Canada at risk of a sharp, NRA-style turn on gun policy

Evidence from multiple countries demonstrates that removing assault-style weapons saves lives

We are deeply concerned that important firearm laws in Canada — that make our communities safer — are at risk.

Gun injury and death are a preventable public health issue, requiring an evidence-based solution. While political discussion often follows media reports of a public shooting, these tragic events reflect only a small fraction of gun incidents. Under-reported are deaths and injuries involving suicides, femicides and unintentional shootings.

To address this public health crisis, policy-makers need to take a multifaceted approach geared toward tackling social determinants such as poverty and racism, shutting down gun smuggling, and investing in mental-health supports. On this, there is wide public and political consensus. Where consensus begins to fracture is on the issue of restricting access to firearms. Enter Canada’s gun lobby groups. After the largest mass shooting in Canadian history last year in Nova Scotia, the federal Liberal government banned more than 1,500 types of assault-style weapons. These are guns that have the capacity to kill and injure many people in a short period of time, leaving devastated communities in their wake. As physicians, we see the devastation firsthand.

Evidence from multiple countries demonstrates that removing assaultstyle weapons from societal use saves lives. Australia, to use one example, saw mass shooting events all but end after its ban was enacted.

The Canadian ban had long been called for by survivors of mass shootings and is supported by 17 health care organizations, including the Canadian Medical Association. Opinion surveys regularly show public support for banning these weapons at 80 per cent or more.

Gun lobby groups oppose this ban, as well as other recent measures such as lifelong background checks on potential gun buyers. Gun control is now an election issue. Notably, the Conservative party and its leader, Erin O’Toole, have taken policy positions, including on the assault-style weapons ban, that closely align with the gun lobby.

As the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated, focusing on evidence-based preventative measures and prioritizing public well-being is the only approach to minimize harm. A similar approach is necessary if Canadians want to reduce gun violence in our communities.

We fear the consequences of weaker gun laws. Consider, a study released this year found 30 mass shootings could have been prevented in the United States had it maintained its assaultstyle weapons ban. This was in place from 1994-2004 and then left to expire by the NRA-backed Bush administration.

Canadians have watched in horror as the U.S. has failed to control its gun violence crisis, a direct result of a tooinfluential gun lobby. We must be mindful of the same potential in this country. Reducing gun violence should not be a political issue. Our actions should be guided by science and what is in the public interest.

Dr. Najma Ahmed is a Toronto based trauma surgeon. Dr. Philip Berger is an associate professor in the Temerty Faculty of Medicine at the University of Toronto. Both are founding executive members of Canadian Doctors for Protection from Guns.