East Elgin Sportsmen's Association

06/18/2026

𝐆𝐨𝐯'𝐭 𝐃𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐯𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐮𝐥𝐭 𝐨𝐧 𝐂-𝟐𝟏, 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐜𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐭 𝐦𝐞𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫, 𝐬𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐠𝐮𝐧 𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠, 𝐛𝐚𝐧 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐠𝐮𝐧 𝐬𝐚𝐥𝐞𝐬, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐠𝐮𝐧 𝐨𝐰𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐦𝐨𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐦𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐳𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬 "𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞"
𝐷𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑒𝑙 𝐹𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑟, 𝐶𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑏𝑟𝑒 𝑀𝑎𝑔𝑎𝑧𝑖𝑛𝑒
𝗝𝘂𝗻𝗲 𝟭𝟮, 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟲

Recently released government documents surrounding consultation on Bill C-21 indicate that stakeholders who consulted on the bill sought to ban online firearm sales, end target shooting with handguns and claimed: “mass shooters who modified their mags were legal gun owners, and it’s common knowledge that gun enthusiasts do this all the time.”

In a document entitled “Preliminary questions re Bill C-21 and other provisions,” a group of stakeholders identified as Polysesouvient, then headed up by current Liberal MP Nathalie Provost, as well as Danforth Families and unnamed others provided former Minister of Public Safety Marco Mendicino with a series of comments on various aspects of Bill C-21, in preparation for a technical briefing on the bill held between the aforementioned stakeholder groups and Ministry of Public Safety staff. Here are some excerpts from the criticisms levelled by these identified stakeholders around what they perceived to be C-21’s shortfalls:

Regarding the handgun freeze: “Authorized businesses with proper storage (i.e., retailers) could continue to import and sell handguns to other businesses (e.g., gunsmiths, museums, valuable goods carriers), law enforcement, defence personnel and exempted individuals. Can gun clubs own and (especially) acquire handguns that stay on site and can be sued [sic] by the public? Can they accumulate a million handguns from current owners before they pass away, ensuring that handgun target practice never dies out? What about new businesses that will pop up to purchase all the existing hanguns [sic]?”

Regarding the provision to make it an offence to alter a cartridge magazine to exceed its lawful capacity and allow for wiretaps for this new offence: “Why is this specific measure in this section? Nothing specifically related to gangs: In fact the mass shooters who modified their mags were legal owners, and it’s common knowledge that gun enthusiasts do this all the time.”

Regarding making it an offence for businesses to promote violence in fi****ms marketing and sales: “Has anyone ever done this? Who [sic] not do something that will make a difference, like no ads on the internet, or not [sic] online sales?”

Regarding the requirement for a person to present a valid fi****ms license to import non-prohibited ammunition for fi****ms: “No additional measure to require PAC to purchase magazines?”

Concerning Insight into Ignorant Influence

This technical briefing is the only reference to a detailed outside consultation included in a 435-page response to a request for “documents regarding the proposal and development of amendments to Bill C-21.” It was authored before the bill’s second reading, meaning it is ostensibly the only such consultation that occurred as government prepared to propose amendments, when the bill passed to the committee phase. This is somewhat surprising, given C-21 combined with the related ban on millions of long guns instituted by Order in Council on May 1, 2020, formed a cornerstone of the most sweeping gun control measures in Canadian history.

In other words, the sole consultation the government participated in during their work on the contentious bill involved individuals who confused the defunct Fi****ms Acquisition Certificate (FAC) required to buy a firearm in Canada 40 years ago with the Possession and Acquisition License (PAL) program that replaced it in the early 90s, and spuriously tied legal gun ownership to mass shootings in order to make an entirely baseless (and false) claim that gun owners illegally modify their magazines “all the time.”

Taken alongside their advocacy for ending handgun target shooting entirely, a goal that is entirely divorced from any semblance of improving public safety, and banning mail-order gun sales in a country where online shops provide a literal lifeline to rural property owners and remote subsistence hunters, indicates that their “consultation” had nothing to do with providing feedback with the aim of reducing gun violence, and everything to do with simply advancing an anti-gun agenda.

And given the politically-driven nature of the Trudeau-era gun reforms, ranging from questions about the government’s attempts to publicize the illegal fi****ms used in Portapique to further their political agenda to the years’ worth of statistical evidence that neither the gun bans nor C-21 have had any beneficial impact on the rate of crime committed with a firearm in Canada, that Public Safety Canada only sought feedback from a group that buttressed the Liberals’ political goals with misinformed, false, and misleading rhetoric rather than meaningful evidence is clear evidence that the gun reforms enacted by the Trudeau government are political in nature, not practical. In short, Public Safety Canada sought out those who shared the Liberals’ political aims in order to justify their gun reforms, rather than any actual expertise that could ensure new gun legislation would reduce gun crime.

It is also worth noting that Nathalie Provost, then the leader of one of the most prominent groups identified as contributing to this expose of ignorance, now sits at the Cabinet table as the Minister of State for Nature and has repeatedly appeared alongside Minister of Public Safety Gary Anandasangaree during announcements regarding gun policy. Simply put, her involvement in this farce of a consultation, and the comments she contributed to that are contained within, should rationally disqualify her from any involvement in gun policy, as her obvious bias and absolute ignorance of gun laws, policy, and lawful use of fi****ms in Canada have been quite literally documented by Public Safety Canada above.

Finally, and perhaps most worryingly, this consultation indicates that the Public Safety Canada staff associated with gun policy seem to serve to further the political ends of elected officials rather than the public. One expects politicians to work towards the advancement and popularization of their political goals, but one also expects Canada’s public service to ensure that those goals are put through a filter of precisely that: Public service. But as is plainly evident, that did not occur here, and it should lead many to wonder where the line between politicians and the public service is drawn.

-

𝘿𝙪𝙚 𝙩𝙤 𝙇𝙞𝙗𝙚𝙧𝙖𝙡/𝙉𝘿𝙋 𝙇𝙚𝙜𝙞𝙨𝙡𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣, 𝘾-𝟏𝟖 𝙞𝙣 𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙪𝙡𝙖𝙧, 𝙬𝙚 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙪𝙣𝙖𝙗𝙡𝙚 𝙩𝙤 𝙥𝙤𝙨𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙞𝙧𝙚 𝙖𝙧𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙡𝙚, 𝙨𝙤 𝙬𝙚 𝙧𝙚𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙙 𝙢𝙚𝙢𝙗𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙨𝙚𝙚𝙠 𝙤𝙪𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙖𝙧𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙡𝙚 𝒊𝒏 𝒊𝒕𝒔 𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒓𝒆𝒕𝒚 𝙤𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝒂𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒆𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒆𝒅 𝒘𝒆𝒃𝒔𝒊𝒕𝒆, 𝙤𝙧 𝙛𝙞𝙣𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙡𝙞𝙣𝙠 𝙤𝙣 𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝑿 𝙤𝙧 𝙇𝙞𝙣𝙠𝙚𝙙𝙞𝙣 𝒔𝒐𝒄𝒊𝒂𝒍 𝒎𝒆𝒅𝒊𝒂 𝒂𝒄𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒕𝒔.
-
X.com/CanadasNFA
Linkedin.com/company/national-fi****ms-association

06/16/2026

"‘There’s no need in Canada for civilians to be involved in such activities, and they are very much at odds with Canadian values and culture.’ — Wendy Cukier, CBC News, June 12, 2026

We could not disagree more.

Handgun sport shooting is a proud Canadian tradition—rooted in discipline, safety, and community. Our athletes train under some of the strictest regulations in the world, and their achievements on the national and international stage are a testament to their dedication and the values Canadians truly share: responsibility, fairness, and excellence.

Legal sport shooters in Canada are vetted, closely monitored, and passionate about safety. There is no evidence linking our community to the criminal misuse of fi****ms. Instead, we build camaraderie, personal growth, and a sense of belonging—values that run deep in Canadian culture from coast to coast.

To suggest our community stands "at odds" with Canadian values is not only wrong, it erases the thousands of law-abiding citizens who find meaning, challenge, and achievement in this sport.

We call on all Canadians to look beyond the rhetoric and see the truth: Shooting sports are part of our heritage, and our values are as Canadian as they come.

Source: CBC News, ‘Northern Alberta sport shooters say pending handgun ban targets wrong people’, June 12, 2026.

06/13/2026

Gun confiscation efforts are falling flat. Despite millions budgeted and lofty goals, only a tiny fraction of banned fi****ms have been surrendered. The public isn’t buying what the government’s selling — and neither are we.

06/13/2026

06/11/2026

A recent CityNews story claims that “the vast majority of crime guns traced by the RCMP in 2023 and 2024 came from within Canada.” On the surface, that sounds alarming—and it’s already being used to justify more restrictions on honest Canadian gun owners.

But here’s what they aren’t telling you:

The RCMP’s tracing data only covers the guns they personally track—mostly from rural areas and mainly long guns (rifles and shotguns). Their own report admits this does NOT include most crime guns in Ontario and Quebec, where the majority of Canada’s handgun crime happens.

Let’s talk about the real facts:
According to Toronto Police, 88% of the crime guns they seized in 2024 were traced directly to the United States. The New York Times reports that 91% of handguns used in urban Canadian crimes are smuggled in from the US—not from Canadian gun owners.

The RCMP numbers are dominated by rural guns, often stolen or involved in non-violent offences. Meanwhile, the guns used in actual shootings and gang crimes in our cities are handguns, smuggled across the border.

Don’t let selective stats mislead you.
The real issue isn’t Canadian hunters, farmers, or sport shooters—it’s organized crime and cross-border smuggling. Policies that target law-abiding citizens do nothing to stop the real source of urban gun violence.

We urge Canadians and policymakers to focus on the facts:
• Border security, not more restrictions on legal gun owners, is the answer.
• Let’s stop blaming the people who follow the rules, and start targeting the criminals who don’t.
•
— Canadian Shooting Sports Association

06/09/2026

: The Amnesty Period for the ASFCP has been extended out 90 days from the upcoming decision by the Supreme Court of Canada (CCFR v Canada)

READ HERE: https://www.canada.ca/en/public-safety-canada/news/2026/06/fi****ms-compensation-program-for-businesses-closes--amnesty-period-extended-due-to-the-supreme-court-of-canada-process.html

06/09/2026

🚨 Firearm owners: Mobile collection units are now operating under the federal assault-style fi****ms confiscation program for those who registered for voluntary surrender. The amnesty is in effect for all firearm owners until October 30, 2026.

Hold the line. Stay informed, know your rights, and keep watching for updates as the Supreme Court prepares to review the May 1, 2020, Order-in-Council. Stand strong and united—your voice matters.

06/03/2026

Why Did Gun Control Start in 1892? Let's set the scene: Canada in the late 1800s was changing fast. The population was booming, the railroads were being built, and cities like Toronto, Montreal, and Winnipeg were growing at a pace that brought new opportunities—and new challenges. With more people...