Trudeau promises more gun control and goes on the attack against Scheer

The decision regarding the judicial review of the May 1, 2020 OIC (Order in Council) Prohibiting 1500 plus named firearms is still pending.

Is this an attempt to influence the outcome of the decision?

This move is entirely inappropriate for the Liberals to make prior to Justice Kane's court decision...

Mendicino announces first step of firearm buyback program, targeting industry

Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino says Ottawa has taken its first step toward launching its firearms buyback program, beginning with industry.

Mendicino said at a news conference this morning that the government has signed a contract with the Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Association to work with businesses and retailers that currently hold inventory prohibited under a May 2020 order-in-council.

The association Mendicino named in his announcement tweeted during the minister's remarks that it remains "skeptical" of this industry buyback program, citing concerns about a lack of implementation process.

The second phase of the buyback program is expected to aim to target individual firearms owners, who currently have amnesty under an order that is set to expire in October.

https://www.castanet.net/news/Canad...of-firearm-buyback-program-targeting-industry
 

Trudeau’s Liberals abandon plan to expand banned guns list — but new amendments are coming​

They plan to try to legislate a definition of what would constitute an illegal weapon in a move that is sure to reignite controversy.​

OTTAWA—The Liberals are dropping a plan to add hundreds of firearms to a list of banned weapons in Canada as part of their broader promise to tighten gun laws in Canada.

But they will try again to legislate a definition of what would constitute an illegal weapon in a move that is sure to reignite controversy around one of the most politically sensitive files on the government’s agenda.

https://www.therecord.com/ts/politi...-guns-list-but-new-amendments-are-coming.html
 

Justin Trudeau’s Great Canadian Gun Confiscation​


There’s no market, only one buyer, and participation is mandatory

When governments take private property, such takings are usually done to carry out some larger public project — like building roads and other infrastructure. Unlike property seizures of the past, the Trudeau Liberals’ gun confiscation (“buyback”) isn’t supporting some larger project for the benefit of the public. It’s a confiscation of private property for the sake of fulfilling a platform point.
They can argue that gun confiscation addresses a public safety issue, but the evidence doesn’t support this. As gun expert Tim Thurley wrote in the National Post last month, the gun control measures that do make a difference for public safety have been in place in Canada for the past 30 years — including licensing, safe storage requirements and background checks. Meanwhile, a substantial body of research shows that bans for specific types of guns don’t work.
nationalpost.com

Jamie Sarkonak: Justin Trudeau’s Great Canadian Gun Confiscation

There’s no market, only one buyer, and participation is mandatory
nationalpost.com nationalpost.com
 

Laurier Poll on Guns in Canada​

Welcome to our survey “Liberal Gun Control Reforms in Canada: Effective Measures for Reducing Gun Crime or Attacks on Civil Liberties?”


Thank you for participating in this important opportunity to provide insight into your experience as a gun owner. Our project aims to examine the impact of introduced and proposed executive and legislative measures on sports shooters, hunters and collectors. It will gather and analyze views and perspectives of Canadian gun owners and inform the ongoing debate on gun ownership and gun control issues arising in the Canadian Parliament, discussed in the media and within gun owners’ circles. This study will provide an important and timely contribution to the empirical research on Canadian gun ownership. This survey will only take about 10 minutes of your time. You can opt out at any time. Your answers will be completely anonymous. The anonymous survey results will be used for research presentations and published in criminology journals in Canada and abroad.

Thank you for your contribution to the study!

Best regards,

Dr. Nikolai Kovalev
Associate Professor of Criminology
Wilfrid Laurier University
 
IronNoggin said:

Laurier Poll on Guns in Canada​

Welcome to our survey “Liberal Gun Control Reforms in Canada: Effective Measures for Reducing Gun Crime or Attacks on Civil Liberties?”


Thank you for participating in this important opportunity to provide insight into your experience as a gun owner. Our project aims to examine the impact of introduced and proposed executive and legislative measures on sports shooters, hunters and collectors. It will gather and analyze views and perspectives of Canadian gun owners and inform the ongoing debate on gun ownership and gun control issues arising in the Canadian Parliament, discussed in the media and within gun owners’ circles. This study will provide an important and timely contribution to the empirical research on Canadian gun ownership. This survey will only take about 10 minutes of your time. You can opt out at any time. Your answers will be completely anonymous. The anonymous survey results will be used for research presentations and published in criminology journals in Canada and abroad.

Thank you for your contribution to the study!

Best regards,

Dr. Nikolai Kovalev
Associate Professor of Criminology
Wilfrid Laurier University
Click to expand...
Done
 
1. Codifying a standardized (liberal party) definition of "assault style firearms" to be written into all legislation including the Criminal Code AND C21.

2. Regulation changes to make manufacturers responsible for classifying firearms.

3. Making "ghost-guns" and "homemade guns" illegal - which they already are.

4. Reinstating a Canadian Firearms advisory committee "non-partisan" to be staffed by Liberals, anti-firearms groups, and others handpicked by the Liberal Party. This group will decide the classification of firearms, can change the classification of any firearm without legislation, and can ban any firearm by adding it to C21 and by OIC without any parliamentary process or debate. This group will be doing this by the summer.
 
Screenshot-20230501-223441-Instagram.jpg
 

Mass Casualty recommendations wouldn't have stopped N.S. massacre, and won't stop others​

The government has renewed its push on Bill C-21, drawing on recommendations in the report by the Mass Casualty Commission (MCC), which had been tasked with investigating the causes of the 2020 mass killing in Nova Scotia. Yet if the commission was aiming to prevent another mass killing, it missed the target.

One recommended measure was identical to the proposed Liberal amendments banning semi-automatic firearms that were added without consultation into Bill C-21 and then removed following widespread opposition, only to be re-added in a slightly altered form earlier this week. Others include limiting the amount and type of ammunition an individual can purchase and store.

These proposed recommendations suffer from the same problems as the rest of the government’s post-2019 firearms policies: they are aimed at the wrong people, ignore Canadian research and would be almost impossible to implement in the Canadian context.

While tragic, mass shootings in Canada are so vanishingly rare, their frequency is actually marginally lower than non-firearm mass homicide rates. The strict vetting process that Canadian gun owners go through to enjoy the privilege of firearms ownership makes them less likely than the general population to commit murder.

Firearms smuggled from the United States are responsible for the overwhelming majority of gun crime in Canada’s major cities and illegal guns have been the weapons of choice for some recent mass murderers, whose violent histories often make getting a gun license impossible.

Policy is about making choices with limited resources. Continuing to pile irrelevant rules on licensed gun owners would be like fixating on a faucet that occasionally drips while ignoring the burst water main flooding your basement.

Canada’s focus should be on putting resources where they will help the most: securing the border, providing mental health support for Canadians and funding evidence-based community programs to divert at-risk youth from gangs. If the government seeks to prioritize public safety, it should not tilt at expensive windmills.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/ma...ave-stopped-n-s-massacre-and-wont-stop-others
 

Three years after Trudeau's gun ban, nothing has changed​


In the three years since his ban, Trudeau hasn't passed a single piece of gun control legislation or taken guns away from civilians.

It was three years ago that Justin Trudeau announced he was keeping Canadians safe by banning “military-grade assault weapons” for civilians. Strangely, three years after that promise, those guns he deemed too dangerous for civilian ownership are still sitting in the basements and gun safes of your neighbours.

We are no closer to the government launching the “buyback” they promised at the time, and that likely suits Trudeau. He’s not interested in public safety; he’s interested in using guns as a political weapon to win elections.

That may sound harsh but consider the facts. Whenever the Trudeau Liberals are in trouble, whenever they want good headlines, gun control is one of the issues they return to.

They may make announcements, they make promises, they hold photo-ops, and they accomplish precious little.

On May 1, 2020, they banned the so-called “military-grade assault weapons” using an order-in-council (OIC) — a kind of executive order passed by cabinet — but it’s not backed up by legislation. That OIC was the subject of a court challenge last month that has a good chance of winning, even according to the government’s own lawyers.

torontosun.com

LILLEY: Three years after Trudeau's gun ban, nothing has changed

Justin Trudeau said he wanted to take military grade guns away from civilians, but crime hasn't gone down since he enacted his ban.
torontosun.com torontosun.com
 
The Bill C 21 Amendments which were forced to be pulled were subsequently reinvented and stuffed back into this handgun bill.

Topping that, the liberals have gone into full roar RUSH mode to get the bill passed asap and off to the Senate.

Order Paper and Notice Paper No. 192A - May 8, 2023 (44-1) - House of Commons of Canada

Order Paper and Notice Paper No. 192A - May 8, 2023 (44-1) - House of Commons of Canada
www.ourcommons.ca

Typical... :rolleyes:
 
"Determining the legal effects of a law involves considering how the law will operate and how it will affect Canadians. "

"The Attorney General of Alberta states that the law [C-68] will not actually achieve its purpose.
Where the legislative scheme is relevant to a criminal law purpose, he says, it will be ineffective (e.g., criminals will not register their guns); where it is effective it will not advance the fight against crime (e.g., burdening rural farmers with pointless red tape).
These are concerns that were properly directed to and considered by Parliament.
Within its constitutional sphere, Parliament is the judge of whether a measure is likely to achieve its intended purposes; efficaciousness is not relevant to the Court."

-- Supreme Court of Canada (2000 SCC 31), Firearms Act Reference 2000

Parliament can decide what is reasonable. There are checks and balances that when used properly at least bring the problems to light. Committees are supposed to figure out if a law will do its intended purpose or if it needs tweaking or to be scrapped.
If the House has a majority, a balanced Senate is supposed to figure out if a law will do its intended purpose or if it needs tweaking or to be scrapped.
Checks and balances.

Justin has been abusing checks and balances almost every month. From Ethics to OICs to Liberal Convention to ...

The original post link shows tomorrow's abuse of checks and balances

Order Paper and Notice Paper No. 192A - May 8, 2023 (44-1) - House of Commons of Canada

Order Paper and Notice Paper No. 192A - May 8, 2023 (44-1) - House of Commons of Canada
www.ourcommons.ca

Trudeau is changing the rules that the courts depend upon, for Bill C-21:

a) requiring the committee to rewrite an existing Bill beyond its original scope. Meaning it skips second reading debate and time for the public to digest/comment.

b) requiring the committee to have maximum 20 minutes to debate any change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

IronNoggin
Thumbs up Nathalie Provost has quit the federal firearms advisory committee
Replies
5
Views
987
agentaqua
A
Back
Top