Summary of Consultations on the Canadian Firearms Program and Proposed Changes to the Firearms Act Regulations

Canada Firearms Centre

August 2004

**********

1. Introduction

2. Background

3. Structure of the Consultations

4. Results of the Consultations

   
           A - Stakeholder Meetings

           B - Online Public Input

           C - Parliamentary Committee Review

    

5. Contact us

This report summarizes the results of consultations on the delivery of the Firearms Program and on proposed regulatory changes. The Canada Firearms Centre conducted the consultations in the summer and fall of 2003.

The issue of firearms control gives rise to opposing and strongly held views not often seen in other public policy discussions in Canada. For example, some firearms owners feel that government should not in any way interfere with firearms ownership. And some firearms control proponents believe that strong gun control is part of the Canadian identity and should be strengthened. Nonetheless, the experience of the consultations demonstrated that there is often common ground, with a clear and shared commitment to public safety.

In February 2003, the Government of Canada announced its Gun Control Program Action Plan. One of the commitments made was to consult Canadians on the administration and direction of the Firearms Program.

In keeping with the Government's regulatory policy, the Canada Firearms Centre also consulted stakeholders and citizens about proposed regulatory amendments that were tabled in the Senate and House of Commons in June 2003 for Parliamentary Committee Review. The proposed regulations were pre-published in the Canada Gazette and can be found using this link:

Canada Gazette, Part I, June 21, 2003

The proposed regulations and the future delivery of the Firearms Program are very much intertwined and clients, stakeholders and the Canadian public have views on both aspects. Rather than organizing two separate consultations, it made sense to combine them. Combining the consultations ensured that a broader spectrum of individuals could comment on both elements. In doing so, the Canada Firearms Centre, Chief Firearms Officers, Firearms Program clients and Canadians could consequentially benefit from their participation and input.

The consultations were carried in two ways:

• The Canada Firearms Centre conducted eight national and regional consultation meetings with stakeholders, including meetings mixing regional and local firearm users/businesses with public health and safety groups representatives, in September and October 2003.

• Canadians were invited to provide their input online via the Canada Firearms Centre website, through the late summer and early fall of 2003.
  

In addition, Parliamentary Committees reviewed the proposed regulatory amendments in October 2003, as provided for by the Firearms Act.

The eight national and regional consultations included police representatives, public safety advocates and professionals, firearms user organizations, public health specialists, firearms business representatives and provincial hunter and wildlife organizations. The meetings focused on a wide range of issues related to the administration of the Program and the proposed regulatory changes.

As with most consultations, participants brought different perspectives, views and experiences to the discussions. There was, nonetheless, a broad consensus that emerged on a range of Program elements. Firearms safety training, licensing of firearms owners and ensuring that all information within the Canadian Firearms Information System is as complete and accurate as possible are broadly supported. Several participants expressed appreciation for recent improvements in Canada Firearms Centre services and efforts to further improve them through the proposed regulatory changes.

Participants indicated that there are clear links between service and compliance. Recent service improvements combined with a clear commitment to continue to identify and implement further improvements noticeably reduced stakeholder concerns and complaints.

While consensus did exist on many fronts, differing views were expressed in a number of areas.

Individuals representing public health and safety organizations and professionals expressed concerns that the outcome of the consultations might lead to a less robust Program. They encouraged the Canada Firearms Centre to broaden its work with crime victims, the public health community, and community safety advocates. In particular, a number of representatives suggested that opportunities should be explored with community-based organizations to promote safe use and storage of firearms, to contribute to the prevention of crime, injury and suicide, and to raise awareness of firearm safety generally. Aboriginal communities, which often have higher levels of reported crime, were identified as important potential partners and a priority.

Public health and safety groups and victims' organizations emphasized that firearms of all kinds can pose a risk to Canadians, such as victims of domestic violence. They recognized that effective firearm controls, especially the registration of firearms, enhance owners' accountability for their guns and help prevent firearms from falling into the wrong hands. The Firearms Program was encouraged to include the general public, communities and professional groups in its concept of "client".

The Canada Firearms Centre was encouraged to communicate the Program's successes and its public safety dividends more clearly and effectively. The view was that there is a success story to be told, but that the story has been overshadowed by other events and a focus on Program costs, reporting and management issues.

Representatives of firearm owners groups and hunting and wildlife organizations welcomed these consultations. They expressed serious concerns about the future of hunting and shooting sports in Canada in light of declining participation rates across most of the country. Many representatives felt that costs associated with individual licensing, safety training and registration present a real disincentive to individuals considering entering these sports, particularly youth. In addition, the length of time from when an individual decides to start shooting, completes the safety course, and applies for and receives a firearms licence may also be a deterrent to new entrants.

Some participants felt that the Firearms Act was a step toward the elimination of lawful firearm ownership in Canada. Certain firearms owners groups and hunting and wildlife organizations also expressed concerns that the registration of firearms could lead to confiscation of firearms. Perceived excessive regulation of law-abiding firearms owners, in the view of many participants, did not contribute to reduce the illegal use of firearms in Canada. Some concerns about the Firearms Act and the Criminal Code were raised. This included, for example, the perception that firearms can be too easily prohibited under the current legislation if they do not serve a legitimate purpose "in the opinion of" the Government.

At the same time, many firearm owner organizations and businesses underscored the need for clear communication of Program requirements to firearms users, and a number offered to work with the Canada Firearms Centre to identify opportunities to communicate with their members.

Some police representatives participating in the consultations expressed concerns about the Program's cost, but nonetheless remained supportive of the Program's objectives. Police-specific issues included the need for more training for officers about the Firearms Act and regulations, and improving access to firearms registry information for police responding to calls.

Police participants felt that awareness among senior police officials about the benefits of the Firearms Program to law enforcement and officer safety needs to be increased. They also highlighted the need to review Program implementation to identify areas for future improvements and opportunities to work at the community level to improve firearm safety and prevent crime.

Participants of all backgrounds raised the issue of illegal trafficking in weapons and cross-border smuggling. Some firearm owners and users groups questioned the utility of firearms registration information in supporting domestic or international firearms tracking and tracing in criminal investigations. Public safety groups, police representatives and others noted that the information could be used to these ends effectively, with many suggesting that greater investments be made to ensure this occurs.

A number of participants strongly supported Canada ratifying the United Nations Protocol on illicit firearms trafficking and the Organization of American States Convention on illicit firearms trafficking, emphasizing that illegal firearms are an international problem. They also noted that Canada has played, and suggested might continue to play, a leadership role internationally, linking the Program to actual and potential contributions to the foreign policy agenda (e.g., in the area of conflict prevention).

Proposed Regulations

The participants also had views on many of the proposed regulatory changes. Some of the key comments and suggestions made are summarized below.

Some participants expressed concerns about the paper burden proposed for gun show sponsors. At the same time, the majority recognized that local law enforcement authorities and Chief Firearms Officers should be aware of gun shows for public safety and service reasons. For example, the Canada Firearms Centre and Chief Firearms Officers should be aware that a show is taking place to ensure adequate resources are available for efficient processing of Authorizations to Transport restricted firearms and prohibited handguns and any firearm transfers that may occur.

Storage, Display and Handling Regulations (Businesses and Individuals)

There was general support for proposed provisions to permit secure, signature-required postal delivery of restricted firearms and prohibited handguns. The proposal recognizes that in many smaller and rural communities, no licensed carrier for restricted firearms and prohibited handguns exist.

Participants recommended that the proposed regulations requiring the Registrar be notified of modifications to a firearm should consider permanence of any modifications. For example, trying out a new barrel on a shotgun should not require reporting; but permanently changing a barrel to a different gauge should be reported to the Canadian Firearms Registry. While some felt that the reporting requirement could be onerous, most indicated that such reporting would help ensure that Canadian Firearms Information System data is as complete, accurate and up to date as possible. It was important to firearm owners that the information in the system corresponds to their actual firearms to avoid any difficulties in proving ownership.

The proposal to eliminate mandatory verification of non-restricted firearms transferred from one individual owner to another drew great concern from many participants. Participants expected verification to be maintained to ensure that information contained in the Canadian Firearms Information System is as complete, accurate and up to date as possible. Once again, it was important to firearm owners that the information in the system corresponds to their actual firearms to avoid any difficulties in proving ownership.

Import and Export of Firearms (Businesses and Individuals)

As with all of the efforts to streamline Program compliance, there was general support. In particular, there was support for the proposals to enhance services for non-residents coming to Canada (e.g., to hunt or target shoot), and for licensed Canadians returning to Canada with registered firearms.

Firearm business operators and firearm organizations, however, expressed significant concern about the proposed $20 fee for authorizations to import and export firearms and certain firearms parts. They asked that the proposed fee be eliminated, as it would place another burden on small firearm businesses.

Several specific issues were raised about the proposed Firearms Licence Regulations.

A number of participants suggested that the licence application be simplified, and that firearm licence holders should only have to update core personal identification information on licence renewal applications.

Certain participants expressed concerns that excessive streamlining of the application process may reduce the public-safety dividends from licensing. They reminded participants that the former Firearms Acquisition Certificate application was eight pages long, and that the personal-history questions currently included on licence applications were research based. As an individual's marital status may change during the term of his or her licence, participants felt that it was necessary for public-safety purposes to collect information about current and former spouses on licence renewal as well as on the initial application.

There was general acceptance and understanding of the necessity for Canada to meet its international commitments to combat firearms trafficking. But some participants questioned whether the marking of newly manufactured and imported firearms, which is one of those commitments, would have a substantial benefit in terms of supporting law enforcement. Business representatives and firearm owners groups wanted to ensure that Canadian marking requirements are easy to implement, especially for newly imported firearms, and that they should involve an absolute minimum impact on the value of a firearm.

Some participants suggested that fees charged to individual firearm owners were too high, and should be reduced or eliminated. They suggested that the public generally should pay the lion's share of costs for the Firearms Program, as the benefit of the Program is principally a general public safety one, rather than a direct benefit to the individual firearm owner.

Participants generally supported steps to extend the terms of firearms business licences and simplify the fee schedule by reducing the number of licence fees. Some suggested a benchmark be set that reflects the percentage of the Program's operation that will be covered by fees.

Canadians were invited to take part in the consultation process through the Canada Firearms Centre website, or by letter or facsimile. These online consultations were open from August 7^th until September 31^st, 2003.

Several hundred submissions were received. Views generally reflected concerns raised during the national and regional consultations. Participants were given the opportunity to provide feedback on current Program design and service delivery, as well as on the proposed regulations.

Participants were also asked some demographic questions such as their name, address, gender, whether or not they are a resident of Canada and if they are a firearm owner. Only a minority responded to these questions. Based on the feedback obtained, a higher proportion of respondents were male, firearm owners, under the age of 50, and lived in Western Canada.

Most of the comments received via the Canada Firearms Centre website focussed on the Firearms Act rather than the proposed regulations. The views expressed can be separated into two categories. The first category is comments on the scope and contribution of the Program. The second is observations or suggestions about ways to improve the Program, combined with service-related enquiries.

Comments focused on the perceived lack of demonstrated benefits. Respondents felt that the Program did not adequately address crime and violence or the apparent increase in black-market firearm sales.

Some suggested that Canadian Firearms Program funds should be allocated to other priorities including, among others, health care and law enforcement.

Certain respondents expressed concern about the potential infringement of "rights" through the Firearms Act and the "criminalization" of individuals who do not register their firearms. Some indicated that the Firearms Act does not reflect Canadian values.

Others argued that the Firearms Act prevents people from protecting themselves and their families. They called for changes to laws to permit Canadians to carry concealed handguns for self-protection. Some favoured stronger sentences for gun crimes.

Certain respondents expressed concerns about the length of waits on the toll-free telephone lines, delays in processing individual licence and firearms registration certificates and other service-related issues.

Others had specific suggestions to improve service to Program clients and/or protect public safety. One suggestion was to make home alarms mandatory for firearms owners who keep firearms in their homes. Some respondents proposed a stronger emphasis on safety education and safe storage of firearms.

Concerns were expressed by a number of respondents regarding overall Program costs. It was also suggested that registration fees are too costly and are detrimental to the Canadian tradition of hunting and sport shooting. Similarly, it was suggested that the cost of firearms safety courses may be a barrier to new participants considering hunting and shooting. The recommendation was made that the costs of the Canadian Firearms Safety Course should be subsidized.

In addition, it was suggested that encouraging the use of more volunteers to run the Verifiers Network could encourage more participation in the shooting sports.

Proposed Regulations

Overall, views expressed on the proposed changes to the regulations were generally quite specific. Some recommendations were well outside the scope of the government's proposals. Input received is summarized below:

The view was presented that the Firearms Act prevents people from protecting themselves and their families. One suggestion was that that law be changed to permit Canadians to carry concealed handguns for self-protection; it was also suggested that Canadians be able to carry handguns without requiring any licence or permit.

Authorization to Transport Restricted and Prohibited Firearms Regulations

It was suggested that Authorizations to Transport for restricted firearms and prohibited handguns be issued automatically when an individual passes the Restricted Firearm Safety Course, and that this could reduce the paperwork for Firearms Program employees and firearms owners.

Respondents expressed concerns about delays in the processing of import and export certificates. Canada does not currently require import authorizations for sporting firearms and firearm parts. It should be noted that U.S. law already requires the American government to authorize the export of firearms and firearms parts before they may be shipped to Canada.

Comments from respondents were less clear about the proposed Firearms Marking Regulations. Many confused the proposed regulations with the existing requirement to affix a Firearms Identification Number (FIN) sticker or permanently engrave the FIN on firearms that cannot be otherwise identified. Some respondents requested clarification on where they should affix the FIN sticker.

Some individuals raised the concern that any required marking would deface firearms and could devalue collector's items.

Respondents suggested that the Canada Firearms Centre should encourage and promote safe-storage education, and develop more specific requirements for safe storage of firearms (e.g. a safe and an approved lock).

Certain respondents wanted shooting range operators to be required to clean up lead shot left on shooting ranges.

The Firearms Act requires that the Minister table proposed changes to Firearms Act regulations in the House of Commons and the Senate. The proposals are referred to the appropriate House of Commons and Senate Committees, which may choose to study the proposals and report.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights considered the proposed regulatory changes on October 23, 2003. The House Committee made no recommendations following its review. The Committee proceedings are on the Internet at:

Edited Evidence * JUST * Number 075 (Official Version)

The Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee began consideration of the proposed regulatory changes and heard witnesses on October 29, 2003. Committee proceedings are on the Internet at:

Legal, Issue 16, Evidence, October 29, 2003

The Committee reported to the Senate on November 6, 2003. Its report made two recommendations. One recommendation focused on reporting of the outcome of the consultations to consultation participants. The other focussed on ensuring that firearms owners are not required to cover a disproportionate level of the costs of the Firearms Program through fees. The full Senate Committee report can be found on the Internet at:

Ninth Report

http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/2/parlbus/commbus/senate/com-e/lega-e/rep-e/rep09nov03-e.htm

IV) Contact us

If you have any questions about this report or the Firearms Program, please contact the Canada Firearms Centre, Communications Group at 1-800-731-4000 or by e-mail cfc-cafc@cfc-cafc.gc.ca, or you may wish to contact the office of the Chief Firearms Officer responsible for your province. Chief Firearms Officer contact information is listed on the Canada Firearms Centre website:

Chief Firearms Officers

The Canada Firearms Centre will continue to engage Canadians, stakeholders and clients to identify new opportunities to strengthen and streamline Program administration and service delivery.