Saskatchewan has the lowest per capita participation in Ottawa’s Assault-Style Firearms Compensation Program. Some experts predict that it will be even lower.

The most recent data from the government of Canada shows 793 guns declared in Saskatchewan as of March 19 — the fewest per capita in Canada.

“It’ll be interesting to see how many people withdraw their applications in the next day or so because we’re starting to see that across the country already, ” new firearms commissioner Blaine Beaven says.

The provincial government has also pushed back on the program by amending legislation to allow for exemptions for gun owners in Saskatchewan.

Beaven says the alternative compensation program from the province is only part of the reason gun owners are withdrawing applications.

“Anyone else who has applied, who’s not a province with an agreement or where a police agency lives with an agreement, as far as I can tell from the terms from the federal program, is not going to be compensated,” Beaven says.

Quebec is currently the only province to sign on to the program.

The Saskatchewan government is also pushing back on the federal government’s plan to use local law enforcement to remove the now-banned firearms in the coming months.

Get breaking National news

Get breaking Canada news delivered to your inbox as it happens so you won’t miss a trending story.

“There’s no interest on the part of municipal police forces to engage in this type of work. They’re focused on actual crime fighting, actual work that will enhance public safety, not this type of work,” Beaven says.

Saskatchewan Wildlife Federation recreational firearm community chairperson Gilbert White feels the program is broken beyond repair after spending days trying to help a friend apply.

“This gentleman, who wanted to turn in a JR-15, has no idea if he’s registered for a compensation program or not, because you’re just not responding to him at all,” White says.

Of the 136,000 assault-style firearms the federal government expected, 47,000 have been declared across Canada.

Ahead of the program opening, federal Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree was caught on an audio recording casting doubt on the program, suggesting it could gain Liberal votes in Quebec.

“I guess we’re an easy target, if you want to put it that way. And the government is willing to, you know, do that for political gain,” White says.

Some national firearms advocates agree with White.

“The government never actually had the intention of collecting firearms from people. The bans were largely political, and the minister admitted as much,” Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights (CCFR) spokesperson Tracey Wilson says.

The CCFR says it will be moving forward with a Supreme Court of Canada appeal challenging the federal government’s use of an order-in-council to prohibit the more than 2,500 recently banned firearms.

“I think a lot of people, myself included, would like to see the program scrapped,” Saskatoon gun owner Kendrick Walker says.

Walker, like many gun owners, is frustrated with what he says is a lack of information from different levels of government throughout the program’s launch.

“There is a little bit of a grey area there. We’re still waiting to see precisely what that means in terms of compensation. The federal government is saying one thing, the province is saying another,” Walker says.

Global News reached out to the Ministry of Public Safety for comment on the program closing but did not hear back in time for publication.

In a press conference, Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree addressed the pushback from provinces.

“Those who are eligible and those enrolled in the program, will be able to seek compensation for their prohibited firearms that they will be willing to turn over to police. Having said that, it’s regrettable that both the government of Saskatchewan (and) Alberta have chosen this path,” said Anandasangaree.

In a separate press conference, Prime Minister Mark Carney addressed the gap in the federal government’s expectations and declared firearms.

“We’ll evaluate the full program and next steps. There’s time between now and when the law fully takes effect later in the fall,” says Carney.

There is still a grace period for gun owners to surrender their guns. The fallout for those who don’t comply after the Oct. 31 deadline remains to be seen on a province-to-province basis.

&copy 2026 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.

The Supreme Court of Canada agreed on Thursday to hear a challenge of a Liberal government ban on firearms models and variants it considers fit for the battlefield, not hunting and sport shooting.

The government banned the use, sale and importation of 1,500 firearms models and variants in May 2020. The move was generally applauded by gun control advocates as a first step toward removing firearms used in mass shootings from circulation.

In October 2023, a Federal Court judge dismissed a request to strike down the ban as unlawful and beyond the scope of the powers delegated to the federal cabinet.

A not-for-profit advocacy organization, firearm owners, businesses, hunters, and recreational and sport shooters appealed the ruling.

In April 2025, the Federal Court of Appeal rejected that challenge, saying the Federal Court delivered “thorough and persuasive” reasons.

The list of guns outlawed by the Liberal government has grown to more than 2,500 varieties of what it calls assault-style firearms.

Government officials say some 19,000 unique makes and models of non-restricted firearms remain available for hunting or sport shooting in Canada.

2:24
Gun control: Canada adding 179 types of firearms to prohibited weapon list

The Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights said in a statement it was “thrilled” with the court’s decision to hear the appeal.

Get daily National news

Get daily Canada news delivered to your inbox so you’ll never miss the day’s top stories.

“This is a pivotal moment not only for the hundreds of thousands of licensed firearms owners affected by the ban, but for the rule of law and the proper limits of executive power in our democracy,” the statement said.

The group said its challenge is focused on questions about the government’s authority to make decisions through orders issued by the federal cabinet.

The coalition says such orders are “executive instruments meant for implementation and administration, not for enacting broad, permanent changes that affect thousands of law-abiding citizens and ban billions in private property.”

A spokesperson for Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Prohibited firearms and devices must be disposed of — or deactivated — by the end of an amnesty period on Oct. 30.

The government is implementing a buyback program that offers gun owners money for turning in or permanently deactivating firearms.

9:22
Gun buyback under scrutiny as costs and impact are debated

Individuals have until the end of the month to declare interest.

A key element of the case before the Federal Court of Appeal was whether the government adhered to a provision of the law forbidding it from using regulations to outlaw a firearm if it deems the gun “reasonable for use in Canada for hunting or sporting purposes.”

Writing on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel, Court of Appeal Chief Justice Yves de Montigny said he was not persuaded that the government erred in considering public safety in assessing whether the prohibited firearms were reasonable for use in Canada for such purposes.

“It may well be that, from the sole perspective of a sensible hunter or sportsman, it makes no sense to ban firearms that are well suited or even specifically designed for hunting or sport purposes,” he wrote.

The federal cabinet is the most senior policy-making body in government and, because of its role at the apex of the executive branch, is best situated to develop government policy and to assess the public interest, de Montigny added.

“Surely, the inherent danger that some firearms pose to public safety because of their lethality and their ability to injure or kill a large number of people in a short period of time, the fact that they have been used in mass shootings in Canada and abroad, the fact that they are disproportionate for civilian use, and the increasing demand for measures to address gun violence are all valid considerations in determining whether their use is reasonable for hunting and sporting purposes,” he wrote.

— With files from Anja Karadeglija

&copy 2026 The Canadian Press

People opposed to the federal government’s firearms ban and compensation program are planning a rally Saturday in Quebec City to accuse Ottawa of unfairly singling out law-abiding gun owners.

The event will come about six weeks into the sign-up period for gun owners to declare interest in a federal program offering them money for turning in or permanently deactivating firearms that Ottawa says belong only on the battlefield.

The rally outside the Quebec national assembly also will take place just weeks after a mass shooting in British Columbia, which has led to some criticism of the timing.

Since May 2020, the Liberal government has outlawed about 2,500 types of firearms, including the AR-15 and the Ruger Mini-14.

Prohibited firearms and devices must be disposed of — or deactivated — by the end of an amnesty period on Oct. 30.

The National Firearms Association says disarming law-abiding Canadians in the hope that criminals will somehow be affected is ideological scapegoating, not public safety policy.

2:50
Doug Ford slams Carney’s gun buyback program, says bail reform needed instead

“Quebec is central to what happens next. Participation here will shape the future of this program nationwide. That is why numbers matter. Presence matters. Visibility matters,” the organization said in a statement posted on its website in support of the rally.

“If you believe lawful citizens should not be scapegoated — be there.”

An ad for the event featuring the firearms association’s logo reads, “If Quebec says no — it ends here.”

Another poster promoting the rally includes the slogan in French, “Our arms are not for sale.”

Get breaking National news

For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.

Online messages indicate participants will arrive by bus from about two dozen Quebec communities.

“Quebec is ground zero for the gun grab,” Tracey Wilson of the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights posted on social media. “We MUST stand united with our friends and fellow gunnies in La Belle Province!! Come join me and thousands of my closest friends as we rally against the gun grab this Saturday.”

One gun rights advocate set up a GoFundMe page with the aim of raising $11,000 for the event.

9:22
Gun buyback under scrutiny as costs and impact are debated

Gun control advocates, meanwhile, question the wisdom of holding such a rally just weeks after the mass shooting in Tumbler Ridge, B.C., that claimed nine lives.

The event, which promises flags, music and food trucks, is “incredibly insensitive and disrespectful at a time when survivors, family members, the community of Tumbler Ridge, as well as countless other Canadians are experiencing trauma and grief,” gun control group PolySeSouvient said in a media statement.

The rally’s timing, its stated justifications and the celebratory atmosphere being promoted will be viewed as a slap in the face by mass shooting survivors and anyone whose life has been forever changed by easy access to guns, said PolySeSouvient.

“It is shameful that in the wake of this tragedy, the gun lobby remains steadfast in its efforts to prevent the successful removal from circulation of civilian versions of military weapons that are typically used in mass shootings and that have been prohibited for public safety reasons,” the group said.

In a video message posted to the organization’s website, National Firearms Association general manager Ginger Fournier says gun owners in Quebec are hunters, sport shooters, farmers, collectors, Indigenous community members and everyday Canadians who comply with licensing, training and background checks and secure storage requirements.

“They are not the problem and they should not be treated as one,” Fournier says.

In announcing the program last month, Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree said the goal is to target only “firearms designed for war, for killing people. They have no place in our communities.”

Federal officials say some 19,000 firearm makes and models remain legally available for hunting and sport shooting in Canada.

Almost $250 million has been earmarked to compensate people who take part in the program. The government has said it expects the money will cover compensation for about 136,000 firearms.

1:31
Federal gun buyback program launches, drawing mixed reaction

Owners of outlawed guns have until the end of March to declare interest.

The government says that as of last Friday, gun owners had reported more than 32,000 prohibited firearms. That includes 13,219 from Ontario, 7,368 from British Columbia, 5,539 from Quebec and 2,730 from Alberta.

“I would consider it a good start,” said Simon Lafortune, a spokesman for Anandasangaree.

The Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights says the number of guns eligible for compensation is much higher than the federal government suggests. It says that, for example, there are more than two million firearms in Canada that were previously non-restricted and are now prohibited as a result of recent bans.

Anandasangaree recently indicated the government stands by its figure and said that “a range of misinformation” has come from the gun lobby.

Quebec supports the federal compensation program but a number of other provinces and territories — including Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador — have snubbed the plan.

The RCMP and Quebec’s provincial police force will play key roles in collecting firearms eligible for compensation, but several other police services have said they will not help with the program.

&copy 2026 The Canadian Press

The deadly mass shooting in Tumbler Ridge, B.C., has sparked questions about Canada’s firearm seizure regulations and so-called “red flag” laws that allow the removal of guns in a case of mental health concerns.

The RCMP has provided few details so far about the firearms used in the shooting and how the shooter, identified by RCMP as 18-year-old Jesse Van Rootselaar, acquired them.

Officials said Wednesday that firearms were seized from the family home “a couple of years ago” but were later returned after a successful court petition to get them back.

It is not yet clear if those firearms included the ones used in Tuesday’s shooting, which RCMP confirmed were a long gun and a modified handgun.

“Police have attended that residence in the past, approximately a couple years ago, where firearms were seized under the Criminal Code,” Dep. Comm. Dwayne McDonald, the B.C. RCMP commanding officer, said in a media briefing.

“I can say that at a later point in time, the lawful owner of those firearms petitioned for those firearms to be returned, and they were.”

2:14
Tumbler Ridge shooting: 5 teens, teacher dead as RCMP identify shooter

McDonald added that the shooter had a firearms licence that expired “I believe” in 2024 and did not have any firearms currently registered. He also said the shooter had a history of mental health issues and was known to police.

“Police had attended that residence on multiple occasions over the past several years, dealing with concerns of mental health with respect to our suspect,” he said.

“I can say that on different occasions the suspect was apprehended for assessment and follow-up” under B.C.’s Mental Health Act, he added, and had been taken to hospital “in some circumstances.”

B.C. Premier David Eby told reporters Wednesday evening he had “a lot of questions” when asked about the seizure and return of firearms from the home.

“I know the people of Tumbler Ridge have a lot of questions. I’m sure the families have a lot of questions,” he said.

Section 117.04 of the Criminal Code allows for the seizure of firearms by a peace officer, even without a warrant, if there are “reasonable grounds” to believe a person poses a safety risk to themselves or others by possessing those firearms.

Get breaking National news

For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.

If any firearms, weapons or firearms licences are seized, a judge will have to review the evidence behind the seizure at a hearing within 30 days. The judge will then determine whether the items should be forfeited or destroyed, or issue a prohibition order that forbids the person in question from possession for up to five years.

The previous Liberal government in 2023 passed Bill C-21, which updated Canada’s “red flag” laws to allow anyone — including civilians, such as a family member — to apply to a court for an emergency prohibition order if there is a safety concern. The applicant must prove with evidence that a person poses a risk to themself or anyone else.

0:53
Canada’s firearms legislation: Proposed handgun bill to include ‘red flag laws,’ Mendicino says

That order, if issued by a judge, directs the removal of the person’s firearms, firearm licence and any other weapons for up to 30 days. A hearing may also be set to determine if a longer-term prohibition of up to five years should be issued.

An application can also be made for an emergency limitations on access order, which would direct a person living with someone under a prohibition order to store their firearms in another location for up to 30 days. A longer-term order may also be considered in these cases.

Firearms may also be seized if police determine firearms are being improperly stored, or if an unlicensed member of a household has access to a gun safe in the home, among “so many other factors,” lawyers and firearms instructors told Global News.

“If there’s a continued safety concern, the police can intervene once again,” said Rob Dhanu, a defence lawyer and former federal Crown prosecutor based in Abbotsford, B.C.

“It’s all about balancing … public safety concerns with the individual rights of Canadian citizens.”

Prohibition orders can be appealed under the Criminal Code, which requires a hearing where the person must prove there is no longer a danger posed by themself or someone else in the home.

In a mental health scenario, the firearms may be returned if “you can prove that … the individual is now medicated properly and there haven’t been any incidents or events for the last couple of years,” said Dan Jones, who chairs the justice studies program at NorQuest College in Edmonton and is a retired 25-year veteran of the Edmonton Police Service.

“The other one would be potentially if the person who owned the firearms and the person who had the issues around mental health … no longer lived at that address. That’s another way to get them back…. So it’s dependent upon the situation. Every situation is going to have a little bit of a difference, but also they’re going to have some similarities when it comes to ensuring the safety of the individual, to people in the home, and people in public.”

10:32
Mass shootings and mental health stigma

However, lawyers say judges are very cautious when it comes to mental health cases because it can be difficult to predict how people will behave in the future.

“In my experience, it’s very rare for somebody to get the firearms back, regardless of where they were seized,” said Jerry Steele, a Vancouver-based defence lawyer who has experience arguing weapons cases.

“Particularly in youth cases, it’s very, very rare to see those firearms return.”

B.C. MLA Elenore Sturko, an independent who previously served as an RCMP officer, told reporters Thursday she has questions about why the firearms were returned to the home of the Tumbler Ridge shooter.

“It is someone’s legal right to make an application to have those firearms returned,” she said. “So for what reason they were returned, what arguments were made, who those firearms belong to and whether or not they were the firearms used in the commission of this horrible attack, those are questions that need to be answered.”

Sturko added that the confirmation of multiple mental health interventions by police may require B.C. Attorney General Nikki Sharma to seek changes to the Criminal Code, particularly Section 117.04.

“If this is a law that needs changing and we need to toughen up the ability for someone who potentially poses a risk to have firearms returned to their home, she needs to go to Ottawa and have this law toughened up,” she said.

Jones, however, said it’s difficult to see where the law could be strengthened further.

“You can never 100 per cent say something is not going to go wrong, and I think that’s [true] in any situation where there are firearms in a home,” he said.

“There is always potential, right? Because firearms are firearms. And that is why we have strict firearms laws.”

— with files from Global’s Jillian Piper and Rumina Daya