- Reaction score
- 8,254
- Points
- 1,360
The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
- Thread starter Jarnhamar
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 4,024
- Points
- 1,040
Haggis said:
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.
Haggis
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,399
- Points
- 1,140
Eaglelord17 said:
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.
- Reaction score
- 4,024
- Points
- 1,040
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.
Haggis
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,399
- Points
- 1,140
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.
There are no property rights enshrined in our Constitution. PM Trudeau senior made sure of that.
- Reaction score
- 4,024
- Points
- 1,040
Haggis said:
No property rights enshrined in our Charter, however I would argue that those are rights that existed prior to the 1867 Constitution, and should be enshrined in common law in this country. Property rights are also upheld in our Bill of rights even though that isn't nearly as binding as the Charter.
It could also be argued under the Charter that a handgun ban in your city or town is a violation of your right to life, liberty, and security of the person, as well as your right to not receive cruel and unusual punishment (which a arbitrary ban on ownership of property based off a geographic area is).
This city banning idea is the stupidest one I have heard of in a long time, because as much as I hate our current firearms act at least it is consistent across the country. This starts turning us into the States with there mishmash of laws depending on the states, and city you live in.
Its disgusting how this current government is acting. They want to bully and attack law abiding citizens who have done nothing to harm anyone, instead have been persecuted for decades simply based off of their decision to legally own and acquire certain property. If anything their aggressive and holier than thou attitude shows more of a reason why we shouldn't disarm ourselves.
- Reaction score
- 1,846
- Points
- 1,160
Haggis said:
Not entirely true.
And while Trudeau gets the blame for not including property rights in CA 1982, the real guilty party was Roy Romanov, Premier of Saskatchewan who convinced him not to.
- Reaction score
- 5,538
- Points
- 1,160
92(13) is a division of powers clause, it doesn’t create a right to any private individual to own property.
The only quasi constitutional document that creates some property ownership “rights” is the Diefenbaker era Canadian Bill of Rights, which is a federal statute and not part of the actual Constitution and certainly not part of the Charter. It’s called quasi constitutional because it has been used as an affirmative defence that has sometimes been accepted by the Supreme Court. If Justin Trudeau wanted to, he could repeal or amend the CBoR this afternoon.
The only quasi constitutional document that creates some property ownership “rights” is the Diefenbaker era Canadian Bill of Rights, which is a federal statute and not part of the actual Constitution and certainly not part of the Charter. It’s called quasi constitutional because it has been used as an affirmative defence that has sometimes been accepted by the Supreme Court. If Justin Trudeau wanted to, he could repeal or amend the CBoR this afternoon.
- Reaction score
- 12,821
- Points
- 1,160
Surprising insight from Toronto area mayors.
Toronto-area mayors calls for action at border following forum on gun violence
https://www.lillooetnews.net/toronto-area-mayors-calls-for-action-at-border-following-forum-on-gun-violence-1.24062834
Police and Border services communicating better and going after guns coming across the border? Good to hear.
Editing to add, it's interesting that classical Liberalism, including the most influential early thinkers like John Locke, believed that Liberalism included individual property rights.
Toronto-area mayors calls for action at border following forum on gun violence
https://www.lillooetnews.net/toronto-area-mayors-calls-for-action-at-border-following-forum-on-gun-violence-1.24062834
Police and Border services communicating better and going after guns coming across the border? Good to hear.
Editing to add, it's interesting that classical Liberalism, including the most influential early thinkers like John Locke, believed that Liberalism included individual property rights.
Haggis
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,399
- Points
- 1,140
Haggis
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,399
- Points
- 1,140
The Liberals have proposed a "new" law (which pretty much already exists) to allow medical professionals and educators to call their local police to report persons at risk of harm to themselves or others and as that the police seize their legally owned firearms. This "Red Flag Law" is already on the books, but those doctors and teachers must call their CFOs, not the local police. Not even the most strident of the anti-gun groups thinks this law is needed.
- Reaction score
- 12,821
- Points
- 1,160
Short of banning all guns in Canada, or a law that severely screws over gun owners, I don't think anti gun advocates will really support or care about this type of stuff.
They don't want connon sense laws they want all guns gone.
They don't want connon sense laws they want all guns gone.
- Reaction score
- 18,393
- Points
- 1,160
It appears that Ducks Unlimited won't support the petition and are now shedding support from gun owners and hunters.
Colin P said:
I thought their primary mission was wetland conservation and advocacy. They are not a firearms lobby group. Seems to me they are being neutral and not taking a position on a policy matter that is outside of their mandate.
As a tax exempt not for profit group their status as such could be at threat if they started getting political.
- Reaction score
- 7,149
- Points
- 1,120
They have a seat on the National Firearms Consultation board....so....yeah....guns are in their wheelhouse.
- Reaction score
- 18,393
- Points
- 1,160
Remius said:
That was not the reason they gave and now it's biting them. They are about to take a major hit in the wallet for their virtue signalling.
Similar threads
