r/canadaguns Apr 07 '26

News / Politics / Activism (Update) Feds lied to the MNO

Post image

well now...

247 Upvotes

52 comments sorted by

222

u/rastamasta45 Apr 08 '26

That literally makes no fucking sense, so these are weapons not suitable for hunting, but you can hunt until October with it and after that date 10 years in prison….make it make sense.

94

u/DonAzuld Apr 08 '26

They’re suitable for hunting until they’re not, which is what they’re not for, but they’re used that way for now until you can’t.

77

u/Kennylobster8899 Apr 08 '26

It makes sense when you realize they're confiscating firearms and reducing freedom for all. Less self-reliance and weapons, more government control. They'd make hunting illegal if they could. Maybe in 10 years.

28

u/WhackDanielz I <3 shitposts Apr 08 '26

There's a district on Vancouver Island that just passed a bylaw regulating the amount of produce you can grow and consume from your home garden.

The only reason hunting isn't already banned is the uniparty isn't ready for the fight FN would put up.

At this point the conspiracy is not believing "you will own nothing and you will be happy."

66

u/HappyCan7250 Apr 08 '26

This would also be a good angle for the SCC to argue in their case, assuming they don't just bend the knee to the liberals. 

"You said these weren't hunting rifles, yet then made an allowance for certain individuals to continue hunting with them, since they were their hunting rifles".

The ideological idiocy is mind boggling sometimes.

18

u/Longjumping_Deer3006 Apr 08 '26

The ideological idiocy is mind boggling sometimes.

NDP takes the cake for that.

8

u/DanLynch Apr 08 '26

The CCFR is already using that argument in their lawsuit. The Supreme Court has agreed to hear their appeal. The court doesn't "argue their case": they make a decision based on the arguments presented by the parties.

29

u/Steelringin Apr 08 '26 edited Apr 08 '26

They also said that they have no sporting purposes. Clearly they do since the bans basically killed 3Gun and other action rifle disciplines where the overwhelming majority of participants used ARs and rest used various semi-autos.

28

u/Metalock Apr 08 '26

On that note, it's immensely frustrating how the Liberals' plan to effectively kill firearm ownership/hobbyship in Canada is by destroying it financially and effectively destroying it as an activity.

Regardless of whatever we all may or may not lose at the end of October, its the gun shop/range owners I feel the most sorry for. Their entire livelihood/business has been destroyed by a political stunt.

"YOU CAN JUST BUY ANOTHER GUN!" the liberal sycophants cry, as if there aren't people who didn't have their entire collection worth thousands of dollars prohibited overnight, or vendors who had their entire/majority of their stock prohibited overnight. For legitimately no good reason.

75

u/WestEasterner Apr 08 '26

But I thought that First Nations traditionally hunted with "assault-style" weapons as Mr JT said through such teary eyes in his original announcement.

Jackass

30

u/Medical_Bluejay_7506 Apr 08 '26

I just hate that my people are being used as a weapon politically.Majority of us are for guns for various reasons and the only reason they give us any favour is just so they don’t look bad politically.Im just tired of this

6

u/LOTSOFRECOIL Apr 08 '26

First Nations are completely different then metis nations

2

u/Neat-Firefighter9626 Apr 08 '26

MNO aren't even legitimate Red River Metis. FNs and MMF, MN-S, and Metis Settlements in Alberta have all argued against MNO's rights to harvest in Eastern and Southern Ontario.

1

u/Jaded-Juggernaut-244 Apr 08 '26

This country is a friggin' dumpster fire of contradictions, prejudice and racism. So sick of all this disgusting pandering to one group or the other and it's always at the cost of someone else's liberty. We either have liberty and equality (not equity) or we don't.

And, apparently we don't.

0

u/Neat-Firefighter9626 Apr 09 '26

Huh? the cost of liberty here has to with and only with Red River Metis. If Red River Metis reject the MNO as legitimate Metis then that costs nothing to non-Indigenous Canadians. If anything, Canada should support Red River Metis and Ontario FNs as Section 35 rights holders.

1

u/Jaded-Juggernaut-244 Apr 09 '26

Did I say I didn't chief? No, I didn't. But thanks for making my point.

58

u/InitialAd4125 Apr 08 '26

I'm sure this will look great in the court case for them.

46

u/HappyCan7250 Apr 08 '26

That was literally exactly my thought. They contradict themselves constantly. 

Not to mention the fact too that when the government needed to cull deer on an Island off the BC coast, they hired a US firm to come in with ARs and shoot them from helicopters, even though "YoU dOnt NeED aN AR-15 tO hUnT!!!!" 

Literally the most popular hunting rifle on the continent I get, given the number of Americans that use them for everything from squirrels and rabbits (22lr conversion) up to bear or moose (50 Beowulf conversion).

7

u/AdditionalLoss7274 Apr 08 '26

They were actually using Bren2 rifles.

15

u/Natural_Comparison21 Apr 08 '26

Which are also now prohibited firearms. So in other words the government set a precedent that the Bren is fine to cull deer with (aka hunt with.) Yet then they turn around later and go "Scary assault style rifle." And ban it.

5

u/AdditionalLoss7274 Apr 08 '26

Rules for thee...

6

u/Norwest_Shooter on Apr 08 '26

And regular capacity mags no?

18

u/PantherD1943 Apr 08 '26

I have a feeling this may be the one of the main issues for the Supreme Court to have taken a case that was twice dismissed. I'm hoping the SCC smacks down this shit like it ought to be. It's an issue of the Governor in Council exceeding the limits placed on them, which was an issue put forth by the parties in the initial application to Federal Court (if I'm recalling correctly).

Essentially and just as people have pointed out, they are contradicting themselves and may be in violation of the law. The limits placed on the GIC to prohibit firearms is that they SHALL not prohibit anything that in their opinion is reasonable for hunting or sporting use. The power to prohibit via regulation, as much as we hate it, exists. However, it's not limitless as much as its being used as such. Some of this is (or ought to be), administrative law 101. In addition, obviously the issue is also the GIC's opinion and its ability to change on a whim due to the order of the day.

Administrative decision making power (that is, the legislated authority conferred to an agency or the executive branch and their delegates to make decisions) is both defined and limited by statute and common law in all circumstances. Even though administrative law and decision making are intended to make policy making more efficient, they are not supposed to be a surrogate for what should ultimately be legislative decisions. Only the Legislature by Act of Parliament should be able to make decisions outside said limits by amending the enabling statute itself (such as removing or amending the limits imposed on the decision maker). Obviously that's longer, slower, and subject to more scrutiny. 

Also, every government has done this. It's not an exclusively Liberal and guns thing. Not defending them by any means. Govs just love delegating policy decisions so things are quicker and easier. 

7

u/DougMacRay617 Apr 08 '26

Does anyone know when the date is for the hearing?

6

u/Thegears89 Apr 08 '26

CCFR goes over the time line in their latest podcast. It's the start of the podcast so you don't need to listen to the whole thing

2

u/TheJurgg Apr 08 '26

Do you recall the date close enough to share it here to save having to find and listen to a podcast?

16

u/Fed_Informant Apr 08 '26

The feds, lying?

No waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay man.

14

u/jollygreengiant1655 Apr 08 '26

I swear I just saw another article where the feds lied to another indigenous group about the bans, but can't find it now.

14

u/pukalo_ Apr 08 '26

It must be noted that the wording says you can use them "until you can obtain a replacement firearm", meaning if you are caught hunting with it, you have to prove you were unable to obtain a replacement, which is very much a trap to get people in trouble.

2

u/Jaded-Juggernaut-244 Apr 08 '26

You think a prosecutor is going to take that charge to court against FN or Metis sustenance hunter???

69

u/[deleted] Apr 08 '26

[deleted]

54

u/Ov3rReadKn1ght0wl Apr 08 '26

Disarming Indigenous peoples is actually the origin story for gun control in Canada. Can't have the people on lands and resources they want having property rights let alone the capability to defend them!

16

u/Infinite-Bill1072 Apr 08 '26

This right here is what it's all about ^^ They come for one of us, they come for all of us, and we just so happened to let them walk all over us

6

u/Perfect_Diamond_1128 Apr 08 '26

the white man? do you know who really is behind gun control?

6

u/dgod40 Apr 08 '26

Why do you people speak in cryptic foolishness? If you have something to say, say it. You want people to call you out, but then you'll say "I never said that". It's such an insufferable and disingenuous way to act.

2

u/Perfect_Diamond_1128 Apr 08 '26

do you know how easily reddit hands out bans?

1

u/[deleted] Apr 08 '26

[deleted]

3

u/16VGTIDave Apr 08 '26

Look further up the pyramid. Those two are just puppets whose strings are being pulled. They are just a small part in the global agenda.

1

u/icebalm on Apr 08 '26

That's just government in general, it has no bearing on if it's white men doing it to indigenous or not. The government does the same thing to everyone.

8

u/guestpassonly Apr 08 '26

So Public Safety Canada,

By their OWN ADMISSION,

States:

"These firearms are ok for hunting".

Therefore, Public Safety Canada, openly lied about the whole thing and just admitted it.

6

u/mywaaaaife Apr 08 '26

Cool. So we’re just flat out racist.

11

u/drugstoremechanic Apr 08 '26

And water is wet.

15

u/[deleted] Apr 08 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

24

u/rastamasta45 Apr 08 '26

Those fucking hags need to seriously fuck off already. This isn’t about safety, it’s their perverted fantasy of revenge against people who own guns.

1

u/AutoModerator Apr 08 '26

Your comment has been removed as it has received too many reports.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

6

u/Perfect_Diamond_1128 Apr 08 '26

poly didnt like that comment

0

u/canadaguns-ModTeam Apr 08 '26

In accordance with the subreddit rules, your post/comment has been removed for the following reason:

[1] Disrespectful/Insulting or Hateful Comments

Civility, courtesy, and politeness, is expected within this subreddit. A post or comment may be removed if it's considered in violation of Reddit's RULES, Reddiquette, and User Agreement.

Using negative generalizations on persons based upon their backgrounds, ethnicity, gender, or appearance is subject to comment removal and a possible ban from the subreddit. Keep comments directed at actions, not at individuals.

Racism, bigotry, intolerance, or otherwise extremist posts/comments/behaviour WILL NOT BE TOLERATED in this subreddit. Users doing so will be permanently banned from the subreddit.

4

u/Stonecutter099 Apr 08 '26

Buckle up. The government not only lied to the MNO but they lied to ALL CANADIANS and they are proud of their lies, and will continue to lie like the lying liars that they are.

5

u/Dickey313 Apr 09 '26 edited Apr 09 '26

An individual may use and transport the firearm during the amnesty period, if it was previously non-restricted, to hunt for the purposes of sustenance or to exercise a right recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. These individuals may also transport the firearm for repairs or adjustments.

117.15 (1) Subject to subsection (2), the Governor in Council may make regulations prescribing anything that by this Part is to be or may be prescribed.

Restriction

(2) In making regulations, the Governor in Council may not prescribe any thing to be a prohibited firearm, a restricted firearm, a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device or prohibited ammunition if, in the opinion of the Governor in Council, the thing to be prescribed is reasonable for use in Canada for hunting or sporting purposes.

Listen, I’m not a lawyer…. But wouldn’t granting an exemption for these firearms to be used for hunting be recognizing they are, in fact, reasonable for hunting?

3

u/misuseofyou Apr 08 '26

I'd say two tiered society but we've had more new tiers springing up.

2

u/sirbobthefish Apr 08 '26

Feds lied

well that was obvious from the start

1

u/ManufacturerMuch5116 Apr 09 '26

Does this mean only Natives can transport previously NR firearms for repair and adjustment, or can whitey do it too?

1

u/nejnedau Apr 09 '26

submit not let liberals hug the chief with one arm and then stab the band in the back with the other might be wise