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)

285 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

83 comments sorted by

View all comments

16

u/midity Jun 20 '26

Everyone saying that the argument are strong... I am confused. Specifically CCC 117.15

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.

"if, in the opinion of the Governor in Council" ....ok well all they need to say is "my opinion is it's unreasonable". It doesn't say "having presented proof that it is unreasonable for use in Canada for Hunting or Sporting purposes".

117.15, the barrier to pass is they have the opinion ( a personal idea/belief about it) it's unreasonable. How is it even possible to "beat" that language?

31

u/EnglishmanInMH Jun 20 '26

Because they allowed some citizens to continue using the banned guns for hunting they are admitting by default that these guns are reasonable for that purpose. So the GIC has considered opinion that they are both reasonable for hunting and not reasonable for hunting at the same time. So the GIC opinion is conflicting/hypocritical and disproved itself.

24

u/boozefiend3000 Jun 20 '26

Same thing with AR’s. They were supposed to be prohibited in the 90s but became restricted because the DCRA lobbied they were used for their competitions. So how does the same party allow ARs to be legal as a sporting rifle and then ban them as non-suitable for sporting use?

10

u/Dill_Pickle_Tears Jun 20 '26

Ya I’d only be partly surprised if it turns out ARs specifically are repealed from the bans and go back to restricted again based on this

9

u/The-Sound_of-Silence Jun 21 '26

It's funny, as this one in particular was helping soldiers get better at marksmanship, as range time at the unit level always seem to be a clusterfuck. Afaik, Swiss soldiers were given their service weapon to take home and practice with