On March 7, the Government of Canada announced another ban on new categories of firearms. This step raises many questions, especially given the political and economic situation the country finds itself in.
Another ban — another step toward disarming the population?
Since March 7, 2025, 179 new models of firearms are banned in Canada. Semi-automatic rifles with large-capacity magazines are under attack. The official version: these models are not intended for hunting and target shooting, and therefore “exceed the limits of safe civilian use.”
For now, owners of banned weapons are given the opportunity to “adapt” to the new rules: the amnesty will be in effect until March 1, 2026, and the government promises to pay compensation. However, Canadians have already seen how such programs have been reduced to bureaucratic chaos and unfair payments.
Why now?
This ban was not introduced for no reason. The Canadian government, losing support among voters, seems to be trying to use a proven scheme: to create the feeling of fighting crime by tightening the laws for ordinary citizens.
But who will this ban really hurt? Certainly not criminals, who, as a rule, own weapons illegally. As numerous studies show, the vast majority of crimes involving firearms are committed with illegally acquired weapons. But Canadian hunters, farmers and residents of northern regions, who need rifles to protect themselves from wild animals, will now find themselves in a difficult situation.
Amid growing discontent with the government before the elections, this move looks like a desperate attempt to hold on to power by creating the illusion of concern for safety. But there is another version.
Is the government afraid of Canadians?
More and more people are wondering: why is the government consistently and methodically disarming the population? There are two possible explanations:
- Fear of protests. The Liberals realize that their chances of winning the next election are extremely low. What if they want to cancel or postpone the elections? Let's remember the events in the Netherlands and France, where protests against the policies of the ruling parties became truly massive. Perhaps the authorities want to reduce the likelihood of armed resistance?
- Concerns about the geopolitical situation. The trade war with the United States, which is developing steadily, could theoretically develop into something more serious. In the event of a crisis, supply disruptions and an increase in crime, the government prefers to see the population unarmed and unable to protect their homes and families? Why would they do that?
What future awaits us?
The government assures that there are still enough "safe" models of weapons for hunting and sports. However, the trend is obvious: step by step, Canadians are left with fewer and fewer opportunities to own firearms.
So who benefits from the disarmament of law-abiding citizens? The authorities must explain why, in the midst of instability, they are not betting on protecting the population, but on depriving them of one of the tools of self-defense.
What do you think? Is this ban a safety concern or a political maneuver before the elections?
The full list of now banned types of weapons can be found on the website: