A sport does not have to be banned outright to be killed.

It only has to be denied a future.

CBC reporter Vincent McDermott recently profiled northern Alberta IPSC competitors whose sport is being slowly strangled by Ottawa’s handgun freeze.^[i]

Existing handgun owners may keep what they already own, but new competitors can’t buy in. Existing competitors can’t replace handguns that are lost, stolen, worn out, or broken. 

Clubs can’t build the next generation when the government locks them outside the gate.

McDermott also cited Wendy Cukier, president of the Coalition for Gun Control, from her 2022 testimony before the Standing Senate Committee on Public Safety and National Security.

“There’s no need in Canada for civilians to be involved in such activities, and they are very much at odds with Canadian values and culture,” Cukier said.^[ii]

Cukier did not say, “I dislike sport shooting.” She argued that ordinary Canadians have “no need” to participate in these lawful firearms activities.

Her target was not gangs, smugglers, or violent repeat offenders. 

Her target was licensed, vetted, trained Canadians engaged in lawful firearms activity; Canadians who obey the law, follow range commands, store their property according to federal rules, and conduct themselves under a safety culture stricter than anything most Canadians will ever experience.

According to 2010 Canadian Heritage statistics reported by TheGunBlog.ca, more Canadian adults had a firearms licence than participated in golf, hockey, soccer, or baseball.^[iii]

Canadian Heritage reported that 1.5 million Canadians over the age of 15 participated in golf that year, making it the most popular sport in Canada. Hockey came second, with 1.3 million participants.^[iv]

That same year, roughly 1.85 million Canadian adults held a firearms licence.^[v]

A firearms licence is not the same kind of measurement as a golf or hockey participation survey. But it does show scale. It destroys the claim that lawful firearms culture is fringe, foreign, or culturally marginal.

More Canadian adults held a firearms licence than played golf or hockey.

Wendy Cukier is the arbiter of Canadian culture?

Cukier does not get to define who is Canadian. She does not get to decide which lawful activities are Canadian. She does not get to declare sport shooting “un-Canadian” because she despises guns.

Canadian culture is not whatever Wendy Cukier approves.

Canadian culture is what Canadians actually do, build, inherit, regulate, teach, and pass on to the next generation.

When millions of Canadians hold firearms licences and compete, target shoot, collect, volunteer, instruct, and mentor, their lawful participation is the proof.

Personal dislike does not make something un-Canadian. Neither does political hostility or an activist’s testimony before Parliament.

In a free country, peaceful citizens do not have to prove “need” before they participate in a lawful sport, pursue a lawful hobby, own lawful property, join a lawful association, or preserve a lawful tradition.

“Need” is the wrong test. 

The proper question is whether peaceful citizens can participate responsibly without being smeared as cultural contaminants by an activist with a personal agenda.

Firearms are dangerous. That is precisely why responsible firearm owners obsess over safety, training, storage, supervision, discipline, and character.

The lawful firearms community is not built around violence, chaos, or intimidation. It is built around a culture of safety, of personal responsibility, discipline, and trust.

Go to any Canadian shooting competition and you will see people from different races, religions, professions, regions, and political tribes submit to the same culture of safety.

On the range, identity does not govern the line.

Conduct does.

Everyone follows the same safety commands or they’re removed.

Criminality is not part of lawful shooting culture. It is not welcomed, normalized, or excused. It is disqualified.

No gun club wants a member who endangers the club, the community, and the future of the sport. Nobody has more at stake than the lawful firearms community itself.

Yes, criminals use handguns to commit crimes. Yes, Canadians have every right to demand serious action against violent crime and those who commit it.

That’s exactly why policy must distinguish between licensed, supervised, rule-bound sport shooters and violent offenders who use illegal firearms.

If the problem is criminals committing violence with illegal guns, policy should target those criminals and the source illegal violence and those who commit it.

Blurring the distinction between criminals and lawful sport shooters does not make Canadians safer. It makes honest people easier to punish.

Licensed owners are politically convenient targets because government already knows who they are, where they live, and what rules they will obey.

Criminals don’t operate that way.

Lawful firearms ownership and the shooting sports are an integral part of Canadian culture. 

They are part of family tradition, local economies, community clubs, volunteer networks, and international competition.

More popular than hockey yet called un-Canadian by a political activist.

That’s not a statement about firearms.

It’s a statement about the arrogance of those who believe their hostility to guns gives them authority to define Canadian culture for everyone else.

Wendy Cukier is free to oppose the shooting sports.

She does not get to declare them un-Canadian when Canadians themselves have already proved otherwise.

---

^[i] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/northern-alberta-handgun-ban-shooting-sports-9.7232210

^[ii] https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/44-1/SECU/meeting-41/evidence

^[iii] https://thegunblog.ca/facts-stats/

^[iv] https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2013/pc-ch/CH24-1-2012-eng.pdf

^[v] https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2012/grc-rcmp/PS96-2010-eng.pdf