Hon. Hassan Yussuff moved second reading of Bill C-21, An Act to amend certain Acts and to make certain consequential amendments (firearms).

He said: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Bill C-21, An Act to amend certain Acts and to make certain consequential amendments (firearms).

Colleagues, I want to recognize at the start of this debate that the conversation about guns is never an easy one to have. It is usually filled with high emotion and strong opinions, and it can be very divisive and polarizing because it is about life and death, safe communities and people’s rights and privileges.

For some people, guns are tools. They use them to protect their farm animals, to protect themselves in the wild, to hunt for recreation or for sustenance food, or to pierce a target in a competition. For some it is just a toy to have fun with. For others, guns, especially those considered assault-style weapons, are grotesque instruments of death and destruction that have caused immense pain and suffering to innocent people and have no place in our society. I know it will not be an easy debate, and I am expecting colleagues in this chamber will have strong opinions on both sides of the issue.

Whenever a government intends to restrict or limit its citizens’ ability to own personal property like firearms, it is something that we as legislators must seriously consider. Colleagues, fundamentally, for me, this bill is about striking a fair balance between the right of Canadians to safe communities and the privilege of Canadians to own certain types or models of guns for hunting and sport shooting. Finding that balance is no easy task.

For some gun control advocates, this bill does not go far enough. For some gun rights advocates, it goes too far. As the debate on this bill progresses, I want you to think about people’s rights versus people’s privileges. I think this bill, at the end of the day, strikes a good balance between the right of Canadians to a safe community by reducing the number of firearms in circulation and the privilege of Canadians to use certain models of firearms for sport and target shooting, collecting, hunting, et cetera.

Senators, I want to talk today about what this bill is about and clear up some misconceptions about what it is not. There is no silver bullet to combatting gun violence, and this bill does not purport to be a silver bullet. This bill is just one piece to solving a very complex puzzle of creating safer communities through a group of initiatives that I would like to now explain in more detail.

First and foremost, Bill C-21, introduced a year ago, would codify in law a national freeze on the sale, purchase and transfer of handguns, which took effect via regulations on October 21, 2022. What this means is that any legal handgun owner who had a handgun before October 21 of last year can keep and use their handgun. They will, however, not be able to purchase new handguns or transfer or sell their handguns, and no one who didn’t have a handgun by last October will be able to acquire one.

For the general public, there are only limited reasons for which a person may be licensed to acquire or possess a handgun that is a restricted firearm, notably, for target practice or target shooting competitions or as part of a collection. What is not a permitted reason is hunting.

I want to be clear on the fact that the handgun freeze in no way limits the privileges that allow Canadians to hunt. The handgun ban restricts only the privilege of approximately 275,000 Canadians to collect handguns and use them for sport or recreational shooting.

There has been a growing increase in the prevalence of handguns in Canada. Between 2010 and 2020, the number of handguns increased by 74% to 1 million handguns owned by approximately 275,000 individuals in our country.

Research shows that the availability of firearms in developed countries and the incidence of firearm crimes, violence and misuse are correlated. By restricting handgun accessibility and by freezing the sale, purchase and transfer of such, the government expects that it will essentially cap the growth of privately owned handguns and have a positive effect on gun violence as a result.

The bill also includes other significant measures to address the alarming role of guns in gender-based violence through red and yellow flag laws; strengthen border controls by increasing maximum penalties for gun traffickers; create authorities to combat firearms smuggling, trafficking and related offences; amend the Criminal Code definition of “prohibited firearm” to add a prospective new technical definition that contains the characteristics of an assault-style firearm, which would only apply to firearms designed and manufactured after the bill’s coming-into-force date; and address the growing threat of illegally manufactured firearms, otherwise known as “ghost guns.”

The latter two measures are particularly important, and I want to start with them in explaining what this bill is about.

Bill C-21 adds a brand new technical definition that contains the characteristics of an assault-style firearm to the definition of a “prohibited firearm” in the Criminal Code. The new future definition focuses on semi-automatic centre-fire firearms that are not handguns that were originally designed with a detachable magazine with a capacity of six cartridges or more.

It is important to note that this new definition will only apply prospectively, which is to say that it only impacts firearms that are designed and manufactured after the date when this provision comes into force. I want to be clear that no legal semi-automatic centre-fire firearm in circulation right now that is not a handgun will be impacted by this new definition.

Incorporating technical criteria in this definition puts the onus on industry to do their part in protecting our communities from these dangerous weapons. As I just mentioned, it would not impact the classification of existing firearms in the Canadian market.

The proposed prospective technical definition of characteristics of assault-style firearms allows us to proactively address advances in the firearms market and keep out of our communities firearms designed to kill as many people as quickly and as easily as possible. This is part of the big picture of keeping Canadians safe. We’ve seen far too many tragedies, including those recently in Nova Scotia, Ontario and Quebec.

The government has been clear that firearms designed for war, like the AR-15, which are capable of rapid fire and can inflict catastrophic harm, have no place in our communities. Bill C-21 calls for a parliamentary review of the new technical definition of a “prohibited firearm” after five years, which would help inform whether the objectives of the proposed changes are being achieved. Bill C-21 also includes several proposed amendments to control the purchase — meaning transfer or importation — of cartridge magazines by requiring a valid firearms licence.

These amendments received wide support from both sides of the aisle and Canadians during the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill in the other place. Senators, these amendments are in direct response to recommendation C.21 from the Final Report of the Mass Casualty Commission.

To me, this is a common sense measure. Let me give you a real-world example of what this means. In 2018, a gunman in Toronto killed 2 people and wounded 13. Known as the Danforth shooting, the perpetrator did not have a legal licence to own a handgun, but was nonetheless legally allowed to purchase the cartridge magazines that he used to kill and wound his 15 victims.

I do not personally have a licence to own a gun. However, senators, I can go to a store right now and buy a magazine for a legal firearm without presenting a licence. How does that make sense?

This bill also takes action against “ghost guns,” which are guns that have been illegally manufactured, often through 3D printing, which can use plastic, metal or epoxy resins, or through the assembling various parts, which can result in firearms with no or multiple serial numbers. These ghost guns are dangerous not just because of their capacities for violence, but because they are unmarked, untraceable and are the firearm of choice for many criminal activities. It is disturbingly easy to find schematics to 3D-print firearms components online for free.

Equally disturbing, it is impossible to know exactly how many ghost guns are on the streets in Canada today. What we do know is that the Canada Border Services Agency, or CBSA, is seeing an influx of uncontrolled firearm parts across the border. That is linked to illicit firearms production in Canada, and several of those components are key to producing 3D-printed ghost guns.

For example, in August 2022, the CBSA announced two significant seizures of ghost guns in B.C. following interceptions at international mail centres. That resulted in the seizure of a 3D printing machine that was in the process of printing a lower receiver for a handgun, six handgun lower receivers with no serial number and a loaded 9-millimetre handgun with no serial number.

In February 2022, the CBSA announced the results of an investigation into 3D-printed firearms following an interception of undeclared firearm components, including metal parts and inserts commonly used to reinforce the plastic frames of 3D‑printed handguns from a processing centre in Ontario. That resulted in the seizure of two 3D-printed handguns and a 3D printer.

The implications of 3D-printed firearms are staggering, colleagues. That’s precisely why Bill C-21 targets them.

The proposed measures would amend the Firearms Act so that businesses or individuals selling certain firearms parts would be required to ensure that the buyer has a valid firearms licence. That is like the existing requirements to ensure individuals possess a valid firearms licence when they purchase ammunition.

Other proposed measures would classify illegally manufactured firearms as prohibited firearms and enact new offences targeting ghost guns, including the possession and distribution of digital files for 3D printing firearms or prohibited devices for the purpose of illegal manufacturing or trafficking. Those ghost gun amendments received unanimous support from all members of the committee studying the bill in the other place.

Senators, I would like to turn to another group of important measures in Bill C-21 related to reducing firearm-related family violence and self-harm. Statistics show that victims of intimate partner violence are about five times more likely to be killed if a firearm is present in a home. That’s why new red flag laws will allow courts to order the immediate removal of firearms from individuals who might be a danger to themselves or anyone else. Additionally, yellow flag laws will allow a Chief Firearms Officer to suspend an individual’s firearms licence if the Chief Firearms Officer receives information calling into question their licence eligibility.

These red and yellow flag laws have been further strengthened by recent amendments to revoke firearms licences within 24 hours of domestic or intimate partner violence and report weapons prohibition orders or protection orders to authorities within 24 hours.

The amendments also introduce a clear requirement for medical professionals to disclose information if a patient may be a danger to themselves or others with a firearm. Of course, the identity of vulnerable persons who provide information to the courts will be protected.

Let me be clear: There is no obligation for victims to use these laws. They will be there to offer additional protection.

I’d like to share a few more important statistics today.