This bill was previously introduced in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session.
Bill Blair Liberal
This bill has received Royal Assent and is, or will soon become, law.
This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament has also written a full legislative summary of the bill.
This enactment amends the Criminal Code to, among other things,
(a) increase, from 10 to 14 years, the maximum penalty of imprisonment for indictable weapons offences in sections 95, 96, 99, 100 and 103;
(b) establish a regime that would permit any person to apply for an emergency prohibition order or an emergency limitations on access order and allow the judge to protect the security of the person or of anyone known to them;
(c) deem certain firearms to be prohibited devices for the purpose of specified provisions;
(d) create new offences for possessing and making available certain types of computer data that pertain to firearms and prohibited devices and for altering a cartridge magazine to exceed its lawful capacity;
(e) include, for interception of private communications purposes, sections 92 and 95 in the definition of “offence” in section 183;
(f) authorize employees of certain federal entities who are responsible for security to be considered as public officers for the purpose of section 117.07; and
(g) include certain firearm parts to offences regarding firearms.
The enactment also amends the Firearms Act to, among other things,
(a) prevent individuals who are subject to a protection order or who have been convicted of certain offences relating to domestic violence from being eligible to hold a firearms licence;
(b) transfer authority to the Commissioner of Firearms to approve, refuse, renew and revoke authorizations to carry referred to in paragraph 20(a) of the Act;
(c) limit the transfer of handguns only to businesses and exempted individuals and the transfer of cartridge magazines and firearm parts;
(d) impose requirements in respect of the importation of ammunition, cartridge magazines and firearm parts;
(e) prevent certain individuals from being authorized to transport handguns from a port of entry;
(f) require a chief firearms officer to suspend a licence if they have reasonable grounds to suspect that the licence holder is no longer eligible for it;
(g) require the delivery of firearms to a peace officer, or their lawful disposal, if a refusal to issue, or revocation of, a licence has been referred to a provincial court under section 74 of the Act in respect of those firearms;
(h) revoke an individual’s licence if there is reasonable grounds to suspect that they engaged in an act of domestic violence or stalking or if they become subject to a protection order;
(i) authorize the issuance, in certain circumstances, of a conditional licence for the purposes of sustenance;
(j) authorize, in certain circumstances, the Commissioner of Firearms, the Registrar of Firearms or a chief firearms officer to disclose certain information to a law enforcement agency for the purpose of an investigation or prosecution related to the trafficking of firearms;
(k) provide that the annual report to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness regarding the administration of the Act must include information on disclosures made to law enforcement agencies and be submitted no later than May 31 of each year; and
(l) create an offence for a business to advertise a firearm in a manner that depicts, counsels or promotes violence against a person, with a few exceptions.
The enactment also amends the Nuclear Safety and Control Act to, among other things,
(a) provide nuclear security officers and on-site nuclear response force members with the authority to carry out the duties of peace officers at high-security nuclear sites; and
(b) permit licensees who operate high-security nuclear sites to acquire, possess, transfer and dispose of firearms, prohibited weapons and prohibited devices used in the course of maintaining security at high-security nuclear sites.
The enactment also amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to
(a) designate the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness as the Minister responsible for the establishment of policies respecting inadmissibility on grounds of transborder criminality for the commission of an offence on entering Canada;
(b) specify that the commission, on entering Canada, of certain offences under an Act of Parliament that are set out in the regulations is a ground of inadmissibility for a foreign national; and
(c) correct certain provisions in order to resolve a discrepancy and clarify the rule set out in those provisions.
Finally, the enactment also amends An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms so that certain sections of that Act come into force on the day on which this enactment receives royal assent.
All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
Oh, man. Okay, thank you.
I know that police have an important role to play in combatting domestic violence. Bill C-21 proposes a so-called “red flag” law that would allow people to apply to the courts for an emergency weapons prohibition order.
The police would be enforcing this order. Is that correct?
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My first question is for Chief McFee.
Something that you said really stuck out for me. To reiterate what you said, is it your opinion that some provisions in Bill C-21 could have a negative impact on public safety?
Inspector Michael Rowe Staff Sergeant, Vancouver Police Department
Good morning, everyone. Thank you very much for your time and thank you for the opportunity to speak to this committee.
I've been a police officer with the Vancouver Police Department for over 20 years now and I've spent much of my career investigating violent crimes, gang violence, organized crime and firearms offences.
I have developed extensive experience conducting investigations and taking enforcement action against those people who use firearms to commit violence. I have seen first-hand the impact of firearms-related violence on communities across Canada and have watched the proliferation of unlawfully possessed firearms, replica firearms and prohibited devices such as high-capacity magazines and suppressors.
To date in 2022, there have been 16 shootings within the city of Vancouver. Eight of those have resulted in injuries or death, and 11 of those were identified as having a significant potential for the injury of innocent bystanders. Sixty-two per cent of those shootings also had a nexus to gangs.
During the same period, there have been 127 shootings across the Lower Mainland region of British Columbia, 74 of which have been identified as having a nexus to gangs.
As we are all aware, firearm violence is not limited to the city of Vancouver. Police officers across Canada are seeing the very real impact that the unlawful possession of firearms and the use of firearms and imitation firearms to commit crimes have on public safety in communities across Canada.
In recent years, I have witnessed the increasing proliferation of firearms. Lower costs and the increased availability of firearms have resulted in people involved in lower-level crime now having access to firearms when they would not have had access in the past.
An example of this is a street-level drug trafficker recently found in possession of a heavily modified ghost gun, a privately made firearm capable of fully automatic firing and equipped with a suppressor and a high-capacity magazine, something that we would not have seen at the start of my career.
Based on my experience, I believe that the amendments that are in Bill C‑21 reflect the need for a national approach to reducing firearm-related violence and will give police valuable tools to address firearms crime across Canada.
I've testified here before about how easy it is to simply remove a rivet from a magazine to increase its capacity and the dangers that high-capacity magazines create for communities, the police and offenders themselves.
The new offence for altering a magazine will provide police officers with much-needed opportunities for enforcement and investigation, and the benefit of creating new offences such as this is that police officers gain the ability to charge offenders and apply for judicial authorizations targeting specific offences.
Modernizing the legal definition of a replica firearm and placing controls on the importation, exportation and sale of realistic-looking replicas will help police address the very real use of replica firearms in criminal offences.
Additionally, this amendment will help the police address the growing trend of altering realistic airsoft guns to fire live ammunition.
Red flag laws will also allow citizens to access a judicially authorized process to restrict a person's access to firearms and provide police with the authority to search for and seize firearms, which will protect victims of domestic violence and those at risk of self-harm.
An ongoing trend that I have identified and testified here about previously is the emergence of privately made firearms, commonly known as ghost guns. We are seeing more and more ghost guns in the Lower Mainland gang conflict on the west coast of Canada, specifically in the hands of people believed to be involved in active murder conspiracies and also those we believe are working as contracted hired killers. Ghost guns can be 3-D printed or created from modified replica firearms. Modern 3-D printing materials produce a durable firearm capable of shooting hundreds of rounds without failure.
One of my investigations in Vancouver located a sophisticated firearm manufacturing operation capable of producing 3-D-printed firearms, suppressors and airsoft conversions. In addition to what is already included in Bill C‑21, I would ask this committee to consider regulating the possession, sale and importation of firearms parts used to manufacture ghost guns, such as barrels, slides and trigger assemblies. These parts are currently lawful to purchase and possess without a licence, and they can be purchased online or imported from the United States. The emergence of privately made firearms has reduced the significance of the currently regulated receiver and increased the importance of currently unregulated gun parts that are needed to finish a 3-D-printed receiver and turn it into a functioning firearm.
I would also support increased funding for specialized firearms enforcement teams to proactively target those offenders who import, manufacture and traffic unlawfully possessed firearms.
Finally, I would like to thank the committee for their ongoing work addressing the real threats that unlawfully possessed firearms create for our communities across Canada, and I ask that you continue to advocate meaningful legal consequences for those people who make the decision to unlawfully pick up a firearm.
Thank you.
Chief Dale McFee Chief of Police, Edmonton Police Service
Thank you.
I'd like to thank the parliamentary committee for allowing us to speak today about the significant safety concern relating to firearms.
I'd also like to acknowledge really quickly those families who have lost a loved one due to violence, particularly violence with firearms.
I've been in police leadership for approximately 20 years, serving both as a police chief in two services—currently, Edmonton, as mentioned—and as a former deputy minister of public safety.
As a police service in Edmonton, we see that most of our gun crime happens with handguns. We support any legislative tools and powers that might help enforce and prevent gun crime in Edmonton. Bill C-21 acknowledges that while law enforcement plays a crucial part, we must build society-wide capacity to find a balance between education, suppression, intervention and prevention.
To give you a bit of local context, over the last two years in Edmonton, as in many other jurisdictions, we have seen an increase in illegal ownership and the violent use of firearms. So far in 2022, we've taken 528 firearms off the street. This year to date, our officers have responded to 127 shootings, of which 50% resulted in injury and 85% were considered targeted. In the same time frame in 2021, there were 125 shootings, of which 57% resulted in injury. These had the potential for bystanders to be injured.
Most of the violence remains targeted, though that provides little comfort to the communities that are often left reeling in the aftermath of gun violence happening in their backyards. We continue to work diligently to mitigate these crimes, but the gangs and organized crime groups driving gun violence are growing more brazen and show disregard for the law, including the legislation we're discussing here today.
I want to break this into two parts. There are things that we support and there are some things that we have some serious concerns with. I'll try to run through these very quickly.
I'm encouraged by parts of Bill C-21 that strengthen our existing approach to firearms and that propose the implementation of new offences. Intensified border controls and stronger penalties combat trafficking and smuggling. All are beneficial and deter the criminal element. Provisions prohibiting the import and export sale of replica firearms are also greatly appreciated. The use of replica firearms to commit crime is something that we see quite often in Edmonton.
While these are good first steps, we must have balanced and impactful legislation. I want to say that I have concerns, and EPS has concerns, about the logistics, resources and long-term impacts of other portions of this proposed handgun freeze.
A handgun freeze will reduce the number of handguns in circulation in the long run. That is the belief. In the short term, we can expect that those wanting to acquire guns will find alternatives, increasing incidences of smuggling, 3-D printing and the conversion of airsoft guns. This may also increase the commodity value and motivate individuals, including lawful firearms owners, to sell their handguns through illegal channels, knowing that restrictions drive up monetary value.
Additionally, we share a border with one of the largest sources of handguns. A freeze would limit our ability to trace transactions originating within the U.S., and we'll be unable to locate a point of sale. We are told that the ban of handgun transfers resulted in an increase in handgun sales, with approximately 20,000 handguns purchased since the ban and 12,000 transfer applications still waiting to be processed.
The “red flag” law is well-intended. However, many of the proposed powers already exist under section 117 of the Criminal Code. As it stands, a law would pose a significant draw on police resources should numerous applications be granted at a time when many Canadian police services are stretched thin. This could further increase service demands.
On expanded licence revocation, with lawful firearms owners no longer able to purchase handguns, they may not be motivated to renew their licence. This may lead to an increased number of expired licences and individuals who are no longer authorized to possess handguns. There is already a backlog in enforcement in Alberta. There are already 3,700 revoked or expired PALs—possession and acquisition licences—that aren't being enforced, with some dating back 20 years.
The RCMP does not have the resources to enforce these expirations. Getting a permit for a firearm is a lengthy process. It impacts the freeze and expands licence revocation, meaning that police may lose vital information for proactive service.
On the buyback program, the police service is still waiting for more information on its implementation. Like other services, I share concerns that it will impact police resources, and I'm not sure what the benefit might be.
Not long ago, we had a large shooting event. I want to share a success story of how this works. There were multiple shooters and a large crowd, and an individual outside. Some of those people were deceased. Some were injured. Through the work that we did in relation to that, finding the firearms and tracing the ammunition, we were able to trace this to a gun that had come up through the U.S. There were multiple shootings in another Canadian jurisdiction. As a result, we, in a very short period of time, had four people in custody, preventing further offences.
If we don't start investing in the Canadian system.... The ATF is a better partner in the Canadian system, particularly the forensic laboratory service, and without it, it would have taken us up to a year to actually solve this case. Steps to strengthen our current approach and investigative tools will bring us long-term change and meaningful....
I heard it earlier today: Focus on the people pulling the triggers and the motivation. Three of our 25 homicides this year to date have been through the use of handguns. The reality is if we have someone who's motivated to do this, I'm not sure when you look at the criminal element that the handgun freeze is going to solve that, but it is going to put more strain on resources.
Solomon Friedman Criminal Defence Lawyer, As an Individual
Good afternoon Mr. Chair, vice-chairs and members.
Thank you for inviting me to address you today. It's always a pleasure to appear before this committee. It's particularly a pleasure to be in person this time.
In fact, since 2011 I have testified over a dozen times before this committee and others on proposed firearms legislation and regulation. In that same time, reflective of Parliament's consistently inconsistent push-and-pull approach to firearms legislation, the Annotated Firearms Act & Related Legislation—the firearms law reference text that I co-authored—has appeared in no less than four editions.
Instead of applying an evidence-based, principled focus to law-making, governments have taken a piecemeal and haphazard approach, which has favoured symbolism over substance and rhetoric over rational decision-making. While this might be good news for legal authors, publishers and booksellers, it is decidedly bad news for law-abiding gun owners and Canadians generally. Bill C-21 is the latest extension of this trend.
Given the time constraints that have been placed upon this committee's work, I will focus my attention on Bill C-21's proposed prohibition on the transfer of restricted firearms—that is, handguns—to licensed private individuals. More accurately, it's the deferred confiscation of a million lawfully owned restricted firearms, which were purchased legally, used and stored safely, and have never posed a risk to public safety.
In my view, there are three fundamental problems with this provision. First, support for this measure comes from fundamentally bad data. Instead of addressing the core causes of handgun offences—namely the factors that drive individuals into gang activity, such as poverty, addiction and marginalization—or even focusing on the true source of the vast majority of handguns used in criminal offences—handguns smuggled into Canada from the United States—this bill targets the law-abiding, without making even the smallest dent in handgun crime.
In February, I appeared before this committee to give testimony for your study on gun control, illegal arms trafficking and street gangs. As I said then, good decision-making requires good data. I cited an example of bad data, which has been used to justify bad policy. That is the oft-heard assertion that 70% of traceable crime guns have a domestic origin. This statistic is a good example of a number that is true, false and misleading all at the same time. To start, this statistic counts only those firearms that are traceable. It is therefore, by definition, a number that will skew towards domestic firearms, as those are much easier to trace. It doesn't count firearms with obliterated serial numbers or foreign firearms that cannot be traced.
Next, the definition of a “crime gun” further self-selects and obscures our focus. Crime guns generally refer to firearms—including, by the way, pellet guns and replica firearms—seized by police in the course of their duties. This includes both offence-related and public safety-related seizures. That definition does not differentiate between a handgun used in a gang shooting and a hundred non-restricted, safely stored firearms seized from an elderly gun collector who was the subject of a police wellness check because his daughter had not heard from him in days.
You can see now why that 70% number may be true on its face but is really irrelevant to assessing what measures are necessary to address violent gun offences. In fact, in your report, this committee agreed with the accuracy of my critique.
Skewed and manipulated data can never be the basis for evidence-based policy. Canadians are entitled to legislation drafted on the basis of empirical data, not misinformation.
The second fundamental problem with the legislation is that it is a distraction and a gross misdirection of policing and other justice-sector resources. These resources are in short supply and are desperately needed to address the core causes of crime. While criminal legislation looks free on its face—it does not require an upfront expenditure—criminal defence lawyers know all too well the costs of increased criminalization and the ever-expanding Criminal Code. We as a group are not surprised as the justice system sags under the weight of well-intentioned amendments and justice is delayed and denied and charges are ultimately stayed by the courts.
Finally, this legislation suffers from the fundamental flaw that is endemic to much of this government's criminal law reform. It is a solution in search of a problem, like the hasty elimination of centuries-old procedural protections like peremptory challenges for juries, the preliminary inquiry, or case-specific responses to unpopular acquittals, which limit the rights of the accused to provide admissible evidence. These justice amendments bear the hallmarks of a government that legislates based on tweets and sound bites without taking into account the real consequences—unintended or otherwise—of their criminal law policy.
This is certainly true of the deferred confiscation provisions of Bill C-21. Legally obtained handguns in the possession of law-abiding citizens are not and have never been a public safety problem. In 2019, Vancouver police chief Adam Palmer, head of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, explicitly rejected the public safety benefits of any such handgun ban, calling it “naive to the realities of...organized crime and smuggling”.
When defence counsel agrees with the policy position advanced by Canada's police chiefs, it is one more indication that these provisions are not based in evidence or data but are political in nature. Once again, it has been the case for each subsequent amendment to our firearms law.
Law-abiding Canadians, citizens who have complied with the law time and again, will pay the price. Worse yet, public confidence in our legislators inevitably erodes even further—
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Wilson, I would like to continue with you. You've heard clearly that there is a very real concern in there about the domestic diversion of legal handguns. I think the intention overall in Bill C-21 is to try to limit the number of legal handguns in circulation. You've concentrated very much on trying to make sure that it's not just the supply but also the demand. You want to go after the demand, but if there is a great big supply out there, there is always a chance that some can be stolen and used in a crime.
Do you have any opinion on the sport shooting discipline aspect of it? I'm trying to find a way whereby people in my neck of the woods who love the sport, who love sport shooting, can in some way continue to do what they can, but also take into account the very real concerns that have been listed by the Danforth families. Do you have any opinion on how we may be able to strike a middle ground on this very delicate question that's before our committee?
I'll address the first portion of the question—our stance on Bill C-21 and whether it does or doesn't go far enough. I'll use the state of New York as an example. On May 24, 10 Black people, people of my culture, were murdered by a white supremacist. That state has one of the most rigorous gun laws in the U.S., red-flag laws included. This was not prevented by either these gun laws or by the red flag.
I'll emphasize again and say that I believe that if there had been prevention and an intervention for this young unhealthy man who committed this egregious act by somebody like Mr. Bradley Galloway.... He is a former neo-Nazi here in Canada. He does some fantastic work on keeping Canadians safe and preventing violence and pulling guys out of that world. If someone like him had gotten to that shooter, I believe that would have been the right measure to take.
To address the funding aspect, to us the issue of death and murder in Canada is not partisan. It's not a political issue, really; it's a Canadian issue and something that we all should care about. When there are people out there who can agree with our struggle or see the work we're doing and appreciate it, we greatly and strongly appreciate that in return. Regardless of what organization has even written us a cheque, we greatly appreciate that they see the work we're doing and are there to support it, regardless of what their political stances are and who they are.
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for your personal testimony, Mr. Wilson.
You spoke about the problem of illegal weapons. I think we are all aware of the issue of the trafficking and importation of illegal weapons. I would like to understand your personal position on Bill C‑21. Do you think it goes far enough or too far?
I believe your organization was funded by a well-known firearms lobby. That organization defends very specific positions, stating for example that it is always honest owners of legal firearms who are affected by this kind of legislation.
Yet the witnesses who appeared today have given evidence to the contrary. There are owners of legal weapons who have committed horrific crimes.
Do you agree with the positions of that organization that you are linked with financially, or do you agree that we need legislation on legal weapons?
Thank you, and thank you again for the other questions from the committee as we're working through this.
I want to say as well that the father of one of the victims affected is a retired police officer. We have that influence in terms of our thinking.
I would say again that it's not going to be about one thing.
Here's the thing: We want to be a country that is very heavily armed relative to other countries in the world. That is the fact. We have a lot of guns out there. Maybe there are a lot of good reasons for that and maybe there are a lot of reasons related to recreation. Now it's going to come time to pay the bill, so we're going to have to step up and do those things. We're going to have to fund the programs that require prevention. We're going to have to fund those programs that talk about more intense consequences for stepping outside of that. We're going to have to fund the program that says we should take those very much most dangerous guns out of here. They never should have been here in the first place. There should have been more oversight all the way along through successive governments of various stripes.
Now it comes time to pay that bill, because the gun violence is continuing to grow. We're letting more and more guns in, and if we don't do anything.... It is naive to sit here and say that supply does not have some kind of impact. It's a supply-and-demand marketplace, just like anything else. A more ready supply has got to be part of the issue.
It's all of those things, sir. It's not just one. We never said it's just about banning handguns; it's about a number of things. That's what we hope the committee will conclude, and we hope they will step up, make the recommendations and push this government to put in place the regulations and resources that will make Bill C-21 effective for all of our neighbourhoods.
Thank you.
Paul Chiang Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to thank the witnesses for being here today and taking time out of your busy schedules to help us in getting this work done.
Personally, in regard to the Danforth shooting, I have a connection to that because Julianna Kozis and my niece were on the same swim team. I met you, Mr. Price, back on July 5 at the centre when we made the announcement.
As a retired police officer, I have come across a lot of gun violence and a lot of domestic situations. I understand what a gun can do to somebody. It's not the gun itself, but it's the person who pulls the trigger and who causes the gun to go off.
Mr. Price, on our government's announcement on Bill C-21, you stated that most Canadians want more gun control measures, more community resources devoted to addressing the root causes of gun violence and more action to control guns at the border. You then said the reason you support the announcement of Bill C-21 is that it is a combination of all those things.
Could you elaborate on your position and why you believe we are taking the right steps to make our communities safer?
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I would like, first of all, to thank all of our witnesses for coming before our committee and sharing their stories.
I will start off with a comment. I think it's quite remarkable that we have two groups of witnesses here who have both been touched by gun violence and exposure to firearms in their own ways in the same city, and are coming forward before our committee with different approaches. I think now we're getting a sense of the challenge that's before us as policy-makers as we deal with this delicate issue.
Thank you for having the courage to come before us to share your stories. I know it's not easy. Many times, you can be reliving the trauma of that lived experience when you're recounting it to us. I want you to know that we as a committee appreciate that and we are certainly taking all of your testimony into account.
Mr. Wilson, I would like to start with you. I agree with you that there's no one silver bullet to address the very complex problem of gun violence. It takes different forms in different parts of the country.
I think there is room for some legislative aspects in approaching this problem. Bill C-21 is not just about a handgun freeze. There are provisions in the bill that address tougher penalties for a variety of firearms offences. There's a considerable section of the bill that deals with emergency prohibition orders under the yellow flag and the red flag.
You must, across your lived experiences, have come across situations of domestic violence in a home where a firearm was present. Do you have any comments on the part of Bill C-21 that provides more legislative authority for someone to approach a judge, remain anonymous and get an emergency prohibition order to remove firearms from the home? Do you think that this legislative part of Bill C-21 has value? Do you have any comments to help inform our committee as we're studying those particular clauses?
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Many thanks to the witnesses for being here.
On behalf of my party, I, too, would like to express sincere condolences to all those of you who have been affected, directly or indirectly, by gun crimes. Your expertise and experience are very important, and I thank you.
Mr. Benabdallah, thank you for accepting our invitation to appear today. I was afraid that you would not be able to connect, because I have some questions for you.
You talked about the announcement on May 30 of this year. You stood behind the government when it announced the introduction of Bill C‑21. I know that certain other groups also backed the government at that time, because Minister Mendicino had promised them that he would amend the bill in order to ban assault weapons as well. That is not in the first draft of the bill, the one we have to consider. That was one of the conditions that certain groups gave the government for supporting this bill.
Are you one of those groups? Did the government promise you that it would introduce that amendment during consideration of the bill? Are you confident that it will keep its promise? On a number of occasions, it seemed to be in good faith and willing to ban assault weapons once and for all, and amend the Criminal Code to remove existing loopholes. But that has not always been the case. The same applies to the buyback program for assault weapons.
Do you think the Liberals will make this amendment soon?
Tony Van Bynen Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
In the Danforth Families for Safe Communities statement on the fourth anniversary of the Danforth shooting, it states, “From the facts of our case, we advocate for actions that can be taken by all levels of government to reduce the risk of death [by] guns.”
Can you expand on this? Do you have a specific recommendation that would help this committee provide effectiveness or improve the effectiveness of Bill C-21?
Raquel Dancho Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
Thank you.
Bill C-21 does many things. One thing is to focus on freezing any new, legal, lawful ownership of handguns. Currently, we have trained, tested and vetted people who go through a very rigorous process and can get a restricted licence and purchase a handgun. It's focusing on those individuals.
Do you think focusing on those individuals will have any impact on what you're seeing in Toronto with the gang elements and guns? Do you see this bill meeting that need at all?
Boufeldja Benabdallah Spokesman, Centre culturel islamique de Québec
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, for your forbearance with this delay. I was not able to connect properly. Of course, we are still dinosaurs when it comes to new technologies.
That said, for more than five years, I have been involved with the Quebec mosque, which has suffered horribly because of handguns.
I would like to speak to you straight from my heart, and share my recommendations with you, hoping that this is in line with the fight against firearms so that we can find peace for ourselves, our families, children, schools and universities, and so that Canada remains a non-violent country, where people can live in freedom and safety.
To begin, I must tell you that the gun attack on the Quebec mosque was a turning point in our existence on Canadian soil. The killer, who exercised his legal right to purchase two kinds of firearms, namely, hand guns and assault weapons, did not hesitate to enter a place of worship and coldly murder six fathers, seriously injure five other people—one of whom is now a paraplegic and still has a bullet in his neck that the health authorities were unable to remove—and traumatize dozens of people.
In fact, the entire population of Quebec and Canada was hurt by this thoughtless act, which was emboldened by the sense of power that comes from having a firearm. A person with a firearm feels invincible. That feeling can lead the person to commit thoughtless acts and to kill people. This was not the only attack. We all know there have been others, including at the Polytechnique. Those 14 girls could have been builders of our society now. The attack at Dawson College was the same type of thing. There was the attack in Portapique, and others. Unfortunately, it is a long list. Should we be pessimistic? Yes, but be we must also remain open to the possibility of implementing regulations and raising awareness in order to combat this scourge called the “possession of firearms”.
We, the mosques, were extremely glad and grateful to have had the opportunity to see the introduction of this bill on May 30 of this year, an historic day. We are honoured to have played a role in this significant and historic victory for public safety in our great country of Canada. For five long years, we have advocated for a ban on handguns, because in less that two minutes, these weapons brought tragedy to our mosque: six fathers killed, 17 orphans, five injured people and the people of Quebec and Canada shaken by something they said could not happen in Canada. And yet, it did happen here because of firearms.
Minister Mendicino, whom we commend for his sincerity and dedication, gave Canadians what they wanted, a firearms ban and the phasing out of existing weapons. I am not telling you anything new, but we must commend him. We celebrated by calling on Canadians to convey their support to their municipal, provincial and federal elected officials who are committed to this fight.
We know that the firearms lobby will fight this bill tooth and nail. The imminent passage of Bill C‑21 will put an end to this lobby group's efforts and contribute to peace on our streets and in our schools.
We presented our 10-point proposal in various fora and on various media. We also presented our proposals to elected officials who have visited the Quebec mosque on many occasions, including the right honourable Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, honourable ministers Marco Mendicino, David Lametti, Ahmed Hussen, Omar Alghabra, Pablo Rodriguez and Jean‑Yves Duclos, along with MPs who are close to us and who have worked hard on this issue, including Rachel Bendayan and Joël Lightbound. Today, we would like to remind you of what we said to them; we are reiterating it and will reiterate it again: please listen to us and try to convince the other parties to work together to resolve this matter.
Here are the 10 points we wish to propose, we the mosques of Quebec who are part of this fight against firearms.
First, amend the bill as the minister promised to establish a broad and permanent definition of prohibited weapons, including all military-type semi-automatic weapons, which are not reasonable for use in hunting. We do not need weapons of war. I was born during the Algerian revolution and I saw the weapons of war that traumatized our parents, and I am still traumatized. We do not need weapons of war on Canadian soil.
Secondly, there must be a complete ban on the flow, sale...