Good afternoon.
The police in Canada support the primary objectives of mandatory minimum penalties to ensure consistency in sentencing, to protect the public and to discourage others from engaging in similar conduct.
For police officers, victims of crime, members of the public and even the offenders themselves, the circumstances that result in a criminal charge for most firearms offences often result in a real threat to public safety, exposure to stress and trauma that has a lasting impact on mental health and the erosion of public safety.
In my experience as a police officer, the following firearms offences, for which the mandatory minimum penalties are recommended to be repealed, hold significant value when addressing public safety and gang-related violence: the use of a firearm or imitation firearm in the commission of an offence, possession of a prohibited or restricted firearm with ammunition and discharging a firearm with intent or recklessly.
The mandatory minimum penalties assigned to these sections of the Criminal Code create a meaningful legal condemnation of the decision to unlawfully pick up a firearm and reflect the important distinction between offences involving firearms and those that do not. Rather than repealing mandatory minimum penalties for serious offences that have a direct impact on public safety, Parliament could provide the judiciary with additional powers via a legislated clause or safety valve, which is something other countries with mandatory minimum penalties have but which is currently absent in Canada.
This remedy would allow for the objectives of mandatory minimum penalties to be met, especially for firearms offences that present a real threat to public safety. It would also establish judicial discretion to individually assess each offence and offender to determine if the mandatory minimum penalties are appropriate. Finally, this approach would reduce the need to rely on a reasonable hypothetical to test the impact of mandatory minimum penalties on outlying cases. Imagined offenders and reasonable hypothetical arguments often reduce the significance of firearms offences to regulatory infractions.
This can be frustrating for police officers who see the very real impact of the unlawful possession of loaded handguns, the use of firearms and imitation firearms to commit crimes and the discharge of live ammunition, and the impact that these have on the perception of safety within our communities across Canada.
In conclusion, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police recommends proceeding with the decriminalization for possession of illicit drugs. We also support maintaining mandatory minimum penalties for serious crimes that warrant them, and we support adding a legislated safety valve that provides sentencing judges with an opportunity to consider the individual circumstances of the offence and the offender to determine if the mandatory minimum penalty is appropriate or if an individual could be diverted away from the justice system toward an alternative pathway.
Thank you very much.