im sorry but i thought you could nt owen firearms in canada
There is many intricate details that would take a long time to go over, but in general canadians have less rights in ownership, more restrictions, and usualy in practice far less rights to self defense even with ownership. Firearm storage laws are strict and
All firearms must be stored unloaded which means defending yourself means you took time to load the firearm which can be used to show you may have been able to escape or do something else. If the firearm was loaded when you picked it up and defended yourself then you were illegaly storing the firearm. They must also be rendered incapable of being fired:
Non-restricted firearms must be rendered unable to be fired by one of the following measures:
using a secure locking device
removing the bolt or bolt carrier
locking in a sturdy, secure container or room that cannot be easily broken open or into
In addition, the non-restricted firearms must be in a place where ammunition for the firearm is not easy to obtain. Ammunition may be stored with the firearm if it is securely locked in a sturdy container that cannot be easily broken open or into (the firarms can also be stored in such a container with the ammunition).
The only exception listed is :
An exception is made for non-restricted firearms being used for predator control in areas where it is legal to discharge a firearm. An unloaded firearm used for predator control can be temporarily stored unlocked and out in the open if the firearms can be discharged at that location without breaking a law.
Notice if discharging the firearm would not be breaking the law in that location. That means technicaly the right to self defense with a firearm in all but the most remote locations is an impracticality under the law. To be readily available for self defense one must be breaking the law in storage.
Those are the laws regarding "unrestricted" firearms (haha) for restricted and prohibted classes such as all handguns the laws are even more strict.
So self defense with a firearm unless you are LEO will usualy result in prosecution in Canada.
The main difference, which unconstitutional laws within the USA have clouded in understanding for US citizens is that the USA has the second amendment and a system where unconstitutional rulings can be overturned. In Canada it is majority rule, and a right or law in regards to firearms can readily be taken away at a moment's notice if the parliment decides.
This is the difference between absolute democracy, as in Canada, and representative democracy with absolute rights provided by the constitution, and specificly the first 10 amendments in the USA. A mere majority of over 50% is not supposed to be able to remove any right in the US. In Canada anything 50%+ of officials vote on can become law. Technicaly the Bill of Rights is supposed to be sacred and unchanging, but through interpretation the SCOTUS can change it even though they took and oath to adhere to it and are supposed to make decisions based on thier real understanding of it, not on what they feel it should mean.
Now in practice the US has been allowing itself to slip away from the constitution (because congress and states are passing laws contrary to the constitution), but legaly that is the primary difference, and because of that passage of restrictions is much harder in the USA because they know that if they do too much the SCOTUS can overturn and set a precedence to undo gun laws. However the opposite side is that if such restrictions are passed and the SCOTUS rules in favor of them, gun rights are permanently tarnished, so both sides are very cautious in the passage of legislation that could set a precedence in favor of the other side unless the bench is currently held by people they are confident will interprete in thier favor.
http://panda.com/canadaguns/ was a good reference I found for general understanding of firearm laws for Canada.
In law Canadians have no RIGHT to firearm ownership, merely the privelidge of what the government decides is allowed through majority rule. In America it is an obsolute right that shall not be infringed and so is not legaly supposed to be capable of being legislated away. In practice though the right has been turned into a privelidge even in the USA through the necessity of compliance of regulations unconstitutionaly imposed on ownership.
So there is in most educated people's understanding a major difference, as there is supposed to be via the second, but in practice the difference is not as great.
In practical terms though many firearms are far easier to own and use in the united states with the exception of a few. Capacity limitations for example are also much more restrictive in canada and there is more laws pertaining to the firing mechanism. Just browse the long list of restrictions in the link I provided.
I think the most important difference is that the right to self defense with a firearm in Canada is all but null and void through the intricate details of the law.
So in America the second was specificly created for the right pertaining to personal and community self defense by individuals, and the entire purpose for firearm ownership protection through the 2nd amendment is to that end. While sport use of them in recreation, and in hunting is just an additional bonus. In Canada the privelidge is granted for hunting and sport use, and never is intended for defense against other human beings.
I'd hate to think of what an HK would go for 
