Close Menu
    Kanada

    Oberster Gerichtshof wird Anfechtung des bundesstaatlichen Schusswaffenverbots anhören


    Oberster Gerichtshof wird Anfechtung des bundesstaatlichen Schusswaffenverbots anhören

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-supreme-court-to-hear-challenge-of-federal-firearms-ban/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

    View 17 Comments

    17 Kommentare

    1. PizzaExisting9878 on

      They can ban whatever they want. Actually getting them turned in is a whole different story 😂

    2. Enigmatic_Penguin on

      Hoping for the best, expecting the worst.

      It’s going to be good to get a definitive answer from the SC either way.

    3. Unfair_Surprise_6022 on

      Since the basis for identifying which firearms are banned is based on an arbitrary determination of how scary they appear to be, I am curious how that benchmark will be defined by the court.

    4. Standard_Program7042 on

      I wonder if this is what the feds are hoping for.. With police forces not playing along and overall its not popular if the SC rules against it the feds can state to the gun activists that they tried..

    5. CantFeelMyToesAgain on

      Is anyone able to list what provinces are actually complying? I know Sask said absolutely not and I believe AB too 

    6. bristow84 on

      Copy and pasting my comment from the earlier removed post.

      The only thing I worry about is if the SCC lets this go forward without any changes. The Government has already shown that they’ve lied about the „fair compensation“ aspect but if the SCC allows it I worry about the precedent it sets in terms of any other sort of OICs and government compensation that might need to occur.

      Otherwise thank fuck this is happening. It’s already abundantly clear this has nothing to do with public safety and is purely for votes.

    7. b00ty10v3r on

      Good. This is such a pointless ban that would have been better served by increasing funding for border security, which is where a staggering 88% of guns used in crime come from.

    8. thatguydowntheblock on

      The funny this is our court system will defer to the government/cabinet on things like this – even if contrary to the law – but then will invent laws and imagine new rights out of thin air.

      I would be fine if they deferred to the cabinet/legislature on this and most other things, but they are far too ideological for that and pick and choose far too often.

    9. ProudVancouverLL on

      When will the decision be made? Will it be before the Oct deadline? The article doesn’t mention it.

    11. Public-Student-2160 on

      I’m thinking put the gun control on hold as every day Canadians may need to defend themselves from the 51st state threats.

    12. discoturkey69 on

      > The [appellants] say such orders are “executive instruments meant for implementation and administration, not for enacting broad, permanent changes that affect thousands of law-abiding citizens and ban billions in private property.”

      agree, the government should not be using executive order to pass legislation-scale changes.

    13. Apples_and_Overtones on

      This is pretty big news, and will be very interesting to watch regardless of outcome.

    14. dagthegnome on

      The SCC basically just exists as a rubber stamp for Liberal policy, so I’m not getting my hopes up.

    15. Artistic-Tip2405 on

      Any surveys on the number of hunters using AR-15 style rifles to actually hunt?

    16. rastamasta45 on

      For those who are not gun owners, this case goes way beyond just guns. It’s a matter of property rights and the right to fair compensation.

      The government essentially issued OIC’s (executive orders) circumventing parliament that overnight criminalizes thousands upon thousand of Canadians.

      Then stayed we can do this because we will fairly compensate everyone. Now it’s been shown by the government themselves “declaration does not guarantee compensation” and only 1% of affected people will get compensated, the rest are to dispose of their lawfully obtained property with no compensation. I know people with 10 to 100K in property tied up in this. There’s a man in Saskatchewan who’s banned collection equals $1 million plus.

      If the government wins this, it sets the precedent that any government minority or majority will have the right to ban your property and seize it without paying while threatening you with prison time if you don’t comply.

      I ask, does anyone think that’s a good precedent to have in Canada?

    Leave A Reply