Breaking down Bill C-21: what amendments to gun legislation could mean for Inuit
Gun control expert Noah Schwartz says proposed amendments may do more harm than good
A crowd of people in Iqaluit gather around to welcome a local walrus harvest in October 2020. (File photo by Dustin Patar)
Nunavummiut will have a chance in the new year to tell a parliamentary committee about the potential impacts of the federal Liberal government’s gun control bill, says Nunavut MP Lori Idlout.
“I would love to receive names of people (men and women) from Nunavut to testify about the potential impacts of the amendments,” Idlout said in a Dec. 19 tweet.
Critics say recent amendments to the proposed law made by the House of Commons public safety and national security committee could ban some of the rifles and shotguns used by hunters, including Inuit and other Indigenous Peoples.
Those recent amendments to the government’s proposed gun control legislation, Bill C-21, are likely to affect hunters across the country, according to University of Fraser Valley assistant professor and gun control expert Noah Schwartz.
Bill C-21 proposes certain long guns — rifles and shotguns — be added to the list of banned firearms, including those that can accept magazines with a capacity of more than five rounds and semi-automatic firearms that don’t have detachable magazines.
Schwartz, who interviewed and surveyed over 16,000 Canadian gun owners while working on his book On Target: Gun Culture, Storytelling, and the NRA, said the firearms the Trudeau government wants to ban are used widely by Canadian hunters, including Inuit hunters across Inuit Nunangat.
Noah Schwartz, an assistant professor at the University of the Fraser Valley and a gun control expert, said amendments to Bill C-21 introduced by a Liberal MP will impact hunters across Inuit Nunangat because of the kinds of guns it is looking to ban. (Photo courtesy of Bryan Gagnon)
He said the proposed amendments will do more harm than good for two main reasons: many people in remote and northern communities may continue using these firearms because they are unaware of changes to legislation, and the amendments fail to address socioeconomic factors that are leading to the rise of gun violence across the country.
“We’re opening up a lot of people in Canada — the most vulnerable people in Canadian society — to a lot of potential danger with this [legislation],” Schwartz told Nunatsiaq News.
“The rising crime that we’ve seen in the past few years is being driven by social factors [such as] the widening income gap in Canada, the lack of support for young people, especially young people in racialized communities.”
Idlout also said New Democrats in Parliament were unaware of the last-minute amendments introduced by a Liberal member of the safety and security committee, and will “not support any amendments that disrespect treaty rights and the rights of Indigenous peoples.”
“I am taking these concerns very seriously. My party is taking these concerns very seriously,” she said in a Dec. 12 statement. “Rifles are not just for hunting, they ensure our safety from predatory animals, such as polar bears.”
Idlout voted in favour of C-21 at the second reading stage in June — before the committee added the controversial amendments.
“There is still time to make this right and we will keep working to make sure any amendments to the bill will not ban guns primarily used for hunting and for the safety of northerners.”
In Nunavut, NDP MP Lori Idlout said the parliamentary committee will be studying amendments to Bill C-21 in the new year and invited Nunavummiut who are interested in sharing their concerns. (Screenshot courtesy of ParlVU)
Nunavut Premier P.J. Akeeagok said the Government of Nunavut has not reached a position for or against the proposed amendments, but through an analysis found the changes will have a greater impact on Nunavut hunters than the previous version of the bill.
In an emailed statement, he said certain semi-automatic rifles that would be banned under the proposed amendments are used for harvesting seals and other game. In addition, shotguns with a high capacity are commonly used for hunting ptarmigan and other birds.
“The Government of Nunavut has expressed to the Government of Canada that firearms regulations must respect the rights of Inuit hunters,” he said in the email.
“The only way to ensure this bill won’t impact Inuit hunting practices is to consult and engage with Inuit and the territory on this issue.”
Akeeagok said the GN is waiting for further information from Public Safety Canada on a summary of and rationale for which firearms used by Nunavut hunters would be impacted by the amendments.
Sylvie Bérubé, the Bloc Québécois MP who represents Abitibi–Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, said a majority of people in her riding are hunters and are concerned about the implications of the bill, although she has not had the opportunity to engage with them. Bérubé also voted in favour of the bill at second reading.
“We’ve had a very busy session. But we’ve received lots of comments from hunters who are very concerned, both in person and over the phone,” she said. “I want to reach out to more people once I’m back in the riding at the end of the session.”
Bérubé added it’s too soon for her to confirm if she is in favour of the bill or not, but that the committee studying the bill is scheduled to hear from experts like different associations and hunters, which she hopes will help.
“It’s very important to have all the input from the experts and Indigenous communities before going forward with the bill. But it’s still too early to tell.”
The bill is all around bad news for hunters! Guns have become an integral part of our culture as Inuit, they provide protection from WILD GAME and soften the blow on food security! Imagine trying to scare off a bear with a single shot! We will have to shoot to kill! No more warning shots for bears. Also, the buy back won’t replace our much needed hunting rifles, compensation must be at full replacement value! Where is Kotierk, Tattuinee, Akesuk and Greenley?
We don’t have the kind of leadership in Nunavut your comment is looking for. Our Premier’s lukewarm comments here are a let down, but the kind of cowardly response to any serious issue we have come to expect.
Yeah where are these people? I guess if the person used a gun while bothering them ,then they may make a presence .
, what a waste of a vote for this kind of rhetoric ! I think Ottawa is a little closer and cheaper than going to France we are more hunters than a single person to help instead kotiek is nowhere on this subject what a shame we have these people for leaders only complainers .
When I read sweeping statements from our MP I am forced to ask exactly which rifles and shotguns she is talking about?
Shotguns with more than a five cartridge magazine are not needed for protection from Polar Bears for an example. So please give us the list not just sweeping generalizations.
Bert, have you experienced a polar bear approaching your camp? What about an attack? Its not only about protecting the human but also the bear with warning shots. Some bears need 10 even 20 shots before turning away. Most of the amendment lists even single shot rifles, bolt action hunting rifles and small caliber arms. Don’t forget this bill targets law abiding citizens that are expected to voluntarily give up their guns for a fraction of their replacement value. Just because you’re a liberal supporter doesn’t mean everything they do is right!
This law does not prohibit only shotguns which can hold more than five rounds – it prohibits shotguns capable of accepting a magazine which holds greater than five rounds. This is a significant difference, and the prohibition affects many, many sporting shotguns. For example, the Browning Auto -5 introduced some 120 years ago, with over a million sold, has a 5 round magazine. But it can be equipped with one that gives a capacity of 9 or 10 rounds.
You obviously don’t live near polar bears. You shouldn’t comment on something you know nothing about.
Isn’t NDP a Liberal with orange colour? Minority Liberals are in power thanks to NDP.
First of all, the shotguns in question don’t have ‘high-capacity magazines’. They have factory standard ones.
Ones that were previously legal.
Second of all, the skyrocketing crime in the South, especially Toronto, won’t be affected by this. It’s a knee-jerk reaction from the GTA as the total lack of punishment for crime (including Mendicino’s removal of all mandatory minimum sentences for gun crimes) makes the justice system more of a suggestion.
Mendicino was too scared to even pick up a little .22 on a range, as shown on TVO. Why is a man who has never fired a gun in charge of regulating them?
This is a recurring theme with our government, so many decisions based on the disproportionate weight of emotion and optics. It’s not principles that animate their thinking, it is the illusions created by appearance.
Where is Carey Price?
Who are and where are the voters who voted for these liberal/ndp alleged legislators? YOU pit them in power to do this.
This legislation is not about public safety. It is about confiscation for the sake of confiscation. Of course it is going to affect licensed, law abiding people. (And not just Inuit). It is not directed at criminals and criminal activity.
I don’t care about guns at all and I had to look up who Carey Price is. But this is a terrible bill.
All this is going to accomplish is pushing in a Con government. I guess we’re due for a few big steps backwards.
100%. I have heard many liberal voting gun owners saying they wil vote Conservative for the first time in their lives because of this bill. They were not happy with just a hand gun freeze. I have read the list on the ammendment. A 1908 Brazilian mauser is on the list, it’s a world war one era bolt action long gun. The persons who made the list , want to ban everything.
I was one of those fools who voted liberal. I should have known better.
The government is doing their best to remove all firearms from everyone who has legally purchased, registered and follow the laws. Banning any firearm or freezing all registered handguns does absolutely nothing to curb violence anywhere. Least of all nothern canada, when in the past 50 years have we heard about a car jacker in any i uit
This is a continuation of my original comment
Sorry!..in any Inuit community. The whole thing is designed to remove all Canadian firearms period! In the end any all money used to buy back legal firearms means that much less money to use towards fighting actual crime in Canada ??
Has anyone heard yet who compiled this list of guns to be banned? It was a last-minute amendment to the bill. Who compiled it, based on what principles? I doubt very much indeed that it was put together by MPs or vetted by any knowledgeable hunters. It is possible that it was put together by clerks – from what departments?
It definitely should not be implemented until it has been examined, gun by gun, by expert hunters and gun experts.
Hunters are normally responsible. The problem is not the guns and rifles. But having guns and rifles coming freely at the borders that is where our government should put money and manpower. Some people drove 5heir vehicle and killed people. Are they going to banned vehicle because it could be considered as a weapon.
The whole point is that with the red and yellow flag laws, the evergreen portion and so much more of this Bill is it just has one purpose. That is to eliminate all firearms from private ownership. Because violent crimes are not effected by failed gun control measures. Never have and never will be. The three “minority parties are ganging up on the Conservatives to try and re-write Canadian culture and heritage, Shame on them . Clay
The list was compiled by the coalition for gun control, obviously
Ms Idlout needs to review the Nunavut Land Claim Agreement. In the NLCA, the Inuit acknowledged the Federal Government’s firearm control program. It might be a bit late to be talking about treaty rights.
Semi-automatic rifles save lives in the case of polar bear attacks. We are able to fire more consecutive warning shots to scare off the bear, potentially saving the life of the bear. If the bear is not scared off by warning shots, and is charging to attack, having a semi-automatic gun allows you to shoot while maintaining your aim on the animal. If you have to use a bolt-action you must take the gun out of a firing position to reload, and then return to an aiming and firing position. This is time you do not have when you are being charged by an aggressive bear. This legislation as drafted will increase increase fatalities for both bears and Nunavummiut.
Banning guns used by law-abiding gun owners will do nothing to reduce violence. This is pure politics, and what the government is doing with this sweeping ban on hunting rifles is simply continued colonialism. Where is the action to stop illegal firearms from being smuggled into the country? That’s the cause of gun violence – not hunting rifles.
Why is everything colonialism? Colonialism died when Canada and other commonwealth countries became sovereign nations.
It’s ‘colonialism’ because that’s a bad word, and if we say bad words people will react emotionally, and when making emotional arguments, that is exactly what we want.
There must be some sort of an exclusion clause for Nunavut.
Vote conservative next election and this bill will be repealed or significantly revised
I will vote PC for the first time in my life to get rid of this bill. They should of been happy the hand gun freeze and present laws about semi auto rifles are fair, 5 rounds max and 18.5 min. barrel lenght.
I will vote PC for the first time in my life to get rid of this bill. They should of been happy with the hand gun freeze and present laws about semi auto rifles are fair, 5 rounds max and 18.5 min. barrel lenght.
Then you would need a similar exclusion clause for every first nation the country – a logistical nightmare.
Good job nunavut Keep voting ndp and liberal who needs guns anyway?
Real rich calling for the use of firearms to protect you from wild animals when all the hunting programs up here are “Beneficiaries only”
Guess I’ll just lay down and die in Racist Nunavut.
It is an underhanded move by a government that wants to appear to be doing something positive about gun crime. ITs time someone tell them that we, Joe and Joe-Ann hunter from rural canada wish to be left alone.
If they wish to do something about gun crime in urban areas of the country,(Toronto) they need to enforce the laws that are already on the books.
when the long registration was inforce, it cost 11 million, and did nothing to make anyone safer. WE gun owners are licensed, and it is renewed every five years, along with a back ground check. If they check with all the criminals in Toronto, they will find very few are abibing by Federal firearms regulations, or could care less what laws that may be passed by parliment.
Please look to the people that are causing gun problems, not law abideing hunters of rural Canada
Gun owners do not only live in rural Canada. Many sport shooters and Hunters live in the big cities, most have not voted to support their firearms rights though in the past. Hopefully this will wake them up and we can be rid of Trudeau once and for all times. Clay
this last minute sweeping amendment to C21 was very poorly thought out
If the government wants to deal with issues around large magazines then more severely punish ownership of illegal, large magazines, illegal handguns etc. To punish hunters for having legally buying and owning a gun that has almost never been used to commit mass murder is vast overreach. If we had a similar problem to the US with mass murder then I would understand the response. Either way, this bill should only be considered conditional upon a buyback program that FULLY compensates the hunter for a replacement gun PLUS sufficient ammo to zero in the gun (2 to 3 boxes) and the costs to have a gunsmith transfer over any scope that was on the old gun. The purchase of a replacement gun is not the only cost that this bill will cause hunters!