Break and Enter to Steal a Firearm from a Motor Vehicle is a very serious form of break and enter under Canadian criminal law. Often referred to as break enter firearm theft, it targets situations where a person breaks into a “place” – including a car, truck, or other motor vehicle – to steal a gun, actually steals a gun during the break‑in, or breaks out after doing so. Under the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) system, this offence is coded as UCR Code 2125, and under the Criminal Code of Canada, section 98, it is classified as an indictable offence with a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. The law treats this conduct with exceptional severity because it combines property crime with the high public‑safety risk of illicit firearm possession.
The Legal Definition
98 (1) Every person commits an offence who
(a) breaks and enters a place with intent to steal a firearm located in it;
(b) breaks and enters a place and steals a firearm located in it; or
(c) breaks out of a place after
(i) stealing a firearm located in it, or
(ii) entering the place with intent to steal a firearm located in it.
(2) In this section, “place” means any building or structure or any part thereof, any motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft, railway vehicle, container or trailer.
In plain English, section 98 creates a special break and enter offence that focuses on firearms. A person can be guilty even if they never actually manage to steal the gun. It is enough that they broke and entered a covered location (including a motor vehicle) with the intent to steal a firearm inside. Alternatively, a person is also guilty if they do steal a firearm during the break‑in, or if they break out of the place after having stolen a firearm or after entering with the intent to do so.
The law also uses a very broad definition of “place”. It is not limited to houses or buildings. It clearly includes motor vehicles (cars, trucks, SUVs, etc.), as well as vessels, aircraft, railway vehicles, containers and trailers. This is why breaking into a parked car to steal a gun is captured by section 98. The word “break” is given the same meaning as in section 321 of the Criminal Code. Typically, it involves opening something that is closed or secured (such as forcing a door, window, or trunk), but it can also include entering without lawful authority in some circumstances. When courts interpret section 98, they rely directly on the wording and definitions found in the statute and related provisions of Part IX of the Criminal Code dealing with property offences.
Penalties & Sentencing Framework
- Type of offence: Indictable only (no summary option).
- Maximum penalty: Imprisonment for life.
- Mandatory minimum penalty: None specified in section 98.
- Other sentencing orders possible: Probation, fines, restitution, weapons prohibitions, and other ancillary orders at the court’s discretion (depending on the case facts and other Code provisions).
Unlike many lesser property offences, Break and Enter to Steal a Firearm from a Motor Vehicle is purely indictable. There is no summary conviction option. This reflects Parliament’s view that break enter firearm theft is inherently dangerous, because it directly feeds the illegal firearm market and increases risks of violence. The theoretical maximum sentence is life imprisonment, placing this offence among the most serious in the Criminal Code, even though it is not a homicide or violent offence in itself.
There is, however, no mandatory minimum sentence in section 98. This means that while the sentencing range is very wide (from a non‑custodial sentence in rare, exceptional circumstances up to lengthy penitentiary terms), judges retain discretion to tailor the sentence to the offender and the circumstances. Courts will consider traditional sentencing principles: denunciation, deterrence (especially specific and general deterrence relating to firearms), rehabilitation, protection of the public, and proportionality. Where the firearm is recovered quickly, no one is injured, and the offender has limited prior record, a shorter jail term or, rarely, a community‑based sentence might be imposed. Conversely, where the firearm is a prohibited or restricted weapon, or there is evidence of gang involvement or plans to use the weapon for further crime, much harsher sentences are common.
Because this is an indictable offence punishable by life, it may also have implications for parole eligibility in the event of very long sentences and can affect how correctional authorities classify the offender. Sentencing judges may also impose weapons prohibition orders and forfeiture of seized items under other sections of the Criminal Code. Even when the break and enter involves a motor vehicle, courts treat it as far more serious than ordinary car break‑ins or theft under $5000 because the core harm is placing a firearm outside legal control.
Common Defenses
-
Lawful justification or excuse (including entry without breaking and with consent)
One important defence focuses on whether there was truly an unlawful “break and enter” or unlawful presence. If a person had the owner’s consent to enter the motor vehicle or other place (for example, to retrieve personal property, to borrow the vehicle, or as part of employment duties), there may be a lawful justification or excuse for being there. In some situations, entry through a permanent or temporary opening that is already open – such as a car door left unlocked and opened with consent – may not satisfy the traditional notion of “breaking,” particularly if the Crown cannot show that the accused exceeded the scope of the consent or was otherwise there unlawfully. The defence will focus on the exact circumstances of entry, any permissions given, and whether the accused honestly believed they were allowed to be there. If the Crown cannot establish the essential element of an unlawful break and enter to a “place,” the section 98 charge may fail.
-
Lack of intent to steal a firearm
Section 98 is not a generic break and enter offence; it is targeted at break and enter involving firearms. For paragraphs 98(1)(a) and (c)(ii), the Crown must prove that, at the time of entry, the accused had the specific intent to steal a firearm in that place. If a person broke into a vehicle intending to steal money, electronics, or other property, but did not know a firearm was inside and did not intend to steal a gun, they may be guilty of a different break and enter or theft offence – but not necessarily of section 98. Similarly, for 98(1)(b) and (c)(i), the Crown must prove that a firearm was actually stolen. The defence may argue that the accused believed the item was something else (for example, a tool or non‑firearm object in a case), or that no firearm was taken at all. Detailed evidence about the accused’s knowledge, statements, and conduct before, during, and after the incident is often crucial. If the Crown cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused intended to steal – or did steal – a firearm specifically, the break enter firearm theft charge should not be made out.
-
Charter rights violations (unreasonable search or seizure under section 8)
Like many serious property and firearm‑related charges, section 98 prosecutions often rely on evidence obtained through police searches – of vehicles, homes, phones, or storage locations where guns or stolen property may be found. Under section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure. If police searched a vehicle or other place without a valid warrant and without lawful authority (or exceeded the scope of a warrant), or if they detained and searched the accused in a way that violates Charter protections, the defence may argue that the search was unconstitutional. If a court agrees, key evidence such as the recovered firearm, tools used to break into the vehicle, or incriminating statements may be excluded under section 24(2) of the Charter. Without that evidence, the Crown may not be able to prove the elements of break enter firearm theft, leading to an acquittal or a reduction to a lesser charge. Charter‑based defences are highly fact‑specific and turn on careful analysis of police conduct and the reasonableness of the search or seizure in the circumstances.
Real-World Example
Imagine a scenario where someone notices a hunting rifle in the back seat of a parked truck. Late at night, they smash the truck’s window, open the door, grab the rifle, and run away. This is a textbook example of Break and Enter to Steal a Firearm from a Motor Vehicle under section 98. The motor vehicle (the truck) is a “place” under the Criminal Code’s definition. Smashing the window and opening the door amounts to “breaking and entering.” The person’s clear goal is to steal the firearm, and they actually take it. From a policing standpoint, officers would investigate not only the property damage and theft, but also the firearm risk – for example, by notifying firearms units, tracing the rifle’s registration (if applicable), and assessing any links to other criminal activity. In court, the Crown would need to prove each element beyond a reasonable doubt: the unlawful break and enter into the vehicle, the presence and theft of a firearm, and the accused’s intent to steal that firearm. Given the public‑safety concerns, a conviction would typically draw a stern sentence, especially if the gun was not recovered or was later used in another crime.
Record Suspensions (Pardons)
A conviction for break enter firearm theft has serious long‑term consequences beyond any prison sentence. Because it is an indictable offence with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, it is viewed as a major criminal record entry that can affect employment, travel, immigration status, and access to certain licences. Under Canada’s record suspension regime, administered by the Parole Board of Canada, people convicted of indictable offences generally must wait 10 years after the completion of their entire sentence – including any custody, probation, and payment of fines or restitution – before they can apply for a record suspension (pardon). Given the seriousness of section 98, applicants must typically demonstrate a sustained period of law‑abiding behaviour, stability, and rehabilitation. A record suspension, if granted, does not erase the conviction but sets it apart from other criminal records, which can significantly reduce many of the practical barriers that follow from a firearm‑related break and enter conviction.
Related Violations
- Attempt to Commit Break and Enter
- Possession of a Weapon for a Dangerous Purpose
- Theft Under $5000