r/canadaguns • u/airchinapilot • Jun 20 '26

News / Politics / Activism CANADIAN COALITION FOR FIREARM RIGHTS, RODNEY GILTACA, RYAN STEACY, MACCABEE DEFENSE INC. and WOLVERINE SUPPLIES LTD. v Canada

https://www.scc-csc.ca/pdf/case-documents/41859/FM010_Appellant_Canadian-Coalition-for-Firearm-Rights.pdf?fbclid=IwY2xjawSjj-BleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEeANXl0iXLYQJAzWAacwJ3jlAPA2JwySXYmO2kdN61vIzfl36nYz2DnLqmuZU_aem_KMNtV2EKNmsPofG7UrsqMA

This is the written argument to be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada by the CCFR and associated parties v Canada. Happy reading. (Warning: pdf)

282 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

83 comments sorted by

View all comments

208

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '26

[deleted]

20

u/Dill_Pickle_Tears Jun 20 '26 edited Jun 21 '26

The interesting thing would be the criminal code piece. If the SCC deems these firearms to be reasonable for sporting and hunting purposes (I.e. the government ignored this) I wonder if it’d be more difficult to actually try and ban the same models again.

This puts the onus back on the government to implement specific language in another bill to try and justify why these same firearms are NOT reasonable, no? Not a lawyer by any stretch but that specific context is important when trying to predict the potential legislative response to repealing the OIC’s

10

u/snasna102 Jun 21 '26

If there’s even a lapse in the ruling and prohibited guns become available again, I’m spending 15K on all the guns I have wanted the last 6 years.

If we all flood the zone, the next time they try, it’s a steeper and more expensive hill to die on.

10

u/Natural_Comparison21 Jun 20 '26

I would imagine they would have to change the CC definition of what a ‘reasonable’ firearm is.

6

u/MapleDesperado Jun 21 '26

This is the strongest argument.

2

u/GoGetInvolved Jun 22 '26

The only reason that reasonable might matter is because they wrote it in the law. They could pass a new bill to delete the reasonable firearm language and OIC again.

But they'll probably do blanket bans instead based on whatever their new advisory group tells them.