Thank you for the clarification, Mr. Chair. It's just that these lists of firearms are in amendment G‑4. I don't see myself voting in favour of that amendment knowing that it's going to have an impact a little later. I certainly have some questions about it, and I think everyone does.
First, I'd like to know why the Liberals chose to proceed in this way.
The Bloc Québécois has long been calling for a ban on military-style assault weapons. Horrific killings have occurred in the past with legally acquired military weapons. We're not talking about weapons that are used to kill a deer or a duck. I think it's reasonable to take military-style assault weapons out of the hands and homes of civilians.
We have asked the government to define in the Criminal Code what a military-style assault weapon is, so that it's clear which model should be banned and which should not. We also told the government not to proceed by lists, as the government had done in the May 1, 2020, order, because it isn't clear. There could be a dishwasher model in these lists that I wouldn't even know it. These are numbers and words that we don't necessarily recognize if we're not a firearms expert. How can we make sense of it and reassure our constituents?
I did a little survey on my Facebook page to find out which guns Quebec hunters use. I don't know, and I want to know, to make sure they aren't on the lists referred to in G‑4. I received several responses in just a few hours. Unfortunately, there is a lot of misinformation out there, and people are really concerned and affected by this issue. They are following the work of the committee, the progress of the bill and G‑4, so it's legitimate to ask questions.
It would have been much simpler not to proceed by model lists, because some guns might fall through the cracks with that approach. I agree that all guns are dangerous, but some are less so, such as those used specifically for deer hunting. If we ban weapons that shouldn't be banned, we won't achieve the goal. So it's much more the approach that I'm questioning today.
This issue affects a lot of people. I have people around me who are more knowledgeable than I am and who help me navigate this.
Let's move quickly to what may or may not be in these lists. Amendment G‑4 proposes to add the following:
(1.2) The definition “prohibited firearm” in subsection 84(1) of the Act is amended by striking out “or” at the end of paragraph (c) and by adding the following after paragraph (d):
(e) a firearm that is capable of discharging a projectile with a muzzle energy exceeding 10 000 Joules…
The schedule in G‑46 could include firearms whose power of up to 10,000 Joules. My question is, what are these weapons doing in this schedule?
Amendment G‑4 then proposes adding the following definition element:
(f) a firearm with a bore diameter of 20 mm or greater…
Once again, it could be in the schedule of weapons with a diameter of less than 20 millimetres.
So I don't know how we can get answers to these questions. In order to get to the bottom of this before we vote on G‑4, are we going to have to go through all the weapons in the schedule one by one? I don't know why that was done. It's kind of a shame, because if the bill—