New Paragraph

From guns and gangs to Bill C-21: Canada's top public safety issues in 2023
December 19, 2023

From guns and gangs to Bill C-21: Canada's top public safety issues in 2023

As a career police officer, author, speaker and CTV News’s Public Safety Analyst, I watch public safety events unfold around the world, with a particular emphasis on policing. I write about some issues, talk about others, but I consider them all.


The top five issues of 2023 from my perspective, in no specific order:

MURDERS OF OUR POLICE OFFICERS

The fall of 2022 saw an unprecedented rash of murdered police including the murder of OPP Const. Greg Pierzchala in a shooting near Hagersville on December 27, 2022 – the same day he was told that he had successfully completed his probationary year. The first five months of 2023 saw a continuation of that tragic and senseless loss.


Const. Travis Jordan and Const. Brett Ryan of the Edmonton Police Service were shot and killed in hail of gunfire in March. Later that month, Sûreté du Québec Sgt. Maureen Breau was stabbed to death in Louiseville Que. Then OPP Sgt. Eric Mueller was fatally wounded by gunfire east of Ottawa in May. Most recently, RCMP Const. Rick O’Brien was shot in killed in September in Coquitlam BC. Other officers were seriously wounded in these incidents and in others, for no other reason than their wearing of uniforms. I pray that it was just a really bad year and not a sign of things to come.

BILL C-21

An act to place even more regulations around firearms ownership in Canada, including a freeze on the legal sale of handguns, was passed by the House of Commons in the spring and just recently proclaimed into law. I do not believe anything in this legislation will mitigate the threat of the violent use of smuggled U.S. handguns by criminals on the streets of municipalities and in Indigenous communities in this country. Smuggled handguns have always been illegal – as have true assault rifles and so-called 3D guns, and those that choose to use them are not afraid of the law, up to and including murdering fellow Canadians. The only people that will be impacted by this legislation are legal collectors and sport shooters that already obey the law to the letter, as well as the commercial businesses that lawfully sell handguns to them.


A so-called Red Flag law will give private citizens the ability to apply for a firearms prohibition against someone. Existing criminal code provisions already allow ‘police’ to seek ownership suspension and to obtain warrants to seize firearms from those that pose a threat to public safety, or without warrant in exigent circumstances. Will these public applications help? I’d prefer to see police remain the focal point on this. In addition, penalties upon conviction for some firearms offences were enhanced, which is great, but this same government was responsible for reducing some of those penalties since they came into power. I guess what was old is new again.


There are other items contained within the act but simply put, government’s claim that C-21 is “comprehensive” and suggestions that it is a game-changer of sorts are political rhetoric at its finest. I assure you we won’t soon see lineups of violent criminals and gang-bangers turning in their guns and applying for service industry jobs. Nor would the contents of this bill have prevented the Nova Scotia mass shooting or even the recent shooting deaths of children and adults in my hometown of Sault Ste. Marie, all of which were committed with illegally possessed firearms.

GUNS AND GANGS

And on it goes. The violent saga continues. I’m resigned to the reality that I may well have this item in my top five for the rest of my existence. We will not arrest our way out of this scourge. Police need support – from governments, the courts, the public, educators and various social service agencies. Mental health and addiction professionals have a huge role as well, as do parents. In the long-term, keeping young people out of destructive lifestyles is critical and in the short-term, rigorous intelligence gathering, investigations and enforcement is a must, including bail and parole improvements and stemming the 24/7 flow of handguns from the U.S. into our communities. If the federal government doesn’t soon support the RCMP and border protection officers with adequate funding and human resources to work international firearms smuggling cases and to interdict guns before they get into the hands of criminals here, we’re in trouble. That is where the firearm threat truly lies. Provincial and municipal police can help fight gun smuggling but can’t monitor thousands of kilometers of international border.

THE EMERGENCIES ACT INQUIRY

The commission, established following Canada’s questionable decision to invoke the never used Emergencies Act during “Freedom Convoy” protests in Ottawa and elsewhere in Canada in January and February of 2022, was led by Ontario Court of Appeal Justice Paul Rouleau. His report was released in February 2023.


Justice Rouleau largely defended the government’s decision to invoke the act, stating that he had concluded that a “very high threshold required for the invocation of the act was met.” I don’t agree, but he’s a Justice, and I’m not. However, he did go on to say, “I also reach this conclusion reluctantly.”


He was critical of police and government in terms of their “missteps” and “failures” around anticipating, planning and collaboration, following months of inconsistent evidence that showed tremendous communication disconnects from police leadership and personnel, and government agency perspectives. He felt that some of these errors allowed the Ottawa protest to take root and become so complex that government had to take extraordinary action (my words, not his).


Then RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki was effectively thrown under the bus by government bureaucrats and elected officials, who seemed to remember things differently than she did as to what she told them and when during the protests – things that should have lessened government anxiety that the act was required to restore order. Frankly, in my opinion, her evidence had much more of an air of sincerity around it than that of the contradictory witnesses but I digress. She submitted her letter of resignation as commissioner two days before Justice Rouleau released his findings.

INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS

The Israel-Hamas war is horrendous to watch from afar, as is the ongoing Russian attack on Ukraine. The deaths of countless innocent people – including the rape and torture of women and children and destruction of historical buildings and infrastructure, is profound to say the least. But besides the provision of Canadian government tax dollars in these dreadful situations, there are other potential and significant impacts on us here in Canada.


Public protests – both pro and con, particularly around the Israel-Hamas war conflict - continue to occur. Some have been aggressive, and I predict over time will increase in intensity. These events are resource draining and publicly divisive at best. Will related acts of terrorism occur as these conflicts continue? Antisemitic and anti-Muslim threats and acts, even around places of worship and schools, are significantly on the rise. Police will be challenged from intelligence, prevention, response and investigation perspectives and it will get worse before it gets better. Police are already responding to new types of crime every day, but the old crimes and demands haven’t gone away. Now this. Something has to give.


I apologize if I sound doom and gloom, but these are serious issues that we all need to consider. It’s not new though. We’ve always had challenges and always will but I am confident we will remain light-years ahead of most countries in terms of our safety. I have complete trust in Canadian police to continue doing their best to make a difference and keep us safe but they need help – including from us and the governments we elect.


Wishing all a wonderful and safe holiday season and prosperous new year. Please thank an emergency responder when you can and pray for their safety every day of 2024.

By Chris Lewis January 26, 2026
It’s certainly not Bovino, Noem and higher. Over the past several months the U.S. President’s seemingly valid promise to close the southern border and to rid the U.S. of illegal aliens who are “killers, rapists, drug dealers and individuals from mental institutions” has evolved into something less defendable. Like him or not, it was tough to argue with the public safety need to deport dangerous criminals back to whence they came. I wish Canada would do the same, but in a more strategic way. Chasing undocumented women through Home Depot and dragging U.S. citizens out of vehicles on Main Street – while clad in mostly civilian attire, screaming profanities and with covered faces, has not worked well for ICE and CBP, in terms of public perception and community trust. Enforcing these laws is not easy for those agencies, even when acting within their legislative framework and with probable cause. Angry crowds; individuals with far-left anti-government convictions who just want to hijack the agenda and commit violent acts; and the doxing of federal agents to cause threats to them and their families, cause untold stress on and danger to law enforcement. None of that is justified and is most often a crime. The public needs to stay out of these operations. If someone interferes with the agents and/or their lawful operations, they should expect to be arrested. Placing cameras in officers faces or trying to obstruct them as they conduct an activity, does nothing but raise the temperature of the operation and will end with the placement of handcuffs. Videoing from afar is different, but some take it to the next level. If they threaten anyone with a weapon of any kind, they should anticipate being shot and perhaps killed. That is reality. But at the same time, law enforcement cannot exist without public trust. If the various Department of Homeland Security (DHS) entities that are conducting these operations always acted as per the original strategy and didn’t often violate the rights of people based on the look or colour of so-called “suspects”, as professionally as possible, there would likely not be such an inflammation of the normal American citizen psyche. After all, Trump was elected in part based on his stated “criminal illegal alien” agenda. However, the way his goal was operationalized and the questionable tactics often publicly witnessed has denigrated the trust of many citizens on both sides of the political spectrum. The most recent loss of life occurred in Minneapolis Minnesota on Saturday January 24th. I won’t pass final judgement on the actions of the agents involved in the shooting death of the U.S. citizen there before the results of a professional and unbiased investigation are released. I was obviously not on the ground with those officers to see and hear all they did from their various positions and angles. I have watched all the videos that have been posted, however, and I will say this: “At this point, it does not look good.” When I was a police commander and received information from the field of a critical incident, the initial information was seldom accurate. In fact, over the hours to follow it changed regularly. I would not make any proactive statement to the media, but if asked, I would simply say that we had the proper resources on the ground and I would await verified information, etc. If it was an officer involved shooting or chase that involved injuries or death, I would follow the protocol of the mandatory independent investigation, and would generally say: “It’s undoubtedly a tragic situation, and my thoughts are with the involved officers, citizens and their families, but it is an ongoing investigation and I cannot provide any more information than that.” But what is the DHS leadership saying? What are elected officials saying? Some have already defended the agents and others – like the Governor, are damning them. Within hours of the shooting CBP Commander Greg Bovino publicly defended the actions of the officers, saying that the deceased man had been armed and that the suspect intended to “do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement.” Yes, he was armed, according to local police, but lawfully licensed to do so according to the 2nd Amendment that many Americans treasure. Regardless, it is not clear in any video so far that the man held anything but a camera in his hand when brought to the ground, and Bovino himself could not bring any clarity to his early statement when asked by the press on Sunday morning. He simply fell back to letting the investigation run its course. Sorry Greg, you’re a day late and a dollar short on that one. Then DHS Secretary Kristi Noem told the media, “This looks like a situation where an individual arrived at the scene to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement.” She acts like the deceased man brandished a gun and threatened the officers. Trump administration officials then called the dead man a “would-be assassin.” If that was the case, being shot and killed should have been the expectation, but are we seeing that? Not so far. How does any of that banter from so-called leaders lend itself to public confidence for an independent investigation that they can trust? True ‘leadership’ involves doing what is right for the people you serve first and foremost, closely followed by the people you lead. These comments do not exhibit leadership at all. ICE and CBP normally operate in enforcement environments at or near (within a hundred miles of) international border points. They absolutely make dangerous arrests at times. But are they selected and trained to operate within the urban environments we are currently witnessing? Perhaps to a degree, but DHS has hired thousands of agents this past year who have received abbreviated training. That’s never a good thing from organizational and officer risk perspectives. I’m not saying normal ICE/CBP agents aren’t as trained and capable as local and state police officers. I’ve known many and they were wonderful officers, but their basic training cannot be the same. Their operating environments may overlap but are generally different. Similarly, most local cops aren’t trained in border enforcement and immigration laws and practices either. In the Minneapolis situation, local police are not supporting the operational activities of the federal agents. The Chief of Police and Mayor are both publicly opposed. Support by local police should be a given – not for random stops of people that look Hispanic and yelling demands for proof of citizenship, but during valid probable cause arrests and the execution of warrants. To stand and watch DHS officers who are unprofessionally targeting innocent U.S. citizens – including off duty local police officers of colour, comes with a loss of public trust as well as ethical and civil liability conflicts. However, I do believe it is the duty of local police to protect DHS agents who are being attacked in the street. DHS should put an immediate halt on any operational activities outside of international border points and pull back from municipalities. Municipal and state police leaders across the country must put their heads together with DHS officials and sort out who does what and how, very quickly. The need to clarify the roles, responsibilities and rules of engagement for their agencies and their people on the street. By being intelligence-led; conducting thorough investigations; working cooperatively and professionally through their varying legislative authorities as they search for and arrest undocumented criminals, they may be able to restore some level of public trust. This cannot continue as is. CBP’s Greg Bovino gave a passionate speech on Sunday afternoon where he spoke of “choices” made by protestors, politicians and the media. It was apparent that he was passing blame on everyone but the DHS in this debacle. Undoubtedly there have been poor choices by many but come on, man. You, the DHS Secretary and your ICE counterpart need to make the “choice” to pause, reflect, regroup and strategize for the good of the people you serve, the American people. Then your President needs to make the right choice and support the change.
By Chris Lewis January 14, 2026
I’ve been watching the enhanced and prominent activity of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers over the past several months with interest. Under President Donald Trump’s second Administration, as promised he has directed ICE to arrest and remove dangerous criminal illegal aliens, and specifically pointed out murderers, rapists, etc. That sensible goal has resulted in some bad people being taken off the streets as well as roundups of people that seem to be hardly dangerous criminals, albeit technically “illegal aliens.” Regardless, the issue I want to speak to is the ongoing controversy over ICE officers – some clad in civilian attire for the most part and others wearing ICE uniforms, but all covering their faces in some fashion. My comments are not “anti-ICE.” I am 100% behind law enforcement but I’m also always honest when I see what I believe is a wrong. I worked with and still maintain friendships with people that are now retired U.S. border and immigration officers. They were the best of the best and I’m sure most current officers are nothing but well intended. This is simply about my concerns around the covering of officer’s faces. I simply don’t get it. This is not Seal Team Six deploying on a dirt road to nowhere in Pakistan, to kill Osama Bin Laden. This law enforcement operating on Main Street USA, in commercial parking lots and sidewalks. These are law enforcement officers not an anti-terrorist unit. If ICE officers need to hide their faces for some legitimate operational reason like they are engaged in an undercover operation somewhere, they should stay out of the public and media spotlight. Members of the public that support the covering of ICE officer’s faces, speak of the dangerous work they do and threats of retaliation by relatives and extremists. ICE officials defend the practice and the Acting Director of ICE stated in a July 2025 CBS interview: “I’m not a proponent masks. however, if that's a tool that the men and women of ICE need to keep themselves and their family safe, then I'll allow it.” [1] If that’s his rationale, I hope they don’t tell him they need heat-seeking missiles with nuclear warheads too. Yes, their job comes with dangers and risk. They’re law enforcement officers not ice cream truck drivers. If the reason is to mask their identity from potential bad guys (which I simply don’t buy), there are also public accountability concerns, for the good guys. For example, identifying an officer that is alleged to have used excessive force, or has even been unprofessional, is important for the public from a process perspective. In terms of the whole pile of good guys ICE also ends up dealing with, I’m concerned for the safety of ICE when they run up to a vehicle, aggressively screaming commands through their facial coverings, sometimes with guns drawn. If I was a wanted criminal, I would likely know my goose was cooked and have to make a decision in terms of my response. That would be on me. But if I was a legally armed U.S. citizen who knew they had no warrants and had never so much as received a parking ticket, I might respond with some aggressive action of my own if not 100% sure that I was dealing with law enforcement and not some half uniformed/half civilian clothed maniac with a gun. That might include initiating a gunfight or at the very least stepping on the accelerator. That’s a frightening scenario for the lawful public and should be for the ICE officers. Uniformed police officers in Canada for the most part wear either name tags, their badge numbers or both on their uniforms. In Ontario, it’s the law. Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) officers wear name tags when they enforce our borders. So do many, many local and state police officers across the U.S. They also do not hide their faces except in extremely rare circumstances. Do all of these officers not make arrests of gang members; illegal aliens; drug smugglers; and dangerous criminals? Do they hide their faces and their names out of a fear of retribution? Do they testify behind a curtain and using a pseudonym during subsequent public trials? Absolutely not. The same rules apply to our police Public Order Unit (POU) officers that unfortunately have seen more violent protest operations in the past 20 years than they did in the 100 years prior. In Toronto, it has become a full-time job. In addition to a lot of good people that are just exercising their right to peaceful protest, at times POU officers deal with some very radical extremists who want to achieve absolutely nothing but cause mayhem, destroy property and if possible, fight with police. As a uniformed police officer, tactical team member and investigator – as did many colleagues, I arrested murderers, outlaw motorcycle gang members and local criminals. I interrogated murderers and rapists for hours. I testified against all these people in court. In small town Ontario, every community member knew where my family and I lived. People I had arrested (and even their parents) knocked on the door of my home to further their arguments. I curled with a local man I’d locked up a week before and against several I’d arrested or charged. I was in and out of provincial jails and federal penitentiaries on investigations and prisoner escorts. In London in the 1980s, my wife and I dined in a lovely restaurant, just two tables away from a notorious biker I’d dealt with on a raid and at biker check-points. We simply nodded at each other and ate our meals. Many of the folks I dealt with were simply not nice people. But I was doing police work! If it was all peace, love, flowers and unicorns, everyone would want to do it. Mind you through all those years, even when I had to use force to arrest some of these individuals or take them into custody at gun point, I treated them like humans. I didn’t disrespect them; didn’t use excessive force; was professional and spoke to them like they were human beings. I truly think that can make a significant difference. In fact, some very bad people I met along the way told me that it did. Some of the publicized ICE interactions with the public have been far from professional. I know their job is difficult and at times they are dealing with complete idiots, but cooler heads should most often prevail. The leaders of ICE should ensure “Professional Public Interaction” is strongly emphasized in ICE officer training and placed front and center in their rules of engagement, then ban facial coverings during public operations. Take that decision out of the hands of the frontline ICE officers that are bravely out doing their jobs. The officers will be safer and so will the law-abiding people in the community. [1] CBS News, CBS News presses ICE head on why agents can continue using masks, YouTube, July 18, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOOGyLuRkgU 
By Chris Lewis January 6, 2026
In my view, when all the decisions are made at one end of the room, it’s a failure of leadership.