Gun politics in Canada

In Canada, gun control is a controversial issue, though less contentious than in the United States. Handguns have been controlled in Canada by statute since Confederation in 1867. The Criminal Code of Canada enacted in 1892, required individuals to have a permit to carry a pistol unless the owner had cause to fear assault or injury. It was an offence to sell a pistol to anyone under 16. Vendors who sold handguns had to keep records, including purchaser's name, the date of sale and a description of the gun.

History of gun control in Canada

Criminal Code of Canada amendments between the 1890s and 1990s steadily increased the restrictions on firearms. These included the following:

• In the 1920s permits became necessary for all firearms newly acquired by foreigners.
• In 1947 the offence of “constructive murder” was added to the Criminal Code for offences resulting in death, when the offender carried a firearm. This offence was struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of Canada in a 1987 case called R. v. Vaillancourt
• Automatic weapons were added to the category of firearms that had to be registered in 1951. The registry system was centralized under the Commissioner of the RCMP.
• The categories of “firearm,” “restricted weapon” and “prohibited weapon” were created in 1968-69. Police were given preventive powers of search and seizure by judicial warrant if they had grounds to believe that weapons endangered the safety of an individual.
• Legislative provisions between 1977 and 1979 required Firearms Acquisition Certificates for all weapons and provided controls on the selling of ammunition. Fully automatic weapons were prohibited. Applicants for Firearms Acquisition Certificates were required to take a safety course.
• Between 1991 and 1994, legislation tightened up restrictions and established controls on military, paramilitary and high-firepower weapons.
• In 1995, new, and much stricter, gun control legislation was passed. The current legislation provides harsher penalties for crimes involving firearm use, licenses to possess and acquire firearms, and registration of all firearms, including shotguns and rifles.

There are groups who oppose this legislation, arguing that guns are necessary for hunting and farm use as well as recreational purposes including target shooting, and should not be restricted. Many Canadians are of the view that the majority of gun owners are law abiding, and that registration of firearms (other than handguns) adds little of social value and is costly.

The pressure that led to the current law began with the École Polytechnique Massacre in Montreal on December 6, 1989, and was given further impetus with the Oka Crisis in 1990. The legislation was written primarily to avoid situations such as Oka, not irrational behaviour. Notice that the firearm used in the École Polytechnique Massacre (A Ruger Mini-14) is still non-restricted, yet all firearms used by the natives at Oka are now prohibited. The present law requires all firearms to be registered. The cost of this registry soared to 5000% higher than its original $2 million dollar budget. This proved embarrassing for the Liberal Government and has led to increased calls for the registry's dismantlement. The government explained that the registry was originally supposed to recover its costs through registration fees. The Ministry later decided to not charge any fees, to increase the registration rate, partially causing the huge increase in the registry's cost.

It has been estimated that as many as 900,000 gun-owning Canadians have not registered their firearms. As of June 2003, 6.4 million firearms had been registered which is far short of the government's 1974 estimate of 10 million guns in Canada. Currently, all provinces and territories save Quebec (which has the lowest gun ownership rate) oppose the registry and refuse to prosecute violators. Supporters of the firearms registry state that it makes no sense to abandon the project midstream, while opponents point out that the 110% error rate (many registry entries have multiple errors) means that there is nothing worth saving. In February, 2003 the government announced plans to strengthen the administration of the gun control program. In May, 2004 the government dropped all fees for transferring firearms, two days before announcing the election.

Violent crime in Canada

Whatever the outcome of the 1995 legislation, Canada has a long tradition of gun control. The rates of violent crime have been stable (e.g., the homicide rate) or declining (in several other categories of violent crime). Although Canada's gun violence rates are lower than those of the United States, Canada's overall violent crime statistics are higher; in 2003, Canada had 958 violent crimes per 100,000 population (vs. 523 in the United States), and 60% of U.S. states have lower crime rates (both violent and property crime) than any Canadian province. Gun-rights activists argue that this supports their contention that a more widespread availability of guns, as in the United States, could help to depress crime in Canada, but this interpretation is disputed by others.

Complex political situation

Matters of gun control are further complicated by factors such as different police bodies and the role of provincial jurisdictions in gun law applications. Long before the present federal laws were enacted the two biggest and richest provinces, Ontario and Quebec (with more than half of the Canadian population between them) had very strict provincial firearm registration systems. Again unlike the other provinces, Ontario and Quebec have separate provincial police forces (much like the larger state police forces in the US) while all other provinces have the federally controlled Royal Canadian Mounted Police doing all police work outside the big cities. Thus, groups who might have normally opposed (or favoured) gun control in other circumstances find themselves in the other camp because of their desire to uphold provincial rights (or the identity of Quebec society) against federal centralization or vice versa. Thus, some provincial groups who might have opposed gun control because of the nature of their normal philosophical stance, had they been located in the US, are often in a political situation where they are asking for even stricter controls than those called for by the federal government, with the provision of course that application of these controls be left in provincial hands. It has to be recognized, however, that gun control is not the flagship issue for the political right in Canada that it is in the US. In Canada it is more of a rural versus urban issue.fr:Contrôle des armes à feu