Canada's "banned" target rifles not a boon for Ukraine
Another hair-brained suggestion from an ex-politician proves pointless
I’ve already taken issue with former Canadian defence minister Peter Mackay’s recommendation that Canada disarm its soldiers in order to send our army’s biggest, newest and most effective guns to Ukraine – all while our soldiers ship out to Latvia to stare down Putin’s army as part of NATO’s deterrent force. You can read my thoughts on that borderline treachery here. But, that wasn’t the only inane idea he shared.
The same Mackay column also included another hair-brained suggestion that belies his ignorance of how militaries work. Ignorance may be forgivable for the average politician, with zero experience in or exposure to, our military. But, Mackay was responsible for Canada’s armed forces for six years. Surely a dedicated, thoughtful leader would learn something in that time.
Mackay suggested Justin Trudeau gather up all the “‘military-style assault rifles’ banned by our government in May 2020” and send them to Ukraine. He goes on to suggest a tax credit scheme as incentive for law-abiding Canadian sport and recreational shooters to hand over their legally-owned property, worth thousands of dollars. I’m not going to write about the wrong-headedness and fundamental injustice of this “ban,” which hasn’t actually happened, hasn’t prevented a single shooting, or saved a single life. Instead, I want to focus on the futility of the gesture as an attempt to help Ukraine.
The rifles “banned” by Trudeau include hundreds of different models and types, using dozens of types and sizes of ammunition, each requiring a different type of magazine (bullet container that attaches to the rifle) and a different toolset to clean and maintain. Perhaps the last thing Ukraine needs now is a sea container stuffed with a hand-me-down grab bag of mixed rifles and accessories arriving in Ukraine.
Most of Canada’s civilian firearms would be, at best inconvenient to use and at worst useless, to a nation that equips its military largely with former Soviet Warsaw Pact-style Kalashnikov weapons that use incompatible ammunition.
Wars are won and lost on logistics. Trying to maintain supply chains for ammunition, spare parts, repair and maintenance on hundreds of different types of rifles – many in limited quantities of twos and threes – is impossible. There’s a reason NATO (and the now defunct Warsaw Pact) agreed on standard ammunition sizes and types: it would be impossible to supply and maintain an allied army with incompatible weapons and ammunition.
The effort to collect Canada’s “banned” sport rifles is expected to cost taxpayers billions of dollars. Ukraine would be better off if Canada instead spent that money to buy and deliver thousands of new Kalashnikovs on the open market (they are plentiful and easy to acquire in large quantity) along with spare magazines, spare parts, cleaning and repair kits and hundreds of thousands of rounds of ammunition for them.
If Canada truly wants to help Ukraine – and it should – there are myriad ways to do so. Collecting second-hand target rifles from law abiding Canadian gun owners is not one of them.
Lol, Ukraine would burst out laughing and say "why are you sending us sporting rifles?"