A growing chorus of opposition is rising against the federal government’s gun “buyback” program, with prominent political figures and law enforcement agencies questioning its effectiveness and practicality.
Ontario Premier Doug Ford voiced strong concerns, stating he’s never encountered public demand to target law-abiding gun owners. Instead, he consistently hears from residents expressing fears for their safety, a sentiment he believes the federal program ignores.
Ford passionately argued for a shift in focus, urging the government to prioritize addressing violent crime through measures like bail reform and reinstating mandatory sentences for gun-related offenses. He emphasized support for responsible gun owners, like hunters, who adhere to legal regulations.
The Ontario Provincial Police have already declined to participate in the buyback initiative, and the Toronto Police Service, the largest force in the country, has followed suit. Their reasoning centers on the need to concentrate resources on combating illegal firearms and cross-border smuggling.
Toronto Police officials stated they were asked to participate but found no “operationally viable plan” presented by the federal government. They will continue to collaborate on public safety measures that yield tangible results.
Manitoba is also distancing itself from the program, despite being offered financial incentives. Premier Wab Kinew expressed skepticism about the program’s efficiency and potential for success, questioning the wisdom of taking on administrative burdens and costs.
Kinew articulated a clear preference for initiatives directly targeting criminals and reducing street violence, arguing this buyback program appears unlikely to achieve that goal. He believes it will create more problems than it solves.
With Quebec standing as the primary partner and the federal minister acknowledging limited functionality in Alberta and Saskatchewan, the program’s claim to be “national” is being heavily scrutinized. A small-scale pilot project in Cape Breton, yielding only 25 firearms, casts further doubt on its potential impact.
The program, estimated to cost approximately $750 million, is increasingly viewed as a politically motivated exercise with limited prospects for improving public safety. Critics suggest it prioritizes optics and appealing to a specific voter base over genuine crime reduction strategies.
