Public Safety Committee on Feb. 8th, 2022

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

Very quickly, if 86% can be sourced and you know they're from the United States, would you have any estimate—and I know it's a guesstimate—on what the total percentage would be that would be sourced from the U.S.?

[Myron Demkiw]

For us, it's 86% of all criminal handguns—

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

No, but those are the ones that could be sourced, and I'm saying the ones that couldn't be sourced.... If you had to guess at those other ones that couldn't be sourced—

[Myron Demkiw]

Oh. I would suggest that for the 14% that's left, the vast majority will likely be American. There might be some Canadian. I can't say that's not the case. We've seen that, but we know that the United States continues to be the issue.

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

It's very close to 100%.

[Myron Demkiw]

Yes.

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

All right. Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Noormohamed, you have the luxury of 60 seconds, and they're yours, starting now.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

I would like to give notice of a motion, please, as follows:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study on the rise of ideologically motivated violent extremism (IMVE) in Canada; that this study include an investigation into the influence of foreign and domestic actors in funding and supporting violent extremist ideologies in Canada; that the study include the use of social media to fuel the IMVE movement; that the committee explore the impact of anonymous and foreign donations funding IMVE, including through crowdfunding sites; that the committee invite representatives from GiveSendGo to appear; that the committee further look at the role of payment processors in preventing the funding of IMVE and invite representatives from PayPal and Stripe to appear; that evidence and documentation received by the committee from upcoming appearances of representatives from GoFundMe and FINTRAC be included in this study; that this study include Canada's national security organizations and police involved in monitoring, countering and responding to IMVE threats; that the committee report its findings to the House; and that, pursuant to Standing Order 109, the government table a comprehensive response to the report.

I'm just giving notice. We don't have to debate this today. I'll send it to the clerk in a few minutes. I want to thank Mr. MacGregor for his contributions and his partnership in helping to put this together.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Notice has been given. The motion then has to be translated and will be up for discussion at our next meeting, which is on Thursday.

Thank you very much. That ends this round of questioning, and it ends this hour, plus a few more minutes, but not very many more.

On behalf of members of the committee, I want to thank the witnesses. Know how grateful we are for the work you do on the front lines, how difficult it is in a moment when tempers are pretty high and anxiety is on the rise in our country, and you see it, you feel it, you know it and you have to cope with it. Thank you, on behalf of all members of the committee and, through this committee, all members of Parliament, for the wonderful work you do. We appreciate it.

Colleagues, we need to take a short break because the panel is changing. That means the clerk and his technical people will have to do some sound checks.

We'll suspend for—I'm hoping—only five minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

I call this meeting back to order.

With us for this second hour we have, by video conference, as an individual, Robert Henry, assistant professor, department of indigenous studies, University of Saskatchewan; Dr. Caillin Langmann, assistant clinical professor, department of medicine at McMaster University; and Stan Tu'Inukuafe, co-founder of STR8 UP: 10,000 Little Steps to Healing Inc. I'm sorry, I probably did not do justice to that beautiful name. I'll try to do better next time.

You have up to five minutes for opening remarks, after which we will proceed with rounds of questions. Witnesses may share their time with other witnesses if they wish.

Welcome to all of you. I now invite Mr. Henry to make an opening statement of up to five minutes.

[Robert Henry, Assistant Professor, Department of Indigenous Studies, University of Saskatchewan, As an Individual]

Good afternoon, everybody.

First, I just want to say thanks for the opportunity to come to talk to you today about these issues. I am Métis from Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, and as was stated, I'm an assistant professor in the department of indigenous studies at the University of Saskatchewan here. I'm also the executive director of the nātawihowin and mamawiikikayaahk health research networks, which are part of the CIHR's network environments of indigenous health research. I'm also part of international research partnerships that are looking at examining prison violence in New Zealand. I have been invited to speak at the United Nations on issues related to gender and transnational organized crime.

I'm a community-engaged researcher who works closely with community partners and with indigenous peoples engaged in street lifestyles. My research has taken me to examine the complexities and issues related to the term “street gang” itself, the problematic issue of data collection, and why and how individuals engage in and exit street gangs. Research has shown that we actually know very little about street gangs because of the ambiguity of the term itself. A street gang in one community is not a street gang in another. Therefore we have a lack of national datasets available to us.

Also, when we are talking about street gangs, are we looking into biker gangs and other organized criminal organizations when we do this, or are we just focusing within street spaces? Do we focus here on hate and ideology groups? How does this impact the ways in which we engage in these discussions, and what is gang crime or street gang crime?

These are questions we need to examine and ask ourselves. For example, when we start to use the “gang” term loosely, we create gang talk, which looks to create fear and use fear for political agendas. As such, this is why I try to stay away from the term “gang” itself and use “street lifestyles”. Individuals are moving in and out of street gangs; however, they are connected to underground, illegal or untaxed economies.

To move back to my work specifically, we have to understand violence. Why is violence used, and how does it escalate to a point where firearms and shootings become necessary and normalized within different spaces? Through my research as well as research conducted internationally, we see that masculinity becomes a focal point. A hypermasculine performance is promoted within the street, and challenges to their face, status, respect or power become a primary reason that an individual may act out with specific violence and a hyperviolence that leads to an increase in gun violence.

We also have to understand, however, that the violence is framed within localized street codes and street justice. These codes then frame how violence is used and the level of violence that needs to be used to protect oneself, or protect one's face, if you will. Again, because of the connection to masculinity, going to the police, whether to help or support individuals, is actually problematic. They're not going to go to them for help, as they will be labelled as unable to look after themselves, which actually increases their victimization for later in life.

Finally, I want to move to the idea of addiction and how we examine this within criminal justice. Most often, addiction centres on substance misuse. However, we need to move beyond this simplistic understanding, because we have to look back to the spaces where power, respect and status are also addictive. When individuals are provided with a space where they feel power over themselves and others, it becomes addictive. Violence creates trauma. Trauma without proper supports moves people to find alternatives to deal with the trauma. This then moves to substance misuse, with substances used to numb the trauma and pain.

In the end, we want to see a decrease. First, we need to look at how we build healthy relationships that are community led, not led by police, because of the negative relationships in some communities. Rather, police need to come in as partners. Second, we need to look at moving from punitive and criminal justice approaches to more of a public health approach, since the discussions continue to focus—as they did with the panel before—on the idea of addictions being the root cause of this violence that's happening.

We cannot arrest our way out of it. We cannot incarcerate our way out of it. We need to look upstream.

With that, I will cede the floor. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Thank you very much, Mr. Henry.

Dr. Langmann, you have up to five minutes for your opening statement, sir. The floor is now yours.

[Dr. Caillin Langmann, Assistant Clinical Professor, Department of Medicine, McMaster University, As an Individual]

Thank you, Chair.

Members of the committee, thank you for letting me present my research regarding Canadian firearms legislation and its association with homicide, spousal homicide, mass homicide and suicide in Canada.

I am a professor of medicine at McMaster University and an emergency physician in Hamilton, Ontario. I serve as an academic peer reviewer in the areas of firearms control, homicide, suicide, violence and gang deterrence for academic journals such as Violence and Victims, JIV, the American Journal of Public Health, Preventative Medicine, and Nature.

I would also like to agree wholeheartedly with Dr. Henry and what he just said.

I have submitted three of my peer-reviewed articles to the committee for review. I'll summarize those findings and the implications.

The first article, “Canadian Firearms Legislation and Effects on Homicide”, examines multiple legislative and regulatory interventions, such as whether bans of certain semi-automatic firearms and restrictions of military-appearing firearms, certain types of handguns, magazine capacity restrictions, registrations and background checks were associated with reductions in homicide and spousal homicide.

Three statistical models were used. To summarize the results, no statistically significant beneficial associations were found between firearms legislation and homicide by firearms, spousal homicide or a criminal charge of discharge of a firearm with intent. Bans of military-appearing firearms, semi-automatic rifles and handguns, short-barrelled handguns and “Saturday night specials” in the 1990s have resulted in no associated reduction in homicide rates. Rather, social and economic factors were associated with higher firearm homicide rates. For instance, an older population was associated with a lower rate of homicide using a long gun, while an increase in the unemployment rate was associated with an increase in spousal homicide.

Homicide by handgun, usually used by people involved in criminality, was associated with an increase in the unemployment rate, poverty rates and immigration. As well, the overall increase in incarceration was associated with increases in homicide rates, likely reflecting an increase in crime rates overall. These results would suggest further areas to study, as well as beneficial areas to target by public policy to reduce homicide rates.

My second paper, “Effect of firearms legislation on suicide and homicide”, expanded on the previous study by looking at homicide rates over an expanded time frame, as well as suicide. It also applied new statistical methods.

This study confirmed previous research findings that legislation and regulatory efforts such as bans had no associated effect on homicide rates. As well, the study demonstrated that while suicide rates fell in males over the age of 45 in association with firearms legislation and regulations, there was an equivalent substitution of suicide by other methods, resulting in no overall difference in the rates of suicide. Factors such as unemployment, low income and indigenous populations were associated with suicide rates.

Other studies have demonstrated agreement with my study findings that laws targeting these restricted firearms, such as handguns and semi-automatic and fully automatic firearms, have had no associated benefit on homicide rates in Canada.

As demonstrated in a recent review article I was asked to write by Preventative Medicine, “Suicide, firearms, and legislation”, nine Canadian studies were found that demonstrated a switch from suicide by firearms to other methods such as hanging, resulting in no overall changes or benefits.

Data on mass homicide in Canada was obtained from Statistics Canada between the years of 1974 and 2010. Using a definition of mass homicide as a single event with three or more victims, no associated reduction in mass homicide rates was found with bans of military-appearing firearms and semi-automatic firearms, or with background checks.

Methods that have been shown to be more effective in reducing firearm homicide involve targeting the demand side of firearms prevalence in criminal activity. As demonstrated by StatCan, a significant percentage of firearms homicide involves gangs. In 1995, as youth violence increased, a program called Operation Ceasefire was launched in Boston that involved reducing the demand for weapons by targeting gangs, specifically in terms of warnings and legal interventions, as well as working with community groups and workers to reduce youth membership in gangs.

The other arm of Operation Ceasefire involved reducing the supply of weapons by legal interventions. Braga et al. 2001, examined both aspects of Operation Ceasefire and found the demand side had significant—

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

I'm sorry, Dr. Langmann. I'll have to ask you to wrap it up. Take 10 seconds to do so, please.

[Dr. Caillin Langmann]

Okay.

The demand side had significant effects on reducing violence and homicide, while the supply side had no statistically significant effect.

Hence, I would recommend that, going forward, we focus on programs that reduce the demand side of firearms acquisition in the future, especially in youth. Targeting them before they enter significant criminal activity would be beneficial in reducing firearms homicide in Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Thank you very much.

I would now like to turn to Mr. Tu’Inukuafe.

Did I do better that time? I'm so sorry.

You have up to five minutes for your opening remarks, sir. The floor is yours.

[Stan Tu’Inukuafe, Co-Founder, STR8 UP: 10,000 Little Steps to Healing Inc.]

Good morning, everyone. I too would like to thank this committee for the invitation to be here today.

My name is Stan Tu’Inukuafe. I am the co-founder of an organization called STR8 UP: 10,000 Little Steps to Healing Inc., whose main office is located in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.

Many might not be aware that Saskatchewan had the highest number of gang-related homicides in a rural area in 2020, making up 40% of the country's gang-related homicides, or that the homicide rate among indigenous people in Saskatchewan is more than 17 times higher than the rate among non-indigenous victims, even though indigenous people make up only about 10% of the province's population. These statistics and others are reflective of the 95% indigenous members STR8 UP works with. As mentioned, I'd like to thank this committee for undertaking this important study to address these and other alarming statistics related to this topic.

The topic of gun control, illegal arms trafficking and gun crimes committed by members of street gangs is something that our organization's clients have experienced in many degrees. STR8 UP's unique approach in addressing these issues are the following.

First, with regard to who we are, STR8 UP's mission statement is to assist individuals in mastering their own destiny and liberating themselves from gangs, addictions and criminal street lifestyles. STR8 UP is an independent, member-driven organization. It was conceived at the request and the involvement of two active gang members wanting support to abandon gang membership that for them had become destructive and dysfunctional. For the first individual, the mother of his daughter had been murdered by a rival gang member. For the second, he had two younger brothers following in his footsteps.

In the last 20 years of working with street gang members, STR8 UP has developed a methodology and approach based on the indigenous medicine wheel that is applicable to both rural and urban communities.

Regarding our impact, in the last 20 years STR8 UP has worked with over 800 male and female individuals wishing to abandon their addictions and gang lifestyles. STR8 UP has facilitated over 2,000 workshops and presentations regarding addictions and gang exit programs throughout Saskatchewan.

Regarding the hiring of former gang members, STR8 UP has hired several recovered gang members to work as mentors. This approach is unique to our organization. Their life experiences have been essential in educating STR8 UP staff, the community and professionals involved with active gang members.

Regarding the Saskatchewan provincial gang strategy, in 2018, in collaboration with the University of Calgary and the Students Commission of Canada, STR8 UP completed the most comprehensive research on street gangs in Saskatchewan. Two reports, entitled “Building Healthier Communities: Final Report on Community Recommendations for the Development of the Saskatchewan Prevention/Intervention Street Gang Strategy” and “Provincial Gang Strategy: Forum & Community Consultation Reports”, were developed with over 100 communities who participated in the process. Copies of these reports are available if requested.

Regarding the gang violence reduction strategy, in 2019 STR8 UP was contracted by the Saskatchewan provincial government and funded by the federal government to develop and implement the community intervention model to support active gang members who wished to leave their gang association. The original contract was to work with up to 57 individuals. However, due to the high demand for these supports, to date STR8 UP has received over 220 referrals to this program and is actively working with over 97 individuals.

Given 20 years of experience, we understand the need for further discussion and research. We are appreciative of being involved in the process. STR8 UP looks forward to further involvement in this process.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Thank you very much, sir.

I will now open the floor to questions in our round of six minutes each. We'll have to do a bit of division for the second round, but we'll have a complete first one.

Ms. Dancho, you're up first. You have the floor for six minutes.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Thank you to the witnesses for being here today. I appreciated all your opening remarks and the hard work you're all doing to support those on the front lines, both youth in gangs and those impacted by gang violence. Thank you very much for your efforts.

I have a few questions for Dr. Langmann. Thank you for being here today. As was mentioned in your opening remarks and the chair's introduction, you are a professor. You are an ER doctor. You have done groundbreaking research. I believe you're one of the few in Canada who has done the type of research that you have done, which is to look at the effect, if any, of various gun control pieces of legislation from the 1970s to the present. I found your research fascinating. It's a very good read for all policy-makers. I highly recommend it.

When we last spoke, Dr. Langmann, you mentioned to me in very plain terms, because I'm not an academic, that overall there was no correlation between a decrease in homicides or suicides from gun violence and gun control.

Can you confirm that this is what your three studies found?

[Dr. Caillin Langmann]

Yes, that's correct. There doesn't seem to be any association with reductions in homicide from any of the legislative efforts that have been produced by Canada's C-51, Bill C-17 and Bill C-68.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

That is very frustrating for all policy-makers, because we want to make a difference in ending gun violence in Canada, and different parties have different philosophies on how to go about doing that. I appreciate your extensive research on that.

The long-gun registry from almost two decades ago cost several billion dollars—it was $2 billion. Did you find any correlation between a reduction in gun violence and the long-gun registry?

[Dr. Caillin Langmann]

Absolutely not. Unfortunately, all that money appears to have been misspent.

We are currently heading into the next round, and many firearms are going to be confiscated or banned. That's probably another billion dollars.

The best focus would be to spend this money on deterrents and reduction in the level of gang violence by reducing the number of youth who are starting to get involved in gang activity by comprehensive methods like Operation Ceasefire and other programs, like the comprehensive gang strategy and Wraparound Milwaukee. All of those methods use scientific methods to reduce youth involvement in gangs. There have been several successful studies, both here in Canada and in the United States, showing that these methods work. Unfortunately, they are largely underfunded.

A lot of it is from psychiatric issues. A lot of the people who are deterred from gang activities suffer from ADHD. They suffer from depression and anxiety, and they've had no help reducing or dealing with those issues. Once these programs, which are comprehensive, start involving those members in cognitive behavioural therapy, etc., they do see a significant reduction in recidivism and a significant—almost 50%—reduction in attending and being [Technical difficulty—Editor] level of attendance at high school, and some even go on to university.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

We heard various numbers from the Winnipeg police, and I met with them as well. They mentioned that youth diversion is critical and one of the best things for us as policy-makers to invest in.

They're saying that they're seeing kids as young as eight years old being brought in. They're almost romanced into gangs and the gang lifestyle. They're often from broken homes or deeply difficult economic situations without proper role models or stability in their lives. All members of this committee are very aware of the socio-economic impacts on youth and the path they often find themselves on toward gang violence. It provides almost a new home for them. That's what we're hearing from some police officers. That's what I've heard.

When we met last night, you spoke about youth diversion. You're speaking about it now. What does that mean for people who may not understand? From my understanding, it's a young person starting to commit petty crimes and getting pulled into gang violence.

Is that the spot where we should be reaching out with resources to help them get on a better path? You spoke a bit about that, so you can elaborate if you have more to say.

[Dr. Caillin Langmann]

No, I think you summed it up quite well.

There are several strategies. Most of them involve a comprehensive network. Often they will have a primary person in charge of the program who will assess the youth in need and then determine which are the best programs for them to attend. [Technical difficulty—Editor] the cognitive behavioural therapy and psychiatry, as well as training in terms of giving the youth a forward-looking approach. If they have job training or training in anger management, they are often able to deal with the issues that turn them to gangs.

A lot of them come from broken homes where they are not getting support at home or the support at home is lacking because of low income. They look at a comprehensive method of diverting youth from gang or criminal activity, especially when they start young.

Some of the other methods, like Operation Ceasefire in Boston, involve police targeting. They found that only a small percentage of actual gang members were involved in a significant percentage of the violence.