 |
| John L. Hill |
Consider the residents of Tumbler Ridge, B.C., after 18-year-old Jesse Van Rootselaar allegedly killed family members and others before taking her own life. Some critics suggest that had Canada’s gun laws been stricter, the tragedy could have been avoided.
It may take more time to fully understand how the shooter obtained the guns used in this horrendous incident. What has been reported is that the police recovered two firearms at the scene: a long gun and a modified rifle-type firearm. However, authorities had previously seized neither of those guns, and their origin (legal or illegal) remains under investigation. Van Rootselaar did not hold a current firearms licence at the time of the shootings; her licence had expired in 2024, and no guns were registered in her name. Police had been to the home on multiple occasions over the years for concerns about mental health and behaviour. At one point, firearms were seized but later returned after a successful court petition by the lawful owner.
seamartini: ISTOCKPHOTO.COM
However, gaps and limitations have already been noted in the reporting. Red flag orders can currently be sought only by certain parties (e.g., police or family) and typically require evidence of an imminent threat. Signs of concern that aren’t overt threats may not be sufficient. Health-care providers are not empowered under existing rules to report patients to firearms authorities without breaching confidentiality unless there’s a clear threat. If someone else in a household legally possesses a gun, a minor or unlicensed person may still gain access if the gun isn’t securely stored. This can create enforcement complexities. Public discussion after this attack has highlighted this as an area where enforcement or rules could be tightened.
Would stricter gun laws alone have likely prevented these shootings? Unfortunately, the answer must be “not necessarily.” The weapons used in the attack weren’t previously seized and may have been obtained without proper licensing or accessed through an adult household member. Canada has enacted fairly restrictive licensing and firearm classifications. Banning additional guns might limit the types available but wouldn’t inherently stop individuals from using other firearms, accessing other points of access or using illegal markets. Simply tightening the laws on specific classes of guns may not have stopped this attack if the individual never held a valid licence and obtained guns through other means.
Could better enforcement or application of existing laws have helped? Commentators and experts have suggested several ways: stronger use of red flag laws or broader criteria for removal could have meant firearms stayed out of the household before they were returned after the earlier seizure. Closer integration between mental health systems and firearms authorities, to allow health professionals to flag individuals with serious mental health crises without legal barriers, might help identify risks earlier. Ensuring that storage rules effectively prevent unlicensed persons from accessing guns in a household, including stricter enforcement or inspections, could reduce opportunities for misuse.
Whenever a crime is committed, we should ask why it occurred. It is insufficient to think that public safety is ensured once an offender is locked away or has died. It’s important to emphasize that multiple factors contributed to the Tumbler Ridge tragedy. These include mental health issues, social isolation and interactions with police services before the shooting, not just access to firearms. Experts and community voices are already pointing to mental health supports, community resources and early intervention as critical, alongside law enforcement reforms.
There are no simple answers to ensuring public safety. Canada’s gun laws are already stricter than those of many jurisdictions. Simply making them “stiffer” in general likely wouldn’t have prevented the Tumbler Ridge shootings by itself. However, better enforcement and application of existing mechanisms, especially regarding firearm possession by persons with documented risks and more flexible red flag tools, might have reduced the likelihood that this individual had access to the weapons used. Broader systemic changes in mental health support and crisis intervention are also widely seen as crucial to preventing similar tragedies in the future.
In the United States, there have been multiple school shootings. If Canada is not to experience similar recurring tragedies, we must examine why and how the Tumbler Ridge incident occurred. We must recognize that causation operates at multiple levels, and each level must be explored and addressed. We must take the steps necessary to ensure it doesn’t happen again.
John L. Hill practised and taught prison law until his retirement. He holds a JD from Queen’s and an LLM in constitutional law from Osgoode Hall. He is also the author of Pine Box Parole: Terry Fitzsimmons and the Quest to End Solitary Confinement (Durvile & UpRoute Books) and The Rest of the (True Crime) Story (AOS Publishing). Contact him at johnlornehill@hotmail.com.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada, contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.