r/canadaguns • u/AutoModerator • Mar 02 '26

News / Politics / Activism Recurring Canadaguns Politics and Debate Thread

Please post all your Gun Politics or Ban-related ideas, questions, initiatives, comments, suggestions, news articles, and recommendations in this thread. This thread recurs every 14 days.

First and foremost, this is a Canadian Gun subreddit, so keep it at least decently related to both of those things.

This thread is not for general politics, there are plenty other subs that are meant for that. Off-topic threads may be removed, especially if they are leading to personal attacks, flame wars, etc.

To prevent the main sub being flooded with dozens of similar threads, text posts complaining about/asking about/chatting about gun politics will be sent here.

We understand that politics is a touchy subject, and at times things can get heated. A reminder of the subreddit rules, when commenting, where subreddit users are expected to abide.

Keep this Canadian gun politics related and polite. Off-topic stuff, flame wars, negative generalizations against groups, personal attacks and gate-keeping will be removed. Please flag any comments to bring to the attention of mods otherwise exercise your upvoting and downvoting ability.

32 Upvotes

97% Upvoted

657 comments sorted by

View all comments

30

u/boozefiend3000 Mar 13 '26

Thursday the Supreme Court decides if they wanna hear the CCFR case. Fingers crossed

23

u/rastamasta45 Mar 13 '26

I’m really really really praying they agree to hear them, but god damn are the judges in Canada so cucked to the LPC. This is more than guns, it’s about property rights.

Allowing the government to just say “anything we deem illegal, we can confiscate and offer scraps, if you refuse you go to jail”

This is criminal and I’m going the Supreme Court recognizes that. Otherwise we’re so cooked, expect the LPC to not only come after all the guns, but our houses, cars or whatever they want to steal without repercussions.

12

u/gamercast1337 Mar 13 '26

Probably wont because its government.  

But hey maybe. Whats the specifics of this case? About how the government isnt offering proper compensation or any at all for the guns despite that being considered "fair" in the previous rulling to make the gun grab """""valid"""""?

20

u/boozefiend3000 Mar 13 '26

The previous judge ruled the OIC was allowed because people were going to be compensated, might have a different opinion now that the government basically said no one’s getting paid 

12

u/gamercast1337 Mar 13 '26

Well shit I hope the judge does feel the same way we do, because otherwise its a scary thought if it still rules in favor of the government. It means there is legal precedent for them to just take your shit without paying, right? 

Your car, house, land, business etc could be at stake here if the judge rules in favor of the government. Which is what they want so lets hope no big deposits from a certain business land in that judges bank account ....

8

u/Lumindan Mar 13 '26

Well the unfortunate thing is, technically on paper, because of their wording with voluntary and the multiple disclosures for declaration, they're still not breaking the law. In spirit it's some weasely shit but courts are usually very pro government / anti gun.

7

u/boozefiend3000 Mar 13 '26

Can they get away with the voluntary angle? I thought the government had to compensate if they banned something?

8

u/LeRoquette Mar 13 '26

I think compensation is only required if expropriated for public use.

19

u/Cre_AK47 Name Prohibited by OIC Mar 13 '26

I hope they hear it, but something tells they'll decline it, saying that the Federal Court of appeal was right and there is "no need" to address this, which would be rich coming from well paid Santa-suit wearing people who make 400K a year and probably are protected by people who carry those same firearms that the government banned as "weapons of war".

10

u/Natural_Comparison21 Mar 13 '26

Even though the Federal Courts decision leaned heavily on “The government will give compensation though” which now they actively aren’t even doing that.

8

u/Cre_AK47 Name Prohibited by OIC Mar 13 '26

Let's hope they'll see that as a valid reason for a SCoC review, but I still have a gut feeling they're going to cite some case law/SCoC case where they'll say that the government has no legal right to even compensate gun owners when the gov wants to take their property. Hope I'm wrong!