Senate Committee — SECD — Brief — 2023-10-30_secd_c21_brief_somerset_e

SECD / Brief / 2023-10-30_secd_c21_brief_somerset_e

Senate Committees

Implica�ons of Bill C-21 for Assault Weapons and Public Mass Shoo�ngs Prepared for: Senate Standing Commitee on Na�onal Security, Defence, and Veterans Aﬀairs Prepared by: A.J. Somerset 27 Oct 2023 What is a Mass Public Shoo�ng? No universally accepted deﬁni�on of “mass shoo�ng” now exists. Various compe�ng deﬁni�ons use a number of vic�ms, typically three or four, and may apply other criteria. As a result, many diﬀerent types of incidents can be captured under the “mass shoo�ng” umbrella, which is unhelpful to understanding mass public shoo�ngs as a phenomenon.

The US Congressional Research Service deﬁnes “mass public shoo�ng” as follows: a multiple homicide incident in which four or more victims are murdered with ﬁrearms— not including the oﬀender(s)— within one event, and at least some of the murders occurred in a public location or locations in close geographical proximity (e.g., a workplace, school, restaurant, or other public settings), and the murders are not attributable to any other underlying criminal activity or commonplace circumstance (armed robbery, criminal competition, insurance fraud, argument, or romantic triangle)1 This deﬁni�on is imperfect.

An emphasis on the number of vic�ms, and the requirement that vic�ms be killed rather than wounded, excludes events that might otherwise qualify. However, the ﬁnal requirement, that the shoo�ng not be connected to underlying criminal ac�vity or commonplace circumstance, captures the crux of the phenomenon. Mass public shoo�ngs are largely deﬁned by their intent. These are mass killings targe�ng random vic�ms in public spaces, through which the killer intends to make some kind of point. That point is o�en associated with fringe or extreme ideas.

For example: • The Quebec City Mosque shoo�ng of 2017, which were mo�vated by Islamophobia; 1 Congressional Research Service, “Mass Murder with Firearms: Incidents and Vic�ms, 1999-2013.” htps://crsreports.congress.gov

• The Moncton RCMP shoo�ngs, which were mo�vated by an�-government sen�ment; and, • The Saanich shootout of 2022, which was mo�vated by an�government sen�ment, and in par�cular, by opposi�on to gun control.2 Are Mass Shoo�ngs Becoming More Common? Public mass shoo�ngs, as deﬁned above, are rare events in Canada, although they do occur. They are more common in the United States, and we can learn from the American experience. The Violence Project, based at Hamline University in St.

Paul, Minnesota, has collected data on public mass shoo�ngs as deﬁned by the Congressional Research Service, with the aim of beter understanding mass shoo�ngs and their perpetrators.3 Their data show an increase in the number of public mass shoo�ngs. Their data also show a striking increase in the number of public mass shoo�ng fatali�es, beginning a�er the expiry of the federal assault weapons ban in 2004.

Indeed, the same data show that half of the deadliest public mass shoo�ngs in the last 120 years took place in the past ten years. 4 While the increase in the total number of public mass shoo�ngs is fairly small, the increase in the number of fatali�es is striking and suggests that the growing availability of assault weapons in the US since 2004 has made public mass shoo�ngs signiﬁcantly more deadly. In Canada, public mass shoo�ngs are rare, and it is diﬃcult to draw conclusions regarding trends with great conﬁdence.

But there is no reason to believe that the trends observed in the United States do not apply in a Canadian context. Assault weapons are available in Canada, o�en as non-restricted ﬁrearms, and remain available following the 1 May 2020 regula�on which banned the AR-15 and many similar ﬁrearms.5 The ballis�c proper�es and wounding poten�al of riﬂe ammuni�on are not aﬀected by the Canada- US border; physics is physics. And Canada’s exis�ng restric�ons on riﬂe magazines are easily circumvented. What Is an Assault Weapon? The language used to describe the ﬁrearms in ques�on is conten�ous.

An assault riﬂe, as originally deﬁned, is a select-ﬁre riﬂe ﬁring an intermediate cartridge, fed by a detachable box magazine with a typical capacity of approximately 30 rounds.6 In popular usage, an assault riﬂe may also be a semi-automa�c riﬂe.7 Because this deﬁni�on is conten�ous, “assault weapon” is o�en used in its place. 2 The Moncton RCMP shoo�ngs killed three and wounded two, but otherwise ﬁt the deﬁni�on of a mass public shoo�ng.

The Saanich shootout, similarly, wounded six police oﬃcers. 3 htps://www.theviolenceproject.org 4 htps://www.theviolenceproject.org/key-ﬁndings/ 5 SOR/2020-96 6 htps://www.britannica.com/technology/assault-riﬂe 7 htps://www.merriam-webster.com/dic�onary/assault%20riﬂe

“Assault weapon” is not clearly deﬁned. Generally, it denotes a ﬁrearm with the characteris�cs of a modern military ﬁrearm such as an assault riﬂe or submachine gun, which may be semi- automa�c. The cover of the ﬁrst edi�on of the Gun Digest Book of Assault Weapons, published in 1986, uses “assault-style ﬁrearms” to refer to its subject. It might be said that assault weapons are like obscenity: we may not be able to deﬁne them, but we know what they are when we see them. This is of litle help in dra�ing legisla�on. It will be more helpful to consider the func�onal characteris�cs of the weapons in ques�on.

What Makes Assault Weapons Dangerous? Assault weapons share the following func�onal characteris�cs, which in the hands of a mass shooter, make them more dangerous than other ﬁrearms: They Are Centre-Fire Riﬂes The main determinant of a ﬁrearm’s wounding poten�al, without reference to the loca�on of the injury, is the kine�c energy of its projec�le. Centre-ﬁre cartridges vary widely in muzzle energy, from a .223 Remington (used in the standard AR-15) at about 1750-2200 joules, to a .50 BMG at up to 20,000 joules. A typical large game cartridge (.308) has a muzzle energy of 3500-3900 joules.

But any centre-riﬂe is an order of magnitude more powerful than a handgun, with muzzle energy on the order of 400-550 joules for a 9mm pistol, or a rimﬁre riﬂe such as a .22 Long Riﬂe, with muzzle energy on the order of 150 – 250 joules. 8 Gunshot wounds are far more likely to be lethal if they are inﬂicted by a centre-ﬁre riﬂe, as compared to a handgun. This is true of any riﬂe, regardless of whether it is semi-automa�c. They Are Semi-Automa�c A semi-automa�c ﬁrearm is one that uses part of the energy of each shot to automa�cally load a new cartridge from a magazine.

This is accomplished very quickly, so for prac�cal purposes, the ﬁrearm is immediately ready to ﬁre another shot. Loading a new cartridge into the chamber of a ﬁrearm that is not semi-automa�c (a repea�ng riﬂ

e) requires the shooter to operate the ac�on of the ﬁrearm manually. How quickly this can be completed depends on the skill and experience of the shooter.9 For these reasons, a semi-automa�c riﬂe has a higher rate of ﬁre than a bolt-ac�on or other manually-operated repea�ng riﬂe, in the hands of a given shooter. This is par�cularly signiﬁcant when the shooter is less skilled. 8 Muzzle energy ranges are approxima�ons based on widely available ballis�cs charts.

Ammuni�on of a given calibre may vary signiﬁcantly in muzzle energy based on the type and amount of propellant in the cartridge and the mass of the bullet itself. 9 A “repea�ng riﬂe” is any riﬂe that can load a new cartridge from a magazine, as opposed to a single-shot riﬂe.

They Accept High-Capacity Detachable Box Magazines Assault weapons are either military ﬁrearms sold for civilian use, or ﬁrearms designed to resemble and to work like military ﬁrearms. A such, they typically follow the military standard for magazines, which in the case of riﬂes is a detachable box magazine holding approximately 30 rounds. Certain older military riﬂes such as the M-14 or FN-FAL, which some authori�es classify as “batle riﬂes,” may have 20-round magazines. Box magazines allow a shooter to reload his weapon very quickly.

Even an unskilled shooter can replace a box magazine in a mater of a few seconds. Magazine capacity is signiﬁcant. The interval during which the shooter is reloading may provide an opportunity to escape the scene or to overpower the shooter.10 The more rounds a magazine holds, the more opportuni�es the shooter has to wound and kill his vic�ms before he must pause to reload. Larger capacity box magazines also form a convenient way for a shooter to carry a large volume of ammuni�on. During a major public mass shoo�ng, the shooter may ﬁre over 100 rounds.

A shooter may conveniently carry 150 rounds of ammuni�on in the form of 5 30-round magazines, simply by stuﬃng magazines in his pockets. To carry 30 5-round magazines is, obviously, signiﬁcantly less convenient. It is no accident that the world’s armies have setled on detachable box magazines with a capacity of approximately 30 rounds. And research indicates that, in high-fatality mass shoo�ngs in the United States, large capacity magazines were associated with a 62% increase in fatali�es. 11 What About Shotguns? Shotguns are capable of inﬂic�ng severe wounds when loaded with larger shot sizes.

Semi-automa�c shotguns are chieﬂy fed by tubular magazines which are permanently atached to the shotgun and which must be reloaded one shell at a �me. These magazines typically have a capacity of ﬁve rounds. These magazines are diﬃcult to reload quickly, and shotgun ammuni�on is bulky and inconvenient to carry. For these reasons, ordinary semi-automa�c shotguns, which are widely used by waterfowl hunters, are less likely to be implicated in high-fatality public mass shoo�ngs. However, some semi-automa�c shotguns do feature detachable box magazines, albeit of a smaller capacity than riﬂe magazines.

These shotguns would typically qualify as assault weapons, and raise the same concerns as riﬂes. 10 Notably, Jared Loughner, who atempted to assassinate US Representa�ve Gabriel Giﬀords, was overpowered by bystanders while he was reloading his ﬁrearm. 11 Louis Klarevas, Andrew Conner, David Hemenway, “The Eﬀect of Large-Capacity Magazine Bans on High-Fatality Mass Shoo�ngs, 1990–2017”, American Journal of Public Health 109, no. 12 (December 1, 2019): pp. 1754-1761. htps://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305311

What About Handguns? In the United States, handguns feature in the majority of public mass shoo�ngs. In many cases, these are workplace shoo�ngs where a ﬁred employee retrieves his handgun from his car, in the parking lot, and returns to shoot his co-workers. Such scenarios are not applicable to Canada, where handguns are much more �ghtly controlled. That said, handguns have featured in high-proﬁle public mass shoo�ngs in this country, including the Danforth shoo�ng, and the Quebec City Mosque shoo�ng. Consequently, appropriate controls on handguns should form part of any strategy to reduce public mass shoo�ngs.

Is an Assault Weapons Ban a Mater of Appearances? Opponents of controls on assault weapons frequently complain that such bans focus on “cosme�cs.” There is some jus�ﬁca�on for this complaint. Previous atempts to deﬁne assault weapons as a class, in legisla�on in the United States, have focused on features such as pistol grips. These deﬁni�ons fail, because a semi-automa�c, centre-ﬁre riﬂe which takes detachable magazines can easily be manufactured without a pistol grip and similar features.

An eﬀec�ve deﬁni�on of the assault weapons must therefore focus on the key func�onal characteris�cs of these ﬁrearms: • They ﬁre centreﬁre ammuni�on, • They are semi-automa�c, and • They accept detachable magazines holding a rela�vely large number of cartridges. What About Control of Magazines? At present, magazines for centreﬁre long guns are limited to a maximum capacity of ﬁve rounds. Frequently, magazines sold in Canada have been altered to reduce their capacity so that they may legally be transferred and possessed.

For example, a 30-round magazine for an AR-15 may be altered by installing a rivet that limits the travel of the magazine follower, so that the magazine can hold only ﬁve rounds. This is a problema�c solu�on, because any person can easily remove the rivet, and thus change the magazine back into an illegal 30-round magazine. One solu�on is to make such magazines illegal, although such an ac�on would have to take into considera�on poten�al uninten�onal eﬀects on magazines for bolt-ac�on ﬁrearms, which are not limited to ﬁve rounds. How Does Bill C-21 Address Assault Weapons?

Bill C-21 purports to introduce a ban on assault weapons using the following “evergreen” deﬁni�on:

A ﬁrearm that is not a handgun and that • discharges centre-ﬁre ammuni�on in a semi-automa�c manner, • was originally designed with a detachable cartridge magazine with a capacity of six cartridges or more, and • is designed and manufactured on or a�er the day on which this paragraph comes into force; (arme à feu prohibé

e) As a consequence of the last provision, Bill C-21 does not aﬀect the status of any ﬁrearm in Canada in any way. However, the remainder of the deﬁni�on forms a good working deﬁni�on of assault weapons: semi-automa�c ac�on, and a detachable magazine exceeding 5 rounds. The Bill further deﬁnes a semiautoma�c ﬁrearm as a “ﬁrearm that is equipped with a mechanism that, following the discharge of a cartridge, automa�cally operates to complete any part of the reloading cycle necessary to prepare for the discharge of the next cartridge.” This is an eﬀec�ve deﬁni�on.

In the UK and elsewhere, bans on semi-automa�c ﬁrearms that deﬁned “semi-automa�c” as comple�ng the reloading cycle led to the introduc�on of ﬁrearms that completed only half the loading cycle automa�cally, and which relied on the operator releasing the trigger (for example) to release the bolt forward and complete the cycle. The deﬁni�on used in Bill C-21 eliminates this loophole. Bill C-21 also introduces an oﬀence of altering a cartridge magazine, and controls possession and transfer of magazines. However, it fails to address the problem of magazines that can be altered to hold more than ﬁve rounds.

Conclusions 1. Bill C-21 oﬀers a sound deﬁni�on of the class of ﬁrearms which are implicated in high-fatality mass public shoo�ngs. 2. Bill C-21 takes no construc�ve ac�on to control that class of ﬁrearms in any way. Future regula�on or legisla�on would be required to eﬀect change in the status of those ﬁrearms. 3. With respect to that class of ﬁrearms, Bill C-21 is therefore of no consequence to public safety nor to gun ownership in Canada. 4. Bill C-21 fails to address the problem of illegally altered magazines.

Although it creates a new oﬀence of altering a magazine, it does nothing to reduce the availability of magazines that might be so altered.

Document details

Collection	Senate Committees
Citation	SECD / Brief / 2023-10-30_secd_c21_brief_somerset_e
Type	committee
Volume / chapter	441 / Brief / 2023-10-30_secd_c21_brief_somerset_e
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	COMM_SEN
Identifier	882aa399000f11bb7c5cc145dd9b8436b9d4153d

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).