Ottawa Flips the Switch on Gun Confiscations, Hands Control to the RCMP

On Monday, January 19, firearms confiscation flipped from theoretical to reality for Canada’s 2.3 million licensed gun owners.

Public Safety Canada opened their “voluntary declaration” phase of the Liberal government’s Firearms Confiscation Compensation Scheme.

Licensed owners will be contacted by the Canadian Firearms Program. You may already have received the CFP’s email.

Declarations will get filed. Gun Confiscation Appointments will be scheduled. Collection of banned guns will begin, but Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree still can’t say when.

What he can tell you is that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police is the face of the confiscation program. The RCMP will wear the program’s successes (if any) and its inevitable failures.

The Announcement, in Plain English

Public Safety Canada published their core timeline.^[i]

The declaration period opens January 19, 2026 and closes March 31, 2026.
Declarations can be filed online or by mail.
Declarations are processed on a first come, first served basis, tied to available compensation funds.
Declaring does not guarantee compensation. They went to great lengths to emphasize this point.
After the declaration window, approved participants will be able to schedule a collection appointment to turn in firearms for validation and destruction.
Collection is carried out through the RCMP, the police of jurisdiction, or a mobile collection unit, depending on where you live.

The minister also said the quiet part out loud at the press conference.

“The deadlines are real. Please heed them.”^[ii]

Call it “voluntary” if you want to delude yourself, but Carney’s Liberal government is not hiding the enforcement actions embedded in these so-called voluntary confiscations.

“Voluntary” Is the Marketing Lingo, but the “Criminal Liability” Is the Reality.

Public Safety Minister Anandasangaree leans hard on “voluntary” participation.

What he doesn’t offer is certainty, the one thing a reasonable person expects from a federal government program that claims to be fair to those affected.

There is no certainty of compensation.
There is no certainty of processing timelines.
There is no certainty of how many additional firearms will be added later.

But there is certainty about one thing: compliance is mandatory.^[iii]

“While participating in the program is voluntary, compliance with the law is not. Individual firearm owners must safely dispose of or permanently deactivate their assault-style firearms before the amnesty period ends on October 30, 2026, or risk criminal liability for the illegal possession of a prohibited firearm.”^[iv]

Minister Anandasangaree demands licensed Canadian gun owners enter a government portal, self-identify, and accept a process that openly warns that the state will take your property, but don’t expect compensation.

That’s not a public safety program.

It’s a political agenda with legal fangs.

The RCMP Chose to Be the Face of Canadian Gun Confiscation

In the House of Commons, Minister Anandasangaree said, “the RCMP will be implementing the buyback program.”^[v]

With that statement, Minister Anandasangaree weaponized the RCMP against 2.3 million lawful firearms owners.

Minister Anandasangaree doesn’t need the RCMP to run its firearms confiscation compensation program.

That’s paperwork, a payment schedule, and a logistics contract.

He chose the RCMP to lead the Liberal government’s confiscation efforts because they add what spreadsheets and contracts can’t: law enforcement consequences.

That is why the RCMP’s decision matters.

Once the RCMP accepted this confiscation assignment, it stopped being a neutral police force in service to Canadians.

The RCMP no longer protects and serves upstanding, lawful Canadians.

It is now the delivery agent for partisan political promises.

If the RCMP wants to be treated like a trusted defender of law-abiding Canadians, it must start acting like one.

Right now, the RCMP is the political weapon of the Liberal government.

And, “I’m sorry, I’m just following orders” hasn’t worked since 1945.

The National Police Federation Warned Us and the Government

Ottawa was told, repeatedly, that using police services for confiscation is a misallocation of finite public safety resources.

Not by bloggers or activists, but by the union that represents serving RCMP members.

The National Police Federation (NFP), which represents the guidance and conscience of RCMP members, put its concerns in writing in submissions to Parliament and in policy papers.

Here is the line that should end the debate in any evidence-based policy conversation:

“In fact, it diverts extremely important personnel, resources, and funding away from addressing the more immediate and growing threat of criminal use of illegal firearms.”^[vi]

The NPF has made the same point in a separate policy paper on gun violence and public safety.^[vii]

This is what measured governance sounds like.

Police resources are scarce.
Public safety threats are real.
Confiscating property from compliant owners does not dismantle gangs, stop smuggling, or secure the border.

Mark Carney’s Liberal government heard that loud and clear.

Mark Carney’s Liberal government ignored that advice, and now they’re proceeding with their confiscation scheme anyway.

And the RCMP agreed to carry the Liberal government’s water for it.

Provinces Resist Because This Is Not Normal Policing

“There are legal impediments that have been deliberately placed on this program being implemented in those two provinces,” Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree complained.^[viii]

His press release also acknowledges provincial and territorial roles and collection differences.^[ix]

This should not be controversial.

When multiple provinces resist using their police and administrative systems to run the Liberal government’s firearms confiscation scheme, that’s not a speed bump.

That is a flashing red warning light that tells everyone that Mark Carney’s firearms confiscation compensation scheme is being seen for exactly what it is:

A crass federal political campaign promise, weaponized with the consent of the RCMP.

Canadians Have Lived the “Doorstep” Version of This Before

If this all feels familiar, it is because Canadians have watched emergencies become the excuse for firearms confiscations before.

High River Flood

The Civilian Review and Complaints Commission documented that RCMP members, acting on their own initiative, searched for or discovered firearms and looted 609 firearms from 105 homes following the High River flood.^[x]

The CRCC later recommended that the RCMP create procedures or guidelines for seizure of firearms, ammunition, and contraband in disaster response situations.^[xi]

In plain language, this is what Canadians learned:

Stealing firearms from ordinary, honest citizens is unacceptable, even during exceptional circumstances.

Even after those firearms were returned, tens of thousands of dollars of ammunition, owned by the residents of High River, was not. It was destroyed.

Fort McMurray Wildfire

In 2016, the RCMP publicly stated it was not conducting a mass seizure of firearms in Fort McMurray, a message widely understood as a response to the backlash from High River.^[xii]

How could the RCMP, without guidance, think it was permissible to kick in doors and steal firearms in High River, but not in Fort McMurray?

What changed?

Their political masters – proving once again that the RCMP does not enforce the law, they enforce the will of their political masters.

Once police services were seen as opportunistic participants willing to turn a crisis into a firearms confiscation operation, public trust was destroyed.

And destroyed public trust doesn’t get reset with a government press release.

So when Ottawa says “voluntary,” and then assigns the RCMP to collect politically-incorrect firearms, Canadians rightfully translate their actions as coercive the moment these political decisions were made.

Ottawa Rebuked for Executive Overreach Again

There is another reason the public’s trust has collapsed.

Ottawa just lost its appeal of the legality of its use of extraordinary powers during the Trucker Convoy.

The Federal Court of Appeal’s plain language decision summary states:^[xiii]

“The decision to invoke the Emergencies Act was unreasonable and ultra vires.”
The government “did not demonstrate” reasonable grounds that a national emergency existed within the meaning of the Act, or that existing laws were unable to resolve the situation.
The Court confirmed infringements of freedom of expression and protection against unreasonable search and seizure.

This is not the Supreme Court.

This is the Federal Court of Appeal, but it is still a major legal and political warning to the Liberal government, delivered by a unanimous panel of Federal Court judges.

If Ottawa cannot be trusted with emergency powers during a political protest, why should Canadians assume they will use restraint in a nationwide gun confiscation scheme aimed at licensed citizens, not drug dealers, criminal gangs or organized crime?

That’s the question Ottawa refuses to answer.

It’s the question they always refuse to answer.

The Policy Failure Hiding Behind the Curtain

A credible public safety policy answers a simple question.

What measurable threat does this policy choice reduce?

Ottawa can’t answer that question.

The union representing RCMP members already gave policy makers the list of real public safety priorities:

illicit firearms,
organized crime,
gun smuggling, and
the criminal use of illegal guns.

Instead of following the advice of the experts, this Liberal government chose to implement a program that consumes scarce police resources, escalates conflict between police and ordinary Canadians, and targets a segment of our population that has already submitted to licensing, vetting, and ongoing compliance.

That is not how a serious government behaves.

That is how a political class behaves when it wants a visible win, with no regard for the consequences.

What “Responsible” Looks Like

It’s not reckless to demand accountability. A measured response is still a hard response.

Here is what should happen next.

Full transparency on operations. Publish written standards for collection, validation, destruction, complaints, and error correction.
Independent oversight. Require public reporting on mistakes, restitution, and the handling of secured property.
No diversion of police resources. Ottawa should stop pretending that firearms confiscation from licensed gun owners is the best use of RCMP capacity.
A public safety pivot. Prioritize border interdiction, trafficking, and violent offenders, the drivers repeatedly identified by police leadership.
A line around policing. The RCMP should not be used as political weapon to deliver a confiscation scheme that Parliament itself cannot defend on actual public safety outcomes.

Ottawa is attempting to normalize an abnormal relationship between the state and its citizens – a relationship where compliance is demanded, compensation is uncertain, deadlines are non-negotiable, and the RCMP is assigned to make it all feel inevitable.

That is not how trust is built.

That is how institutions are weaponized against the citizens they’re supposed to protect.

Since the RCMP insists on owning this program, it also owns the trust destroyed by this program, the damage it does to the RCMP’s claim on legitimacy, and to the fragile social contract that holds our country together.

Canada does not need more political theatre.

Canada needs public safety policy that is evidence based, legally constrained, and focused on criminals, not the compliant.

Weaponizing Canada’s national police force against our most vetted and statistically safest citizens is not just bad governance; it’s a deliberate destruction of the public’s trust in both the government and the RMCP that labels the wreckage ‘public safety.’

^[i] https://www.canada.ca/en/public-safety-canada/news/2026/01/government-of-canada-opens-the-assault-style-firearms-compensation-program-to-all-individual-firearms-owners.html

^[ii] https://globalnews.ca/news/11617988/banned-assault-firearms-program/

^[iii] https://www.canada.ca/en/public-safety-canada/campaigns/firearms-buyback/declaration-participation.html

^[iv] https://www.canada.ca/en/public-safety-canada/campaigns/firearms-buyback/submit-firearm-declaration-individual/declare.html

^[v] https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/13550426

^[vi] https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/441/SECU/Brief/BR12078084/br-external/NationalPoliceFederation-e.pdf

^[vii] https://npf-fpn.com/app/uploads/2021/05/Gun-Violence-and-Public-Safety-in-Canada_PS_November-2020.pdf

^[viii] https://www.gx94radio.com/2026/01/17/federal-firearm-buyback-program-to-open-monday-with-march-31-deadline-to-register/

^[ix] https://www.canada.ca/en/public-safety-canada/news/2026/01/government-of-canada-opens-the-assault-style-firearms-compensation-program-to-all-individual-firearms-owners.html

^[x] https://www.crcc-ccetp.gc.ca/pdf/highR-en.pdf

^[xi] https://www.crcc-ccetp.gc.ca/en/chairpersons-final-report-after-commissioners-response-regarding-rcmps-response-2013-flood-high

^[xii] https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2016/05/10/mounties-say-they-are-not-conducting-mass-seizure-of-firearms-in-fort-mcmurray/