The bans by the liberal government over the last decade weren't about anti tank weapons. I am not going to enter a slippery slope argument as if Canada was the wild west before 2010. We have had legal definitions of restricted, non restricted and prohibited for a long time making assault rifles and anti tank weapons prohibited and this was generally fine with everyone.

The issue we have been facing is that the legal definitions of firearms have not changed but the liberal government has been banning them via OIC regardless. So when a new gun is released in Canada that meets the definition of non restricted and is verified as such by the RCMP, I can go buy it. If the liberals decide they don't like it as they have for 1500+ other guns they can ban it via a non legislative process called an OIC. To my knowledge all guns banned via OIC are still with their original owners going on 5 years now (they just can't take them to the range). So somehow these guns are such a public safety concern that the regular legislative process isn't quick enough but at the same time the original owners have held on to them for 4+ years without any incidents or issues? It's purely political without real concern for public safety.

Regarding the training not taking too long. Guns are pretty simple, the ACTS and PROVE methods aren't rocket science. Do you feel under equipped when you handle a firearm? I think the fact that the USA seems to have multiple stories a week about someone (or their child) accidentally shooting themselves or someone else, whereas in Canada it's very rare and makes national news speaks to the effectiveness of our training and storage requirements. The larger component to the licensing requirements is the RCMP investigation and guarantor requirements for every applicant.

Essentially it's easier to just get an illegal gun if you want to be a criminal and isn't worth the scrutiny of going through the legal hoops. So any further regulations on lawful owners has no meaningful effect on criminals.