OTTAWA — The Federal Court of Appeal has rejected a challenge against the government’s prohibition of weapons deemed suitable solely for combat rather than hunting or recreational use.

In May 2020, the Liberals banned approximately 1,500 types of firearms and their variations, making them illegal for use, sale, or importation.

The action was largely praised by supporters of gun control as an initial measure aimed at taking guns utilized in mass shootings out of circulation.

In October 2023, a Federal Court judge rejected the plea from those opposing the ban, deeming it neither illegal nor exceeding the governmental authority granted under their mandate.

A non-profit advocacy group, along with firearm owners, business representatives, hunters, and both recreational and sports shooters, challenged the decision.

On Tuesday, when the Federal Court of Appeal released their decision, they dismissed the newest challenge, stating that the Federal Court provided “detailed and convincing” rationale.

The roster of firearms banned by the Liberal administration has expanded to over 2,500 types deemed as assault weapons—these include semi-automatics capable of continuous rapid fire.

Government representatives indicate that approximately 19,000 distinct types of non-restricted firearms continue to be accessible for hunting or recreational use in Canada.

An important aspect of the appeal revolved around whether the government followed a clause within the legislation that prohibits them from prohibiting a weapon through regulation if they consider the gun reasonable for hunting or sports activities in Canada.

In writing for a unified trio of judges from the Court of Appeal, Chief Justice Yves de Montigny stated that he found no evidence suggesting the government made a mistake when prioritizing public safety in determining the appropriateness of prohibiting certain firearms within Canada for those reasons.

He noted that, from the viewpoint of a practical hunter or sports enthusiast, prohibiting weapons tailored or highly suitable for hunting or sporting activities might not seem logical.

Nevertheless, the federal cabinet stands as the highest-level policymaking entity within the government. Due to its position atop the executive branch, it is uniquely positioned to formulate governmental policies and evaluate the public good, the chief justice further noted.

Certainly, the significant risk certain firearms present to community safety due to their capacity to cause severe harm or death to numerous individuals rapidly, coupled with their historical involvement in mass shootings both within Canada and internationally, makes them seem excessive for typical civilian needs. Additionally, the growing call for actions to combat firearm-related crimes adds weight to evaluating whether these weapons should be permitted solely for hunting and recreational activities.

The Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights, one of the appellants, described the court decision as “negative news” for Canadians.

The choice is evident; the courts won’t limit the government’s excessive intervention in this matter. This poses adverse effects on numerous facets of the Canadian legal and legislative framework,” stated the organization in a social media update.

Over the coming period, our legal department will thoroughly examine the decision and provide guidance on subsequent actions.

The report from The Canadian Press was initially released on April 15, 2025.

Jim Bronskill from The Canadian Press