There was some concern about the Ruger No. 1 single-shot being on the list. I think it's important to note that this single-shot is on the high-energy list but is prohibited only in circumstances where it's been chambered for a cartridge capable of generating 10,000 joules of muzzle energy. If it's chambered for a standard calibre, a standard-calibre rifle is not restricted.
I decided I would speak to one of my friends who is a hunter. I ask what would happen if you were to hunt a moose or a deer using this—which is, effectively, a long-range sniper rifle—if you were to take a shot at a deer or a moose. I asked what would actually happen to that deer or moose if you were to use something that generated 10,000 joules of muzzle energy. The response was that there wouldn't be very much deer or moose left. I fail to see why that would be needed for hunters for the purpose of hunting, other than if one wanted to obliterate an animal.
It's important to note that other versions that do not generate 10,000 joules are not banned.
I just want us to be very clear about what, in fact, is banned and what, in fact, is not. There are weapons that were banned in the United States in the 1990s that are on this list finally being banned. There are items that were on this list from the 1990s that a decade of Conservative governments saw fit not to reverse. There must have been a reason for that.
I want to go back to the principle here. If there is a list that we are all working from—which there is—what would be extremely helpful, Mr. Chair, is for the opposition to acknowledge that there are weapons on this list that should be banned. If they are concerned, then let's talk about those that are concerns, and let's understand why. That's why we have the officials here. Let's go through that in detail.
However, we were subjected to the gun lobby, the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights, making a statement today that says, “If you think they are not coming after ALL of your shotguns or [rifles and] they're not going to come after your bolt-actions, you're wrong.... If you think you will be left with anything, when the Liberal, the NDP and the Bloc are done with you, you're wrong. THEY WILL LEAVE YOU WITH NOTHING.”
I think it's really important for us, all of us here, to clarify that misinformation. At no point does a list that allows 19,000 to 20,000 guns that could be used for hunting, as the officials said today..... That should give us no reason to believe we are “coming after all of your shotguns”. We have gone through a list of what is available on the open market today that will continue to be available.
There will be those who will say that those should be banned. It's their right to say that, but that's not what we're doing. I think it's important for us to take the step to understand that on this list, indeed, are weapons that should be banned because they have been responsible for taking life, for killing human beings. However, there are a lot on here that are not. Fearmongering and trying to vilify is not the answer. Nobody is trying to vilify hunters.
I know Ms. Dancho feels this is funny, but it's actually not. It's really important. Trying to vilify hunters is not what anybody is trying to do. What we are trying to do is make sure that there is a comprehensive list of weapons that should be taken off our streets. Because this is a process in committee where we have the right to debate amendments, if there are items on this list that the Conservatives feel strongly about, there is a process. There is a group of people here who are looking to work together to ask what should be taken off this list. Let's have a good discussion about it. Let's all, among parties, agree. Let's move forward.
To get in front of cameras and say that we are coming after every single hunter, that we're coming after every shotgun and every rifle in this country, is both incorrect and inaccurate. All it really does, frankly, is stir up unnecessary conflict where that's not necessary.
We've gone through a number of guns that we know are going to continue to be available. The officials have told us that there are close to 20,000 options available to folks. We know that there are guns that are on this list that have been banned in the United States in decades past that we are now getting to. We also know that there are many that were referred to in committee by others that have been on this list for many, many years and that are not new.
I would encourage us to go back to what this committee has done so well in the past, which is to find where we agree and disagree based on fact. Let's go through this list together. If there are areas of debate, let's debate those, but let's not make blanket statements that we are coming after every single shotgun and every single rifle, that we are trying to take away people's right to hunt and that we are taking away indigenous communities' right to hunt. That's not what this is about.
Mr. Chair, I just want to be on the record saying that, as we continue debate today.
Thank you.