Assault Style Weapons Prohibited In CDA
- Thread starter Ocean Breeze
- Start date
http://web-extract.constantcontact....-474e-aa82-e4ef94406470.jpg?ver=1557437111000
All 12 and 10 gauge shotguns with removable chokes are banned, all large game rifles, bolt action, such as the weatherby mark V .460 bolt action hunting rifle are banned.
So much for only assault style weapons being banned and hunting rifles not being touched.
All 12 and 10 gauge shotguns with removable chokes are banned, all large game rifles, bolt action, such as the weatherby mark V .460 bolt action hunting rifle are banned.
So much for only assault style weapons being banned and hunting rifles not being touched.
This will get butchered by lawyers in Court and the Liberals can have their "we tried" as an out. It's not going to be cheap either.
But. . . Canada is the home to the large majority of the largest game species in North America.
A criminal might steal our garden gnome & then kill somebody so it only makes sense we don't have a garden gnome that can be stolen? This is a slippery slope.
http://www.newscenter1.tv/late-night-assault-by-garden-gnome-leads-to-arrest/
Yup. And a criminal might steal your money, then buy a rifle, and kill somebody. So we'll give you two years to turn in all your money.
We’re Going to Court – Charter Challenge
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
The CCFR, as the public relations and education branch of the Canadian firearms community, has not typically pursued litigation as a tool of changing legislation or steering public policy. As a result of this unprecedented attack on the freedom and liberty of Canadian sport shooters and hunters, that’s changing.
A message from Rod Giltaca, CEO & Executive Director, CCFR
Over the last five days, the CCFR has looked at what the Liberal Party of Canada has done to us with their massive, overreaching firearms ban, and in that short time to the best of our ability we have assessed all of the associated issues and the ways that we can respond to protect our members.
This issue gives rise to complicated arguments of constitutional law and the legislative process, however the arguments boiled down to this fundamental truth: the government, in an entirely arbitrary and irrational way, has created legislation that will deprive us of our property and our freedom to live as we wish, on pains of incarceration for failing to comply.
While we have assessed the legal technicalities of what they have done in great detail, the government is charged with passing legislation governing the nation and our options are not great. That said, when we took our analysis back to first principles, and the actual nature of our complaint, it became quite simple: we believe that this is a wrongful deprivation of liberty arising from an improper exercise of legislative power.
Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides that “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice”.
Although the application of this section of the Charter to our circumstances is not guaranteed, this much is clear: what’s gone wrong in this process is that we have been deprived, both as to our freedom to live as we choose, as well as being put at risk of incarceration by this law, in a manner that is fundamentally unjust. We will ask the Court to rule on whether or not the government has the right to deprive us of our liberty, or our property, on penalty of incarceration, on fundamentally irrational grounds.
In looking at the role of the CCFR and what our members want and need from us, it is clear that lobbying and running educational programs will not solve this problem. While we will keep doing that of course, to deal with this problem we must do more. We must fight for our liberty, and we must fight to oppose irrational legislation. In the present case, this requires litigation. We must try to use the powers of the court to stop the unrestrained and abusive exercise of legislative authority given to the government. Regrettably, nothing else will work.
As an additional argument beyond issues of liberty, while the government is clearly authorized by section 117.15 of the Criminal Code of Canada to make regulations classifying firearms, we say their use of that authority in this instance is irrational with no foundation in the factual circumstances of Canadian society. Such an arbitrary exercise of legislative process is abusive, contrary to the principles of fundamental justice, and must be struck down. We will ask the Court to do this as well.
We are not guaranteed success in this fight, although the arguments are far from frivolous. In the end, we can either choose to simply take this treatment, or we can oppose it in the only ways we can.
And so, here we are – we ARE doing this. There is no guarantee of a win – but our team believes we have a chance, and we promised our community we would leave no stone unturned, nor avenue unexplored. We meant it.
Stay tuned for details on how you can help, when the action is officially filed and where we go from here. Rod, Tracey, Michael and the entire team at the CCFR are grateful for your continued support. We are all in this together.
Our legal team: JSS Barristers are experts in the litigation of Constitutional Law, The Constitution Act, the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. They have a proven track record with substantial successes under their belt. Our team leader, Laura Warner has an impressive repertoire as a litigator and specialist in this area of law, along with her outside interests including being a volunteer for the Rocky Mountain Civil Liberties Association, proposing amendments to Human Rights legislation and serves on her firms Inclusion Committee. Laura is a former World & National Ringette champion and has been inducted into the Ringette Canada Hall of Fame.
Notable cases:
Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v. Alberta Teachers’ Association, 2011 SCC 61
Strickland v. Canada (Attorney General), 2015 SCC 37
Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v. University of Calgary, 2016 SCC 53
Ernst v. Alberta Energy Regulator, 2017 SCC 1
Calgary (Police Service) v Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2018 ABCA 114
Fitter International Inc v British Columbia, 2019 ABQB 990
The CCFR’s General Counsel Michael Loberg of Loberg Law will liaison and quarterback the litigation on our behalf. Michael brings with him a wealth of litigation experience and a deep understanding of firearms legislation & regulation, both as a lawyer and a restricted firearms owner. Check out Michael on LinkedIn
firearmrights.ca/en/we-are-going-to-court/
Just mailed off a check to help with the court case. Those of us who can afford to and believe that this bill is useless, unjust, unnecessary should think about doing the same.
In 2018 (the latest year I can find numbers for) more than 5x times as many Americans were stabbed/slashed to death than were killed by someone with a rifle of any kind. Clearly the US is in desperate need for knife control. Same with Canada. But leftists don't care about that shit. They only care about firearms because those are far FAR more effective in bringing down an authoritarian govt than a bunch of bladed weapons. And the leftists in the West ARE authoritarian. Trudeau's latest gun ban is not only unconstitutional, it's also just a tad racist. Not that the leftarded morons in Canada will care.
They haven't been banned though. First Nations are still permitted to use their semi-automatic rifles for hunting, even though Groper stated that hunters in Canada don't use semi-automatic rifles. The law is racist.
I wonder if the Japanese detainees and their descendants can use the letter of apology from the government of Canada to fight the gun grab . During fishery protests a number of years ago , many commercial fishers set their nets to bring light to the racist policy of native only commercial harvest . When fisheries officers were on the grounds fining the protesting fishermen , the Japanese gillnetters showed a copy of that letter to the officers , and not wanting to open that can of worms left the Japanese guys to carry on .
Machetes. These are currently being sold cheaply in many stores and used in crimes like home invasions and street robberies and especially against taxi drivers, etc....and what the Hell are $20 Machetes legitimately being used for on the Canadian Prairies to justify their sale here? Not for harvesting Canola or clearing jungle trails I'd assume.
http://leaderpost.com/news/crime/regina-man-charged-in-machete-attack
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/saskatoon-teen-says-men-with-machetes-attacked-him-1.1362073
http://thestarphoenix.com/news/crime/saskatoon-police-constable-suffers-machete-wounds-during-attempted-arrest
http://thestarphoenix.com/news/local-news/separate-machete-attacks-on-same-street-send-two-to-hospital
http://saskatoon.ctvnews.ca/man-faces-charges-following-alleged-machete-attack-in-saskatoon-1.4922761
http://panow.com/2019/09/30/witness-says-two-men-tried-to-enter-care-home-said-they-would-kill-us-all/
http://www.discoverhumboldt.com/local/rcmp-led-on-perilous-chase-throughout-eastern-saskatchewan
http://www.cjwwradio.com/2020/05/22/94462/
http://globalnews.ca/news/3902974/prince-albert-police-service-machete-attack-assault/