Don’t be fooled. Bill C-21 is still in play. Trudeau wants to take our guns.

Hear how the Liberals plan to confiscate your guns. The budget keeps growing.

The Liberals, backed by both the NDP and the Bloc, are pushing for mass confiscations. Trudeau demonizes civilian firearm owners and threatens to criminalize responsible Canadians. Supposedly, our guns threaten public safety, but he undermines this claim by giving “get out of jail free” cards to violent criminals.

If passed in its current form, Bill C-21 will solidify two of Trudeau’s recent Orders in Council (OICs) against firearm users:

Trudeau’s May 2020 OIC to confiscate millions of popular rifles and shotguns.
Trudeau’s October 2022 OIC to confiscate all legally owned handguns after the owner dies.

Despite the removal of the odious G4 and G46 amendments contained in Bill C-21, the original bill still bans almost a million legally owned handguns and imposes unworkable “red flag” and “yellow flag” laws. The Liberals can still introduce amendments to ban more firearms.

The Trudeau Liberal claim they are confiscating guns because they are just too dangerous for civilians. But the type of gun that is “too dangerous” keeps changing:
– In the 1970s, fully automatic rifles were too dangerous, later, “assault-style” weapons;
– In the 1990s, it was small handguns, now, it’s all handguns;
– the 2020 ban included many popular semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, plus it even bans some bolt-action hunting rifles.
– Bill C-21 will ban many popular semi-automatic rifles and shotguns.

The Liberals’ claims are bogus. The police do not support the Liberals’ claims that banning currently lawful firearms is a serious approach to fighting violent crime. See here. And here. Statistics show that PAL holders are not the problem. Virtually all guns used in violent crime are smuggled or held illegally, according to police data.

So what? What’s so important about firearms?

Don’t be fooled. Guns save lives. In Canada.

Communities are safer when civilians can protect themselves and their neighbors. In the hands of responsible citizens, firearms keep the peace and deter criminals. Armed civilians protect community members from attacks by wild animals as well as criminals.

Armed civilians deter criminals in the same way armed police deter crime. They are a symbol of law and order and they are less likely to be charged with a firearms violation than police. Criminals think twice about committing crimes when they know that they can be caught and punished quickly. An entire community is protected when homes and small businesses in their community hold armed citizens.

Everyone has the God given right to use physical force – including deadly force – to stop an attacker from causing serious bodily harm to themselves or their family. However, no one has the right to use physical force to punish another person. This is an important distinction: vengeance is not self defence. Although distinguishing them can be difficult. Deadly force is only justified if it is necessary to stop an attack. Anger – even righteous anger – is not enough. The need to shoot may have to be shown in court. Just drawing your gun can bring charges.

Before deciding to use deadly force it is crucial to know the law as well as yourself. There’s no going back after pulling the trigger. It’s a life-changing event if anyone is actually shot. Even if no shots are fired, it is likely that you will be charged and forced to spend tens of thousands of dollars on lawyers. And you may still end up in prison.

Be prepared. Get training. Learn the law. Get a lawyer.

Learn how to tell the difference between fear and anger. One lawyer argues that: If your ears are burning, don’t shoot. It’s only necessary to shoot if your heart is racing, you are sweating, and you also feel cold and clammy. That’s fear. So it’s legal to use force to resist attack.

It is legal to stop an attack. According to Section 34 of the Canadian Criminal Code:
34.(1) A person is not guilty of an offence if
(a) they believe on reasonable grounds that force is being used against them or another person or that a threat of force is being made against them or another person;

The Harper government, in Bill C-26 (S.C. 2012 c. 9), relaxed the conditions under which one could use force in defence of others.

Under the old law, defence of a third person was provided for by section 37, which stated that a person may use force “to defend… anyone under his protection from assault”. The phrase “under his protection” was subject to varying interpretations.

The new law applies not just to acts in defence of oneself, but also where a person acts in defence of a third person, without any special or different qualifications or requirements. The accused must reasonably perceive a threat against the other person, must act with a defensive purpose, and their actions must be reasonable in the circumstances.

Don’t be fooled. Guns save lives.

Civilian gun owners have stopped bear attacks and spree killers. Canadians have used a firearm to protect themselves or their families between 62,000 and 80,000 times per year, according to peer-reviewed research. In the United States, where responsible citizens can carry handguns, concealed handgun permit holders have stopped likely mass public shootings. The Crime Prevention Research Center collects news stories on cases of permit holders stopping spree shooters with their handguns. For example, An armed Arizona man is being credited as a “good Samaritan” by police after he shot an active shooter in an Amazon facility parking lot, likely preventing further bloodshed. The Canadian government has less trust in Canadian citizens than do most American states have for their residents.

Stopping bear attacks is not easy but civilians can learn and more Canadians could come to the rescue of their neighbors if the government would allow it. Locals stopped a polar bear that attacked people in remote Canadian village. No police were around. No government official was there to help. But an armed civilian put paid to the bear attack. Grizzlies and black bears pose a serious threat to anyone travelling or working in the back country, even city dwellers, as bears have been sighted in Vancouver suburbs. Trappers – Canadian and American — have even killed grizzlies by shooting them in the eye. Of course, the bear has to be quite close to be able to hit a bear in an eye.

Armed civilians keep criminals in check as well. Higher proportions of households own firearms outside large cites or in rural areas. In rural Canada, “guns are the only protectors that a farmer has,” according to Senator David Tkachuk, who should know. As shown below, Canadian communities from 10,000 to 499,999 are safer than our largest cities. Canada’s large cities often have high homicide rates: for example, Toronto (1.81), Vancouver (2.16), and Winnipeg (5.39).

Canada’s small towns and cities tend to be safer than big cities, however, the smallest communities are the most violent. That’s where many First Nations are located. The smallest communities suffer the highest homicide rates in the country. According to Statistics Canada, the homicide rate for Indigenous people was six times higher than that of non-Indigenous people in 2021 (9.17 per 100,000 compared to 1.55 per 100,000 non-Indigenous people).

Canadian homicide rates per 100,000 population by community size, 2003-2016

Source: Special Request, Statistics Canada, Homicide Survey

Communities thrive when community members are self-reliant and self-reliant people are willing to help each other. Canada needs communities to be able to take care of themselves rather than to depend upon a distant national government. We have all witnessed the frequent failure of the government to take care of us, to protect the elderly in long-term care homes, our failing health care system, the “catch and release” treatment of violent criminals.

Emergency Departments are failing Canadians and the government struggles to  issue passports in a timely fashion. Local residents are often capable of dealing with the challenges they face without need to rely upon a distant government. Police play an important role in keep our communities safe, but the job of the police is to identify and arrest criminals, not to protect us. Police have no legal obligation to protect any individual. When seconds count, the police are minutes – or hours – away.

We are in a culture war.

The best argument for owning firearms is to protect your family, your property, or your community. Many communities are safer because they are protected by the guns in the hands of civilians. Armed civilians deter criminals and save lives. Armed mature responsible citizens, not armed yahoos. Owning a gun means being willing to accept heavy responsibility.

Canadian authorities discourage owning firearms for protection. If the real reason for owning a firearm is for protection, few are willing to tell the police. The police can easily refuse to issue a firearm licence. Or revoke an existing licence and confiscate your firearms. Politically, few Canadian firearms rights organizations are willing to even mention using a firearm for protection.

We are the inheritors of a firearms culture. Guns have been handed down to us from our parents and grandparents. We need to teach our children our love for firearms, or our culture will die with us.