RCMP “Clarification”: Will the Liberal Government Use Military Against its Own Citizens Again?

The RCMP Communications team emailed CSSA last week to “clarify” the RCMP’s role in the Liberal government’s Firearms Confiscation Compensation Scheme.

That clarification confirmed everything we said about them in our commentary, “Ottawa Flops the Switch on Gun Confiscations, Hands Control to the RCMP.” 

Their email, shown below, confirms the primary concern raised in our original commentary: that the RCMP is responsible for carrying out the federal government’s firearms confiscation scheme.

The RCMP attempts to draw a distinction between ownership of the firearms confiscation scheme and implementation of it.  That’s semantic garbage. 

Public Safety Canada may “own” the policy, but the RCMP openly admits it is “preparing to collect prohibited firearms within its jurisdictions.” 

That’s not administrative support. That’s enforcement.

The RCMP specifically says it will use mobile collection units, supplementary personnel, and administrative resources to physically collect prohibited firearms from licensed Canadian gun owners. 

That makes the RCMP the face and operational engine of the confiscation scheme.

This is precisely what Canadians were told in Parliament when the Public Safety Minister stated that the RCMP would implement the program. 

RCMP’s own clarification reinforces that fact.

The most revealing line in the unsigned RCMP communication is not about jurisdiction or administrative control. 

It is about resources.

“The RCMP will be leveraging mobile collection units and supplementary resources such as Reservists and public servants for collection activities to mitigate impact on operational and frontline policing priorities.”

Their “clarification” raises far more questions than it answers.

First, the RCMP confirms that confiscation activities require additional personnel. Normal policing capacity is not enough. 

If supplementary resources are necessary then the program is, by definition, diverting attention, planning, and logistical coordination away from traditional policing responsibilities.

Second, the reference to “Reservists” is deeply unsettling. 

The RCMP’s gun confiscation efforts in High River during the 2013 floods were supported by military personnel. 

Under the guise of searching for survivors, the Canadian military used helicopters with infrared scanners to find people while the RCMP kicked in doors and broke open gun safes.

When the RCMP says “reservists” in the context of firearms confiscations, they shouldn’t be surprised when gun owners immediately think of that awful precedent.

• Is the RCMP planning on using the military to support their gun confiscation efforts again, as they did in High River?
• Why is the Canadian government apparently, through the RCMP, planning using the military against Canadian citizens?

Whether the RCMP means retired RCMP members, auxiliary RCMP officers, or military reservists, their lack of clarity screams for answers. 

Public trust is fragile. Vague language from the RCMP does not inspire confidence or restore lost trust.

The RCMP then confirms that firearm confiscations will occur “within its jurisdictions, excluding in Alberta and Saskatchewan.” 

This admission readily admits the law will not be applied evenly to all citizens. Laws applied unevenly across regions raise valid questions about fairness and legitimacy.

That’s a glaring and blatant violation of Section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.^[i]

The imposition of the Carney Liberal government’s firearms confiscation scheme literally depends upon where you live. 

The RCMP then insists these efforts will not impact frontline policing priorities. 

That assurance conflicts directly with warnings from the National Police Federation, which repeatedly argues that firearms confiscation programs divert resources from combating organized crime, illegal firearms trafficking, and gang violence.

Those concerns have never been meaningfully addressed by the federal government or the RCMP.

Instead, the RCMP is publicly committed to delivering on a partisan political promise that only targets licensed firearm owners, those who passed RCMP background checks, all licensing requirements, and continuous eligibility screening.

This is not a question of whether Parliament has the authority to legislate firearms policy. It does. 

The real issue is institutional trust.

Peel’s Principle #2:

“The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions.”

Police legitimacy depends on public confidence that law enforcement decisions are guided by legitimate public safety priorities, not partisan political commitments. 

Since the RCMP chose to become the operational and enforcement arm of a partisan political agenda, whatever small amount of confidence gun owners had in them vanished.

The unsigned RCMP Communications email confirms what Canadian gun owners already understood: 

Public Safety Canada designed the program, but the RCMP will enforce it.

And enforcement is what the public remembers.

---

^[i] https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art15.html