Canada’s Liberal government is pressing on with its harebrained gun ban and confiscation program for “assault style weapons,” but, true to form and precedents, it has been far from smooth sailing.
Canada’s National Post newspaper describes the government’s program as “not only severely behind schedule and over-budget, but a newly released internal report shows that Ottawa is doubtful of the plan ever actually working as announced.”
That report is a document prepared by an outside contractor, Ekos Research Associates Inc., a public opinion research company hired by the federal government’s Privy Council Office in the apparent recognition that gun owners’ hostility to the gun ban and confiscation program presents a big problem. The object was to provide “research-based information on Canadian firearms owners’ experiences, motivations, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours” to aid in crafting government communications to “increase compliance and maximize the number of firearms disposed of for the least cost.” The contractor points out that the program “faces a risk of non-compliance stemming from psychological, physical, and logistical barriers. A deeper understanding of the various motivations of owners (financial, cultural, recreational, safety-driven, etc.) will help the Government to address these barriers.”
Given the misrepresentations the government has spun over the last five years relative to its gun bans and “buyback” (for instance, here, here, and see below), the contractor’s assertion that “[t]he Government of Canada believes it is unlikely to be the most trusted messenger with individuals who own assault-style firearms” is nothing short of a massive understatement.
In search of that “deeper understanding,” Ekos Research conducted an online and telephone survey last year involving 1,712 respondents, who were, on average, asked 148 questions on firearm ownership, use, whether the respondent was licensed, how their guns were obtained, the sources of their news about firearms; opinions and beliefs about firearms, the extent to which the person supported or opposed specific firearms-related policies (including the “buyback” for banned guns), and much more. Of particular interest were the questions about whether the person was likely “to participate in the buyback program before the amnesty order expires;” the reasons why the person would be complying or not with the law; and their level of trust in the government, the RCMP, and police.
The survey delivery date was January 9, 2025, and although the report on the methodology of the survey is available, the results are not. The reliability of the information gathered is another matter; one would assume canny gun owners would be unwilling to disclose whether they possessed any banned firearms (and how many) or a valid Possession and Acquisition License (PAL), and what they expected to do about the planned confiscations. Regardless of reliability, the survey cost Canada’s taxpayers just under C$100,000, adding still more to the ballooning price tag of the gun ban and confiscation law.
Speaking of price tags, the National Post refers to a fiscal and status analysis released in June by Canadian firearm magazine, Calibre. That analysis, Gun Ban Budget Crosses Half-Billion Mark, Taxpayer Cost-Per-Firearm Confiscated Currently $24,416, breaks down the various funds spent and committed to date in detail, and concludes that the program has cost Canada’s taxpayers “at least $548.1 million from 2021 to the end of this fiscal year.” Public Safety Canada, the federal government department responsible for implementing the ban, plans to spend another C$459.8 million on the program over the next fiscal year.
More information comes from Canada’s Blacklock’s Reporter, which quotes officials from the Department of Public Safety on the completion of Phase 1 of the gun confiscation program (surrenders and seizures from gun dealers/the firearm industry). “Budgeted costs were $20 million to collect 12,000 firearms,” which amount doesn’t include the additional, unspecified costs “relating to destruction of firearms by a third party destruction services provider.” The government is still in the process of “forecast[ing] anticipated program costs for the individual phase” of confiscations and “establishing compensation amounts for individuals,” but that step has hit a snag (“a bit of a data gap”) because the government’s estimated number of banned “assault-style firearms” is “based on what was known in 2012” and not 2024.
If this is correct, the tally so far is over half a billion dollars spent with around 12,000 firearms surrendered. To put that in perspective, readers of this space may recall that shortly before the gun ban and confiscation law was announced in 2020, the Liberal government gave an initial total cost estimate of C$250 million – an amount already long since invisible in the rear-view mirror.
What’s more, the department’s reference to firearm destruction is at odds with the promises that the Liberal government (including the then Minister of Public Safety) made last year. Firearms collected through the government’s Phase 1 of the “buyback” would be donated “to support the fight for democracy in Ukraine.” As of mid-June, both the Canadian national news service (the CBC) and a Ukrainian news source confirm that not a single firearm out of the approximately 12,000 seized or surrendered has been sent to Ukraine.
The ban and confiscation program continues to face opposition from provincial governments.
Danielle Smith, the Conservative premier of the Province of Alberta, spoke at a town hall meeting in June and reportedly outlined the directives her government has in place to counter any enforcement of the federal gun grab. According to the Canadian gun rights news source TheGunBlog.ca, law enforcement in the province have been instructed that their policing priorities do not include going after law-abiding gun owners; further, municipal governments have been told “they are not allowed to participate in the gun confiscation program without getting permission from our Justice Minister.” The Alberta Firearms Act allows the provincial government “to determine the credentials and the training” needed to participate in the federal government’s firearms confiscation program, and, as Ms. Smith notes, “it might take us a while to figure out what all of those requirements are. It might take years, in fact, for somebody to be able to get the proper certification to participate in that program. Maybe even decades.” Finally, the province is exploring using its constitutional authority over property and civil rights to create its own firearms licensing scheme, to allow Albertans who acquired their firearms legally, and who continue to be law abiding, to own, keep, and use their guns.
Making sure that the gauntlet was well and truly flung, Ms. Smith declared, “we’re going to be as obstructionist as possible.”
To come back to the “deeper understanding” of the beliefs and behaviors of Canada’s gun owners, we’d suggest more true and reliable indicators are the numbers of Canadians who continue to lawfully acquire and use firearms. An exclusive report from TheGunBlog.ca states that the number of Canadian adults with a government–issued PAL rose to a new high in 2024, with the expansion occurring in every province and territory. The number of “Restricted” PAL (RPAL) (required for all handguns that are not classified as “prohibited,” and for specified rifles by model or variation of a model that are classified as restricted) jumped by +3.1%, and the number of first-time PAL holders also increased. The net increase of PALs in 2024 “exceeded 10-year annual average gain of about 40,000.”
In the meantime, in the words of the Calibre magazine article, the Liberal government’s ban and “buyback” are the very “definition of regulatory capture run amok, and … will remain an ever larger, ever more obvious albatross about the neck of any future government that seeks credibility with regard to responsible spending and pragmatic, rational policy, just as the long gun registry proved to be in its waning days.”
U.S. firearm prohibitionists with confiscatory ambitions should take note. Grabbing lawfully obtained firearms from law abiding owners is not as easy or cheap as you want or think it to be.
More Like This From Around The NRA
