Quebec gun control debate resurfaces twenty years after the shooting at Dawson College
Content warning: death, violence
September 13 marks twenty years since the 2006 shooting at the Dawson College CEGEP, where one student was killed and 19 others were injured. Two decades later, families and survivors are citing the anniversary to argue that Canada’s legal approach to gun control remains unresolved.
In an open letter, families of survivors and victims called upon the federal government to act on three commitments: completing the ban and removing assault-style firearms, closing the large- capacity magazine loopholes, and strengthening the oversight of handgun exemptions. Their demands ensued decades after major shootings in Quebec triggered debates over firearm regulations. Debates that have been reignited by thousands demonstrating against federal firearm restrictions in Quebec City earlier this year.
The gun control debate precedes the Dawson tragedy. A debate that came to the forefront nationally after the 1989 École Polytechnique massacre where 14 women were killed in a misogynist attack. In its aftermath, the Coalition for Gun Control was formed. In 1995, the federal government adopted Bill C-68 which established the Firearms Act and expanded requirements surrounding licensing and registration.
By the time the Dawson shooting took place eleven years later, Canada already had a significantly broader federal firearm regulation. However, the attack renewed questions about what kinds of firearms could legally circulate in the country and whether further restrictions were necessary.
In 2023, the federal government made the handgun freeze permanent. Under the measure, new handgun registration certificates cannot be issued to individuals. This prevents most new purchases, sales, and transfers, while allowing people who previously owned handguns to retain them. The legislation also expanded the Criminal Code’s definition of prohibited firearms and introduced additional measures related to illegally manufactured firearms and licences in cases involving domestic violence.
Quebec also maintains firearm regulations of its own. Since 2018, the province has operated the Quebec Firearms Registration Service (SIAF). Most firearm owners in Quebec are required to register their firearms with the provincial system, in addition to meeting federal licensing requirements. Prohibited and restricted firearms, however, are registered federally rather than through the SIAF. The distinction means that what is often described broadly as “Quebec gun law” is actually a combination of provincial and federal regulations.
One of the largest ongoing disputes concerns assault-style firearms. The Assault-Style Firearms Compensation Program was created to compensate eligible owners who surrender prohibited firearms. Owners who did not participate must dispose of or permanently deactivate affected firearms by October 30 of this year.
For gun control advocates, the removal of these firearms is one of the commitments that remains incomplete. For opponents of the program, however, it has become a symbol of what they view as unfair restrictions on legal firearm owners.
Moreover, this disagreement came into public view on February 28, when several thousand protesters from Quebec and the rest of Canada gathered outside the National Assembly in Quebec City to oppose the federal program. At the demonstration, Sophie Béland, the provincial director of the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights, argued that the program unfairly targets legal firearm owners who are not involved in crime. Other participants described themselves as hunters and sport shooters concerned about losing legally acquired property.
PolySeSouvient, a gun- control advocacy group formed by survivors and families affected by the École Polytechnique massacre, criticized the movement opposing the removal program. The advocacy group argued that the firearms covered by the ban had been prohibited for public safety reasons.
The February protest also raised another question about the shifting discourse of firearm politics in Quebec. Some arguments made around the demonstration emphasized owning firearms for self- defence. This framing is particularly associated with gun politics in the United States, where firearm ownership is constitutionally protected. La Presse investigative journalist, Tristan Péloquin, argued that American political discourse surrounding firearms has increasingly influenced Canadian gun owners, particularly on the idea of possessing firearms for personal protection. This does not necessarily mean that Quebec’s gun regulations are becoming comparable to that of the United States; however, the language used to defend gun ownership in Quebec may be starting to change.
Twenty years after Dawson, the anniversary arrives in the middle of an ongoing debate. This debate that has shifted as Canada and Quebec have introduced layers of firearm regulation that did not exist at the time of earlier mass shootings, while the federal government continues to determine how some of the newest restrictions will be implemented.
For the families and survivors of the Dawson College shooting, September 13 is not only a day of remembrance but also a time to make distinctions between the passing of legislation and its implementations. This renewed distinction places the question facing governments in the present, twenty years later: not only regarding how much gun control policy has changed since 2006, but how much of it remains unresolved.