If you own a firearm in Canada, your inbox likely contains a very expensive piece of government desperation. On January 19, the federal government sent an industrial-scale email to nearly every one of Canada’s 2.3 million licensed firearm owners. It wasn’t a routine safety update or a renewal reminder. Instead, it was an invitation to a “maybe.”
For the next ten weeks, the state is asking the most vetted, law-abiding segment of society to log into a portal and “declare” property that, in many cases, the government doesn’t even know they have, in order to potentially be compensated, but without any guarantees. While serial numbers for restricted rifles like the AR-15 are already on the books, Ottawa is either effectively blind when it comes to the millions of formerly non-restricted firearms. By mass-emailing the entire gun-owning population, the government is trying to crowdsource a registry for the sole purpose of confiscation.
We are witnessing the birth of a “Liability Model” of citizenship. The current approach implies that the vetting process itself – the same background checks these 2.3 million people pass every single day – isn’t enough. By obsessing over the object rather than the owner, the state is signaling that it no longer trusts its own licensing system.
This “confiscation-first” model is a global outlier. While Canada treats its most scrutinized citizens as a mystery to be solved – or worse, a bloc of voters reliably opposed to many of its nanny state-style antics – modern democracies in Central and Eastern Europe are doubling down on trust. The Czech Republic is the gold standard here. On January 1, Prague fully implemented a new Firearms Act. Their digital “Central Firearms Register” wasn’t built to facilitate a grab; it was built to cut through the red tape. “Czech law now allows owners to verify their status instantly via a mobile app, reaffirming a citizen’s right to acquire and carry for defence,” a stark contrast to the Canadian portal that warns users that “submitting a declaration does not guarantee you will receive compensation.”
Toronto Police Association President Clayton Campbell: “I can’t think of a single time when a legal gun has been used in a crime in this city, not one. We know that the gun buyback program is going to have essentially zero impact on the crime in Toronto.”
The Cost of Virtue Signaling
The math behind the Assault-Style Firearms Compensation Program (ASFCP) is, to put it mildly, “creative.” While the PBO originally floated a $746 million price tag in response the Liberal government’s own ridiculously low estimate, expert analysis suggests the real cost will balloon to $6 billion.
The Cape Breton pilot project offered a prime example of just how badly the Liberals are understating the costs billable to the taxpayer. Ottawa aimed to collect 200 firearms over six weeks. They managed to get 25. The administrative cost? Over $149,760 for just 16 participants. As Carson Binda, B.C. Director for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF), put it while speaking in context to B.C.: “The Eby government needs to stand up for taxpayers and refuse to help Ottawa waste more taxpayer money on a failed confiscation program.”
Even Manitoba’s NDP Premier Wab Kinew has voiced his skepticism. “If we’re looking at taking away weapons from criminals … I’m all for that, but this program doesn’t look like it’s going to achieve that end,” Kinew said. “Instead, it’s going to create other issues around administration and costs.”
Many Police Forces are Opposed
Perhaps the most damning indictment of the program is the fact that the people supposed to enforce it are walking away. From London to Peterborough and beyond to the distant west coast, over two dozen police services are signaling they won’t participate in this antisocial Liberal scheme.
Peterborough Police Chief Stuart Betts was clear about the “significant gaps within the ASFCP program,” noting a lack of clarity on how police are expected to safely engage with it. “Our current priorities related to firearms investigations are focused on those who use firearms in the commission of a criminal offence, irrespective of whether they are legally or illegally owned,” Betts explained.
Toronto Police Association President Clayton Campbell went even further during his testimony: “I can’t think of a single time when a legal gun has been used in a crime in this city, not one. We know that the gun buyback program is going to have essentially zero impact on the crime in Toronto.”
Targeting the Wrong People
The data confirms what every hunter and sport shooter already knows: the problem isn’t the securely stored rifle in a rural basement. The vast majority of crime guns – upwards of 85 per cent in Toronto and likely higher than 90% – trace back to the United States.
Saskatchewan’s Minister of Community Safety, Mike Weger, isn’t waiting for Ottawa to see reason. The province is preparing amendments to the Saskatchewan Firearms Act to ensure owners are actually compensated, rather than just being left with a “maybe.” “The reality is the serious crimes involving guns aren’t being committed by law-abiding gun owners,” Weger said. “It’s a program that’s going to do, frankly, nothing to make communities safer.”
The Political “Break Glass” Strategy
Many see this entire scheme as a “break glass in panic” exercise – a politically-driven move to shore up Liberal and leftist votes when facing backlash to the government’s own failed policies. With the appointment of Nathalie Provost, one of the most virulent anti-gun activists in Canadian history, the program has evolved from a policy debate into a divisive ideological crusade that is characteristic of the modern Liberal government.
As Kawartha Lakes resident and licensed owner Luke Procter told his council during a unanimous vote to oppose the program: “These bans and confiscations seek to destroy rural life while having no impact on the very criminals who are committing all the crimes.”
Ottawa has until the October 30 amnesty deadline to realize that a secure nation is built on trusted citizens, not a digital portal designed to make a law-abiding populace disappear their own heritage. Until then, it seems the only thing being “bought back” is the public’s patience.
