Owning guns- Right or Privilege?

[u/Low_Bar_804]

So obviously here in Canada our government sees private firearm ownership as a privilege rather than a right. My question is, how you guys feel? Do you think gun ownership is a right or a privilege?

When you look at other things people view as rights, such as abortion, freedom of expression and freedom of religion etc. These are all viewed by most as inherently “good rights”, but in many countries these rights are restricted. I think, along with many others, that it is justified to ignore unjust laws that restrict human rights.

I personally believe that firearm ownership is a fundamental human right because it protects all of our other rights and freedoms from being taken away. So even though legally speaking firearm ownership is a privilege that can be taken away at any time here in Canada, I don’t agree with the way our country and many others treat firearm ownership.

[u/buckshot95]

The 1689 Bill of Rights guaranteed Protestant men the right to own weapons for their own defense. So there is precedent in our system.

I think more important than specifically firearms rights though is strong property rights that would include protecting our firearms.

[u/Intrepid_Pop269 → u/buckshot95]

Canadian constitution pretty intentionally does not include property rights. I think there are some treaties/interpretations that protect native hunting rights and the tools needed to hunt, so there is that. (Kinda talking out my ass here - I really dunno too much about treaties)

[u/petrop36 → u/Intrepid_Pop269]

Even the US Constitution does not have property rights.

[u/petrop36 → u/[deleted]]

Correct,however that is only possible in Criminal procedure.

[u/petrop36 → u/[deleted]]

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The Fifth Amendment creates a number of rights relevant to both criminal and civil legal proceedings. In criminal cases, the Fifth Amendment guarantees the right to a grand jury, forbids “double jeopardy,” and protects against self-incrimination. It also requires that “due process of law” be part of any proceeding that denies a citizen “life, liberty or property” and requires the government to compensate citizens when it takes private property for public use.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment

[u/petrop36 → u/[deleted]]

You are still wrong, not in reading of the US constitution, because the right to bear and own arms is covered by the 2nd amendment in the US Constitution. Owning a firearm in the USA and Canada is not a property right.

[u/petrop36 → u/[deleted]]

I am not anti gun. The right to bear arms is a right in Canada also, it has been established by the convention of the Bill Of Rights in 1686.

[u/petrop36 → u/[deleted]]

The Bill Of Rights is still valid and important as it is a living document it never ages, it lives with the times.When I was going through my Law Clerk training in Ontario,Canada during one of my classes,the instructor told us that case law in Britain,Northern Ireland,Scotland,Wales,Australia and New Zealand is to be used in Canada when rendering decisions. When it comes to Quebec because they are a civil law jurisdiction they are allowed to use case law from France and Louisana.