Author Topic: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0  (Read 94729 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Haggis

  • "There ain't no hat badge on a helmet!"
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 68,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,858
  • "Oh, what a glorious sight, Warm-reekin, rich!"
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #700 on: December 18, 2019, 06:33:14 »
Conservative MP Glen Motz has sponsored another petition for the PM and Minister Blair to ignore. This one, unfortunately, asks only for a debate of the OIC/ban and associated costs, not for the abandonment of the plan.

Train like your life depends on it.  Some day, it may.

Offline Haggis

  • "There ain't no hat badge on a helmet!"
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 68,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,858
  • "Oh, what a glorious sight, Warm-reekin, rich!"
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #701 on: December 21, 2019, 12:33:06 »
The handgun ban will likely take the form of legislated changes and regulation issued under the Firearms Act which allows for the creation of municipally defined restriction zones and prohibition zones for certain classes of firearms as defined under the Firearms Act.  Regulations will also be needed which allows the Canadian Firearms Program (CFP) to provide municipalities who establish such zones with the names  addresses and ownership particulars for all registered firearms within their restriction and prohibition zones. (You can bet that, at least in Québec, this will also include information from the long gun registry.) Those municipalities will now be empowered to issue confiscation orders and lay charges under the Firearms Act for non compliance.

And this article would seem to indicate that my quote above may be right on the money.  Trudeau WILL get his ban, whether the provinces support it or not.  It will be interesting to see which level of government by invokes the "notwithstanding clause" first.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2019, 14:33:35 by Haggis »
Train like your life depends on it.  Some day, it may.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 315,236
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,359
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #702 on: December 21, 2019, 14:16:06 »
Quote
"In some situations, we may have a province that is unwilling to do that despite the willingness of a city or cities to do that," he said. "At which point, I have been assured, there are other tools we can use that wouldn't be as ideal, because it would involve disagreements with the provinces at a time where we want to be collaborative."

Trudeau declined to elaborate on any alternative measure, "because it's something we hope to not have to use."

Classic Honourable Prime Minister Trudeau right there.


And when Toronto bans handguns and there's still shootings they'll simply say it's because the next city over didn't ban the-so better ban them everywhere.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Online milnews.ca

  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 447,605
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 22,669
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #703 on: January 23, 2020, 19:24:22 »
Interesting letter a Liberal MP wrote to Minister Blair, attached - more here ...

Edited to add:  I suspect he & the whip (at least) got to know each other much better after this.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2020, 09:47:18 by milnews.ca »
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline Eaglelord17

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 18,245
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 329
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #704 on: January 24, 2020, 06:01:36 »
And this article would seem to indicate that my quote above may be right on the money.  Trudeau WILL get his ban, whether the provinces support it or not.  It will be interesting to see which level of government by invokes the "notwithstanding clause" first.

Notwithstanding clause I don't think would work. The ban will likely be struck down in the Supreme Court as it violates our constitution. There is a clear separation of powers in this country, and part of that is that cities gain their powers from the Provinces, not the other way around. The Federal government cannot give powers to a city, only to the Province.

No matter what happens it is going to be some interesting constitutional law happening.
+300

Offline Haggis

  • "There ain't no hat badge on a helmet!"
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 68,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,858
  • "Oh, what a glorious sight, Warm-reekin, rich!"
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #705 on: Yesterday at 17:58:05 »
Notwithstanding clause I don't think would work. The ban will likely be struck down in the Supreme Court as it violates our constitution. There is a clear separation of powers in this country, and part of that is that cities gain their powers from the Provinces, not the other way around. The Federal government cannot give powers to a city, only to the Province.

Minister Blair was directed to "amend Canada's firearms laws" in order to fulfill the campaign promises of confiscation and municipal bans.  See my reply #690 which outlines how the municipal bans will likely come about which will make them constitutionally sound.

Another point to watch in the near therm is the upcoming initial ban on the sale of soon-to-be-banned/confiscated firearms.  You won't even be able to sell your AR platform, SKS, Mini-14, Garand etc. to an American/foreign buyer, driving the "fair market value" in Canada to near zero.  I suspect $500 will be the top end payout during the confiscation, thereby allowing the Liberals to stay within their $250M buyback budget.
Train like your life depends on it.  Some day, it may.

Offline Eaglelord17

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 18,245
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 329
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #706 on: Today at 06:08:36 »
I don't see the changes that you think they might propose as sound. Currently there is no prohibition in Canada as to where you can own a prohibited or restricted firearm, only where they can be used. Hypothetically I could live right next to parliament and if I was 12.2 licenced there is nothing that they could do to stop me from storing my property in my home. To try and argue that they can establish areas that you cannot possess legally acquired property on your legally owned property where you are legally required to store it (in the case of restricted firearms) is hopefully impossible under our current form of governance. I still see that as a violation of our separations of powers as it is still giving municipalities more powers than the province, just trying to word it differently. Hopefully the courts have enough sense and are impartial enough to see it that way.

Offline Haggis

  • "There ain't no hat badge on a helmet!"
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 68,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,858
  • "Oh, what a glorious sight, Warm-reekin, rich!"
Re: The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
« Reply #707 on: Today at 06:27:36 »
Eaglelord17, the PM has said that there are tools available to force recalcitrant provinces to comply.  He will use those.  He will not accept challenges to a key plank in his election platform.  If certain provinces fail to play along, then a national handgun ban will probably be imposed.

There are no property rights enshrined in our Constitution.  PM Trudeau senior made sure of that.
« Last Edit: Today at 09:20:22 by Haggis »
Train like your life depends on it.  Some day, it may.