, before which time you will be expected to declare which Newly Prohibited Firearms you intend to surrender to the government, either by phone or online. After making these declarations, your surrendered firearms may be collected at a scheduled collection event (more likely to occur in more urban areas) or, as we’ve discussed, potentially by mail; likely via a pre-paid case or box shipped to you for the express purpose of surrendering firearms that are simply dropped off at a nearby Canada Post outlet.

Once your firearms have been Collected from the collecting authority, a cheque will be issued for the agreed-upon sum, or a dispute process may be initiated (potentially) by either party if the firearm or its condition is incongruous with the information provided on the surrender form. The firearm is destroyed.

Due to the publication date of IBM’s report, the projected dates contained within, recent job postings in support of the digital infrastructure framework being constructed, and what we’ve learned about this new five-step process of firearm prohibition, we would not be surprised to see the amnesty remain in place as-is. Minister overseeing the gun ban, Marco Mendicino recently committed to new gun legislation, and the timing of the announcement would seem to coincide with a one-month declaration window. Additionally, the RCMP's Firearms Program page was updated yesterday, March 2nd, to include a new drop-down menu where none previous existed. It may be simply part of a systems-wide update or it may be an indication that front-end infrastructure and UX is being prepared for the rollout of the declaration system - in which case we would not expect the amnesty to be extended.

Our Take

In short, the buyback appears to be structured in such a way that the mass collection of registered AR-15s may be accomplished with as little effort as possible, while simultaneously ensuring the ability to limit government expense. As mentioned, the Liberal Party of Canada still remembers the expense of the Long-Gun Registry being used against them, so they’re obviously cognizant of the risk of this program’s costs also ballooning wildly out of control.

Of course, that can’t happen when you require owners to declare their firearms prior to collection by way of postage-paid packaging; as IBM so proudly states the front-loading of data collection will inform forecasting and decision making, meaning that if the government begins to see wildly more than the roughly 5,000 Norinco M14s they estimate to exist (for example) crop up on incoming declaration forms, they can simply adjust the amount of compensation paid for a Norinco M14 downward; claiming they’re less rare and more common than expected. As a result, less will be turned in, and the ones that are will cost them less to collect. 

So they’ve made a perfect political buyback: Marco Mendicino and Justin Trudeau will get their “mission accomplished” moment after they receive declaration forms stating that over 75% of the Newly Prohibited Firearms are expected to be surrendered, the potential use of a crown corporation as the collection agency keeps it all in the government family, and IBM has built them a system to support it all while also allowing complete control over costs - while entirely ignoring the matter of actually attempting to collect unregistered rifles. 

It should of course be mentioned that no firearms involved in criminal activities will be accepted for this program; only firearms never used in the commission of a crime, and acquired and possessed in accordance with the law by licensed individuals will qualify. Which should tell you everything you need to know about how much crime prevention this expense of billions, and further alienation of hundreds of thousands or millions of Canadians, will buy our nation.