r/canadaguns Aug 07 '26

News / Politics / Activism What are your guy’s thoughts on the federal assault-style firearms ban appeal hearing? What do you think the outcome will be?

Post image
260 Upvotes

137 comments sorted by

266

u/LePapaPapSmear Aug 07 '26

I would love for the OIC to be overturned but I am not optimistic. Even if it does get overturned its likely the liberals use their majority to pass a law doing the exact same thing

93

u/Consistent_Animal_70 Aug 07 '26

Still wouldnt help with C21 and the handgun freeze. So its not really a win. Just buys us time to dig holes.

144

u/567432Gains Aug 07 '26

Maybe I’m just overly optimistic but I swear they are looking for an excuse at this point to drop it without offending too much of Montreal. A Supreme Court ruling the OIC’s being illegal would be an amazing exit opportunity for them to save face and drop this whole thing. Yeah, Polly will throw there tantrum but they have been getting less and less coverage as they become more unhinged and now that the liberals have their majority they do not need as much support from Quebec for the next while. That being said, a majority makes it easy for them to do just what you described so who knows.

63

u/DrtySpin on Aug 07 '26

They've had plenty of off ramps, I just cant see them taking this one. Even if appeal goes 100% our way they will flex their majority. Remember Provost is an MP now, and the majority is still slim...

8

u/burgers1919 Aug 08 '26

That poor sick woman needs help

1

u/fyfnw Aug 08 '26

The CCFR should offer to pay for her therapy bills if she will agree to leave us alone.

25

u/567432Gains Aug 07 '26

Yeah but provost doesn’t have many options unless she wants to run with the bloc. The NDP is against the buy back now, the conservatives have always been against it, and the bloc although seems like they would “support” it, it would most likely be a meaningless effort to put it on a platform for themselves give the majority of there rural Quebec nationalists supporters are pretty chill with firearms.

I honestly don’t see what alternatives provost would have aside from straight up resigning should she not get her way.

Yeah, they have had opportunities before… but none as potentially good as this. This gives them the ability to save face, drop it, and they still keep their (slim) majority even if provost resigned.

I think it could be a win-win.

16

u/Patient_Jicama Aug 07 '26

I can see the supreme Court saying the oic was inappropriately used and giving the government a year or so to implement their bans properly instead. If the government was a minority, maybe they wouldn't try, but with their majority they can push the legislation through.

16

u/Scary-Detail-3206 Aug 07 '26

That’s how I think it will play out as well. This will give people the illusion that the Supreme Court is looking out for Canadians and that the new (likely even more restrictive) firearms laws were put in place by a more democratic means.

Carney’s polling numbers are starting to slip. If this gets overturned then re-legislated into law, the Libs can replay the easy win to their base, who presumably are too stupid to know any better. The Trump boogeyman is starting to lose steam, time to turn the attention to guns.

10

u/escv_69420 Aug 07 '26

Yeah, that's 100% it. They get to remove their own ban, then REBAN everything and get the same brownie points twice.

2

u/BrightOrdinary4348 Aug 07 '26

Not presumably.

10

u/DrtySpin on Aug 07 '26

If they wanted to abandon it they would have by now. Also, Provost isn't just an MP shes in Cabinet too, so she she holds far more sway, as much as I hate to say that. They wouldn't elevate her like they have if there wasn't more there.

36

u/newtoabunchofstuff Aug 07 '26

I think this might be it. Now that the Liberals have a majority, they'll need less of Poly's support and can afford to offend them.

12

u/Dootbooter Aug 07 '26

They have a very slim majority. They can't afford to lose any support at this point. Bans will be reinstated even if the SC sides with us.

21

u/That-Assistance-5612 Aug 07 '26

Canadians don't care about the gun bans, poly does. That's it.

They could overturn every gun ban tomorrow and the general public wouldn't bat an eyelash.

11

u/rastamasta45 Aug 07 '26

In fact they’d praise carney because they are a cult at this point

25

u/Unknownuser010203 Aug 07 '26

This program is not about wining a few votes. Its about disarming the population. There not just going to abandon it. Thank God it's impossible to enforce

15

u/escv_69420 Aug 07 '26

You've got that backwards. That's Facebook boomer lore man.

A: They can't disarm the populace in a meaningful way. The people that a government would fear aren't going to be sourcing the kinds of guns the government says are allowed from places they say people are allowed to acquire them. If you only own your legal guns and use them legal ways you're doing just as much government compliance as the people who give them up. You're still letting them tell you what to do with your weapon. Like you know, not overthrow them. Legal gun owners are no threat to them, never have been and never will be.

B: All these laws have made ZERO difference to the flow of the kinds of illegal guns used in crime and terrorism. You know it, I know it, they know it. Domestic production is possible with basic equipment even in countries with MUCH stricter laws, and 3D printing is a thing and produces automatic weapons with no controlled parts even in Myanmar during a revolution. On top of that, in Canada, pistols and prohib rifles all but free flow from the US through the Akwesasne rez.

C: Because A and B are pretty obvious to both firearms owners and the government itself, the only possible reason they're blowing a fat stack of money that they don't even have on this is to get votes and brownie points from the uninformed. Which in the case of urban Canada, is the vast majority.

Honestly the reality is way dumber than the conspiracy and that makes it worse. They aught to win votes with an economy isn't trash and a medical system that works, rather than blowing our money on a problem that doesn't exist.

2

u/fyfnw Aug 08 '26

I could be convinced that don't intend a full disarm but are just buying the votes they need in Quebec. Maybe I'm just feeling charitable today though...

2

u/Unknownuser010203 Aug 08 '26

Nothing wrong with hoping for the best.

2

u/Hepheastus89 Aug 07 '26

I also kinda feel like this, not that I think the current iteration is any friendlier to firearms than the last but rather that they are more adverse to the financial implications of the buyback

13

u/567432Gains Aug 07 '26

Not even just the financial aspect, but that it’s a massive logistical nightmare and a policy that doesn’t have the majority of voters supporting it.

The liberals are (if we are being honest with ourselves) more right wing compared to the last administration on a number of issues. Carney reversing the gun stuff would be a massive gain for them politically at this point.

3

u/Scary-Detail-3206 Aug 07 '26

The liberals are courting the NDP voters more so than the Conservative voters. They don’t need support from those opposed to the bans to win the next election. Most people won’t change their vote from red to blue over gun bans.

1

u/fyfnw Aug 08 '26

I'd vote Liberal if they gave us our pistols back. ;)

1

u/Scary-Detail-3206 Aug 07 '26

They have already spent all the buyback money. Going forward they will simply be seizing private property without payment. It won’t cost the Feds any additional money to make you a criminal and take your property.

2

u/Disastrous-Panic-87 Aug 07 '26

I think you have part of the answer. But, if the SC rules in our favor about the OICs, I think that with their majority, they will just ban them through law instead of a OIC and we will be even more screwed.

6

u/That-Assistance-5612 Aug 07 '26

Then why don't they just pass the law now? Why wait for a massive political hit by taking an L at the supreme Court?

4

u/3202supsaW Aug 07 '26

Cause if they pass a law now, anti gun groups and NIMBYs can say that they want guns on our streets and love criminals.

By waiting for the SCC decision, they can take the L, pledge to reintroduce the bans in legislation, and then just not do it. Having to write and vote on a bill when other, more important bills come first gives them plausible deniability.

"We haven't gotten around to it yet" sounds better on them than "we actively stopped the program in its tracks"

And by actually implementing the ASFCP and getting at least a few guns off the streets they have a little win they can hold up any time anyone criticizes them.

11

u/drpestilence Aug 07 '26

left leaning voter here, I've written to every possible MP I can, talked to my friends to explain what our gun laws are and how they are (were) really quite sensible and even a bit over strict, try to get them to write in. What else can do?

7

u/GoGetInvolved Aug 07 '26

Keep doing it and keep educating people. It never ends you just have to take it one step at a time and keep trying. Also when they knock on your door in the next election tell them you normally vote for them but aren't voting for them this time and say why.

4

u/drpestilence Aug 08 '26

Will do,

the second bit has been in the emails. They don't seem to knock around here anymore.

3

u/Lumindan Aug 07 '26

Aside from increasing numbers of PAL holders, you vote for a government that will actually enact change on this.

The reality is, the government parties only listen to one thing and that's votes.

-2

u/LePapaPapSmear Aug 07 '26

There is really nothing we can do ultimately, it's not a big enough issue for most Canadians to make a difference. Most people in major cities hear about gun crime and that's it, hell most city people are shocked when they find out you can own guns at all.

I vote left and ultimately while it sucks to lose a large portion of the firearms in my safe I couldn't justify voting conservative just for my guns at the cost of everything else I believe we should have. Lesser of two evils personally as it were

1

u/drpestilence Aug 08 '26

Ya its tough right? Where I'm at its solid Green who at one point had sensible gun policy though I've not looked in a while

3

u/LePapaPapSmear Aug 08 '26

It's a rough landscape for gun ownership that's for sure

-2

u/RGundy17 Aug 07 '26

Completely agree on all of this

1

u/Hopeful_Relation_441 Aug 07 '26

marie hogue will get the call to the bench on this one

92

u/OkBurner777 Aug 07 '26

Huffing the copium on the idea that the liberals secretly want to lose the hearing so they can drop the disaster of a buyback program while deflecting poly/gun control criticism at the court rather than their political party.

17

u/WeightedDips95 Aug 07 '26

Carney made more progress on the buyback than Trudeau ever did. What about that would indicate this is some sort of albatross for him?

8

u/CringelordCameron Aug 07 '26

The buyback will be an expensive failure and it will be very publicly known once the program is over. The difficult part for the government is ending the amnesty and potentially criminalizing thousands of people, they don't want to do that.

2

u/Dill_Pickle_Tears Aug 07 '26

Your point is solid. My the only counter is that Carney is GENERALLY trying to set the precedent that his government follows through on promises, not just this particular portfolio. I don’t think they particularly care as much about gun control as a platform point anymore as the Trudeau era liberals.

I don’t think they are conspiring and intentionally sandbagging to lose the case? But I have serious doubts that they’d fight back hard if they lost.

This isn’t speculation about “carney being different” to try and paint him or the LPC in a good light - I don’t vote for them at any level of government, so I don’t care how they’re perceived.

Really, I just don’t think they view it as high on their priority list, plus a better trade deal or stronger stance with Canada-us relations buys more approval than gun control does. If anything the LPC operates based on political game playing rather than a moral philosophy, which is why they come off as fake and power hungry IMO

3

u/WeightedDips95 Aug 07 '26

Sure, but I just don’t understand why this dumb theory is so pervasive here. My best guess is it’s liberal gun owners trying to wish cast. I really don’t understand why any logical person would give the Liberals the benefit of the doubt on this, especially when all the facts completely dismantle that silly thought.

Not only has Carney not taken his foot of the breaks, but they’ve devoted a lot of resources and political capital in going full steam ahead. I just think you have to seriously turn you brain off and get into some Q anon level theorizing to believe this. 

You even said it yourself, cause it’s true. Canadians don’t actually care about or think about gun laws. It only became an issue when the Trudeau government used it as a political tool. 

The extent to which Canadians think about it is entirely dependant on how much the Liberal captured media talk about it, which hasn’t been a lot lately. So carney could have literally outright scrapped it and the media could have either not talked about it or even spun it as a huge win. Thinking he needs to rely on the SCC to rule against them(which they won’t) is actually freaking absurd. I don’t know how one would tie their own shoes if you believe this is some 5D chess being played out. 

1

u/Dill_Pickle_Tears Aug 07 '26

It’s less about 5D chess and more about political resources in my opinion. I don’t even think they’re “trying” to lose. I just think a loss would take the wind out of the sails of their mandate. That kind of ruling would signal the start of a slow death of the policy because it’s much too costly to actually continue at that point.

There are examples of this in practice, where an SCC ruling has impacted legislation and ultimately led to a government abandoning ship on that particular issue.

I do think there are people who are trying to do mental gymnastics because Carney appeals to them and they hope he secretly wants to reverse things. That’s not the case.

Instead, it’s simply a smart move to let an unpopular initiative die if a defeat in the courts were to happen.

Think about it - if the SCC rules in favour of gun owners’, we don’t actually know what their ruling will specify.

A response from parliament, even with a majority, would take months to make real progress and would divert significant resources away and political capital away from higher ROI goals.

I could as easily be wrong about this entirely, but I’d say many pessimistic users here are oversimplifying a very complex situation

82

u/rastamasta45 Aug 07 '26

Whatever happens, non-compliance is still clearly the best strategy and the one that has the most participation. Only 7.8% of retailers participated in handing over guns and 2% of civilians.

This is a lost cause for the LPC, they can either drop it, or decide to actually wage war against their law abiding civilians. The LPC don’t have a choice.

5

u/Altruistic-West-802 Aug 07 '26

War? No, just from vanilla to kinky.

1

u/4r4nd0mninj4 Aug 07 '26

The government does love their kinky boots...

5

u/Neat_Imagination2503 Aug 07 '26

Only a moron is going to jail over this shit

1

u/Successful_Swim6332 Aug 07 '26

non-compliance is still clearly the best strategy

What is it going to accomplish? A bunch of dusty PPC and ARs sitting at home. What we need is to find a way to repeal everything so people can start buying and using them again.

We need to stop selling defeat as victory.

7

u/Lumindan Aug 07 '26

What is it going to accomplish? A bunch of dusty PPC and ARs sitting at home.

It buys time for a different government to come into power. It holds the line and doesn't give Liberals and public safety the data points they're so hungry for

What we need is to find a way to repeal everything so people can start buying and using them again.

Its really simple. You don't comply until a different government comes into power, said government implements simplified classification and bobs your uncle.

We need to stop selling defeat as victory.

Mass non compliance isn't really a victory, it's just simply a stalemate condition and it's the best path for now.

-4

u/Successful_Swim6332 Aug 07 '26

If I can't use something its a wall hanger or useless. There are thousands of prohibs out there but we can't own them. Those guns sitting around doing nothing for anyone.

a different government comes into power, said government implements simplified classification and bobs your uncle.

Okay this is the part that actually matters. Until there is a clear path to this I don't care about non compliance, its not important. I am firmly committed to doing the absolute minimum that the RCMP tells me to do.

2

u/Lumindan Aug 08 '26

If I can't use something its a wall hanger or useless. There are thousands of prohibs out there but we can't own them. Those guns sitting around doing nothing for anyone.

And if you comply and turn them in for a quick payday you're just giving the government further justification.

That's why mass non compliance is important. Its about holding the line.

Until there is a clear path to this I don't care about non compliance

Then you haven't been paying attention I guess.

2

u/Successful_Swim6332 Aug 09 '26

The government already has its justification through the passage of the bill c21.

Thats the problem. We need to undo that bill.

You are not holding shit, the line has already been crossed. We can't use our guns and new people can't get them. Wake up.

Let me give you another example I owe 10 handguns that I can still shoot. I bet a lot of people here would like that but they can't. Me owing them does nothing for the community. People need to exercise their rights ownership in itself in insufficient.

26

u/R4ID on Aug 07 '26

regardless of the result, Im still not giving my guns to the gov, mass non participation is the only way forward.

7

u/Ok_Competition6823 Aug 07 '26

This right here, if non of us comply there is nothing they can do. But then again there will so many scared people that will be in fear and comply so that won’t happen.

4

u/JumpinJacker081 Aug 07 '26

I definitely wouldnt comply, had i not sold all of my guns on may 17, 2022

3

u/looloopklopm Aug 08 '26

Strange, I bought a fishing boat in poor condition that same day

1

u/JumpinJacker081 Aug 08 '26

I remember that was a really windy day, and it was raining pretty hard too, maybe some hail.

1

u/Infamous_Narwhal_665 Aug 09 '26

Never give em up

19

u/IcySkyDream Aug 07 '26

Hold on to your bang sticks, dudes, dudettes, and dudetés.

We’ve come too far to give up now.

20

u/Ace_And_Jocelyn1999 Aug 07 '26

I think it’s unlikely it will be reversed, but I don’t think it’s outside the realm of possibility that the courts will decide the government must pay fair market value for confiscated guns. That would push the cost of the program into the billions.

6

u/RydNightwish Aug 07 '26

Honestly, this will be the best outcome in terms of forcing the most damage onto the country. Right now they can shrug and say just a couple million dollars. If the SCC forces it to balloon to several billion, like it would cost, well at least it would be the bloody nose right in the finances that the country deserves.

55

u/layzorbeemz Custom Flair (Be appropriate or else we'll take it away again) Aug 07 '26

The supreme Court doesn't take on cases they don't want to have their say in. If they were alright with the way the liberal government went about the bans, then they probably wouldn't take on the case on. Or maybe they'll just have something to say about property rights as a whole.

13

u/yummybunnybear Aug 07 '26

"If they were alright with the way the liberal government went about the bans, then they probably wouldn't take on the case on."

Unfortunately this is not true. The SCC will take on a case even if they're alright with the liberal government's approach. The SCC will take on a case simply for it raising an issue of national importance.

104

u/ShinyRainier Aug 07 '26

I find it to be about a lot more then firearms. If this stands this sets a dangerous precedent that gives any minority or majority government the power to basically do what they want through an order in counsel (oic). They can create “law” that non of the citizens representatives (all the MPs) get to vote on.
Here’s an exaggeration:
this time it’s firearms, but next election the Green Party wins a minority government and since the appeal from the CCFR vs Canada was denied, the OIC stands and therefore they decree that all gas powered cars are now illegal as of January 1st next year. You will be compensated (if at all) 5% of the MSRP and if you are caught operating a gas powered vehicle you will be fined and put in jail.
It’s unregulated power, taken out of the hands of the citizens. This, in my opinion, moves us away from democracy and toward a dictatorship (strong word, but scarily fitting)

19

u/donzi39vrz Aug 07 '26

That is the part that pisses me off/worries me more than the fact it's firearms banned. What this says a future government can get away with.

5

u/IamGimli_ Aug 07 '26

The law gave the ability to Government to further ban (and unban) firearms through Order in Council (specifically, section 84.(1) of the Criminal Code).

There is no such mechanism for vehicles.

6

u/Lumindan Aug 07 '26

Not yet anyways.

Slippery slopes and what not. If the government is cool with draconian spying and burning hundreds of millions to buy votes, maintain a wedge issue and create the Illusion of public safety, we aren't that far off.

Scary ain't it?

1

u/chillyrabbit Aug 07 '26

Maybe kind of?

I'm not familiar with the motor vehicle safety act, but they do have a regulation that allows them to suspend, modify or adapt a regulation.

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/M-10.01/page-3.html#h-353579

Order to suspend, modify or adapt regulation

13.1 The Minister may issue an order, effective for a period not exceeding three years, that suspends, modifies or adapts a regulation, in whole or in part, if the Minister is of the opinion that it is in the public interest to do so, including to promote innovation or for reasons of safety.

So taking a regulation to its logical conclusion, you could modify, adapt or suspend the regulations that allow importation of Chinese cars to ban the import of Chinese cars "for the public interest"

44

u/FedInformant Aug 07 '26

I would be so happy if this shit got reversed. But looking at the rest of the western countries, it doesnt seem likely. Everyone's slowly losing their rights

1

u/wireditfellow bc Aug 15 '26

Well not really. US 2nd amendment makes it clear so bunch of dip shits try to fuck with it but keep getting shot down so far.

-13

u/[deleted] Aug 07 '26

[deleted]

4

u/Top_Importance6216 Aug 07 '26

you make the common mistake of confusing pewpew with freedom.

43

u/KorporalKarnage Aug 07 '26

Don't care anymore. Irrelevant. I'm still gonna do what I feel is right, regardless of what some black-robed worshipers of Moloch have to say.

10

u/greasygreenbastard Aug 07 '26

"Please hold while your call is connected to the BASED department"  🗿🗿🗿

14

u/Medical_Bluejay_7506 Aug 07 '26

Win or lose my guns are my guns

5

u/rastamasta45 Aug 07 '26

This is the way

32

u/hunterofsteelhead Aug 07 '26

Never be optimistic about canadian politics

2

u/fyfnw Aug 08 '26

I've been hurt too many times to count being optimistic about canadian politics.

10

u/Diligent_Studio6763 Aug 07 '26

My question is what happens if by some miracle the CCFR wins? Like dream scenario what if the Supreme Court throws out all the OIC bans? Thats just it then? All the OIC’d guns are back on store shelves?

10

u/HatchingCougar Aug 07 '26 edited Aug 07 '26

It all depends on the exact wording of the ruling. (other OICs could be affected as well).

Would AR-15s appear on the shelves any time soon?  No, many if not most of the stores don’t have stock or likely don’t 

The govt even if forced to negate the OIC could still ban their import through CBSA

2

u/MacintoshEddie Aug 07 '26

Hard to say, but I think there'd have to be some concessions. Full restoration is very unlikely. They might say everything has to be re-submitted for verification, or they might say that AR15s remain prohib but the named prohibs are restored.

4

u/Diligent_Studio6763 Aug 08 '26

For me, that is a completely welcomed outcome. I have no interest in owning anything restricted unless handguns come back anyways. Registration is just the first step of confiscation.

10

u/LumberjackCDN Gold'n Loan Outfitters & Pawn Aug 07 '26

Im optimistic things are coming back. But at the same time we have to wait and see.

19

u/rastamasta45 Aug 07 '26

I’m tired of the pessimism folks, the fact we even got a Supreme Court case is a massive win for us! The fact non compliance hovers 90% plus for retailers and civilians. The fact it’s getting this much heat that the Toronto Police Chief is now calling it out in all press conferences is huge.

The fight is never over till it’s over, so stop with the doomerism, I’m holding out regardless of what happens but I’m happy and hopefully because we’re still in the fight.

You know how American has such a strong 2A, it’s because you never hear them say “oh well, we lost anyway” they yell from my cold dead hands, this is the mantra we need and I maintain.

Fuck the LPC, they can take it from my cold dead hands

9

u/drpestilence Aug 07 '26

A committee will be formed to study the possibility of studying the possibility that this might have been a terrible idea.

Then they'll ban black powder cap'nball cause I just took an interest in it, cause somehow it relates towards encouraging piracy.

7

u/kinghalifax902 Aug 07 '26

Im hoping one of the judges has some skin in the game

14

u/Flat-Dark-Earth Big Bore Specialist Aug 07 '26

Whatever the outcome of this ruling, future bans will continue to be implemented under the LPC. This ride only moves in one direction.

Until the liberals are removed from government, I don’t expect any meaningful improvements on this file.

1

u/fyfnw Aug 08 '26

Our strategy so far sucks. I'm legit proud of the CCFR. They are at least chasing every lead; spearheading the SCC and now the class action law suit. We need more of that. People smarter than me need to take an offensive posture instead of waiting for the government to smack us with the next wave of bans.

23

u/Agonizing-Stroke1812 Aug 07 '26 edited Aug 07 '26

Nothingburger. If it somehow got overturned they would just ram through some legislation instead - assuming they don't do that before the hearing anyway. The last election proved that the voting block in this country does not care at all about this matter.

They've already collected and destroyed a bunch of guns in BC and ON. Way too much is in motion for them to entertain stopping it. Driving past a collection site myself made me realize that this is quite an elaborate project and they did have some genuine planning and investment involved here beyond the talking head morons that we're all too familiar with.

7

u/rastamasta45 Aug 07 '26

I mean yes and no, yes it’s moving forward but with honestly how many. Have you read and heard about the logistical nightmares. People in Nova Scotia given 400km plus location drop off with no other options.

Alberta and Saskatchewan barred from even participating.

The LPC are excellent at making it looking like they are competent and oppressive against citizens, but they’re really a paper tiger.

1

u/Agonizing-Stroke1812 Aug 07 '26

I'm afraid that it really doesn't matter to them as long as they've effectively prevented most people (i.e. those who don't own an acreage) from using the banned guns, and they make ever repealing this politically unpalatable - see the original Firearms Act for a great example. I'm fairly confident that legislation is coming through one way or the other to patch this up.

I'm sure the threat of PAL revocation will follow for the holdouts that had R->P class stuff as well if they feel compelled to get the numbers up, but as I understand it most of those people just plan to hold off to the last second to see what plays out before eventually giving in

3

u/rastamasta45 Aug 07 '26

Again it’s simply not that easy nor possible. Yes you can threaten revoking your license, let’s 10% of people say “screw you I’m keeping my property” that’s thousands of civilians that are now in illegal possession of firearms, by definition they are armed. You now must execute a search warrant and arrest warrant because of known suspect with rifles in illegal possession, this is not some Joe beat cop, this needs a tac team because it’s known rifles.

I personally have spoken to people who said, they won’t go quietly, times that across the entire country. There’s a real reason why every police force in Canada refused to participate….its going to get very very dangerous.

Also sure we can’t use it, but as long as we get to keep them, there’s hope. It’s ownership that matters.

2

u/Agonizing-Stroke1812 Aug 07 '26

This is Canada we're talking about. One of the most passive populations you'll find anywhere. On top of that we loved to tout about how PAL holders are the "most law abiding citizens in the country". Those people aren't suddenly going to turn into some kind of violent rebels and throw their whole life away, and implying that they might is even more harmful to our image - not that it matters much anymore.

They don't have to go door to door looking for you, they'll just snatch you up next time you have a traffic stop.

It’s ownership that matters.

Maybe for some but not for me. I bought my guns to shoot not to stare at

10

u/rastamasta45 Aug 07 '26

The Canada you know is gone friend, as I said and I’ll leave it at that, the people I’ve conversed with personally….they ain’t complying and they ain’t alone. It only takes hundreds of people to think like that. Good thing the LPC affected millions.

And actually they do, there’s no such thing as passive policing for known rifles in illegal possession. That’s simply not a thing. There’s procedures that have to be followed, cops don’t go “oh he’s got an illegal ar15, we’ll eventually get him on a traffic stop”

It doesn’t work like that, it’s full enforcement or complete disregard for the law. This is why police are so against this. Because full enforcement will lead to bodies being stacked on both sides. Everyone knows this. RCMP head literally stated he’s afraid of ambushes when the time comes to get the guns.

You need to think outside of Toronto friend, Toronto is the compliant Canada, the rest of rural Canada….not so much.

Also I bought my firearms because it’s my right and regardless if I shoot them or not, they’re mine.

8

u/DougMacRay617 Aug 07 '26

I don't think people realize how much this is about property rights just as much as guns. It will be interesting because if they rule in favor of the government it will allow the government to OIC any property they no longer want us to have access to. So if they rule in favor of the liberal government it will be one of the biggest L's this country has taken and will.

If we win we might get to shoot our ARs for a month or two before the liberals new gun ban bill passes, ( they likely already have one drafted up in the event they lose)

4

u/MapleDesperado Aug 07 '26

There’s a good chance you wouldn’t even get the month or two. A ruling against the OIC would likely include a stay to allow the government time to decide whether to legislate or to let it go. Twelve months wouldn’t be unheard of. And don’t be surprised if that were to be extended so long as the government demonstrates progress towards legislation.

4

u/WesternPen7100 Aug 07 '26

Just glad it’s happening.

4

u/Neat_Imagination2503 Aug 07 '26

I think it doesn’t matter. The liberals now have a majority government and will just ban it through legislation. This court case is not fighting against the ban, it’s fighting against how it was banned

8

u/Curious_Joe2020 Aug 07 '26

Outcome will be Liberals pass some new legislation banning everything again and tightening "loopholes".

7

u/Curious_Joe2020 Aug 07 '26

For every 22LR non-restricted now prohibited plinker turned in you should legally import one or two 22LR handguns from the USA with an exemption.

2

u/fyfnw Aug 08 '26

That exemption is meaningless. The Olympic people are not friends and won't help pushback on this.  They are the CBC of the gun world, bought and paid for.

1

u/Curious_Joe2020 Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26

It's not meaningless, you can import practically any 22LR handgun from the USA and more than one. Once you have it I don't see what they can do afterwards. It's for an intent to train for the discipline not the actual Olympics. Training can just be going to the range and taking some courses, joining a club etc.

2

u/fyfnw Aug 08 '26

Meaningless because they saw it was too popular and are locking it down further.

1

u/Curious_Joe2020 Aug 08 '26

That's why you get it while you still can even if it takes a bit more effort and paperwork. Some already got 2, 3 even 6.

2

u/fyfnw Aug 08 '26

.22lr -- I can't get excited about that. I'm certainly not going to go out of my way to get a cope gun. Personally, I'd rather use those funds for something I enjoy shooting... what's left of them.

0

u/Curious_Joe2020 Aug 09 '26

It's not a cope gun bud it's a 1911, Glock or FN. The most popular gun in the USA for sports target shooting is a 22. CIA, Israeli Special Forces, US Air Force all use it. The cope gun is the Russian SKS and those Turkish rifles.

10

u/Br0wnSugarr Aug 07 '26

Lets be realistic, the question being asked is can the government use OIC to ban private property without fair compensation. There is a chance the courts rule yes they can since we in this country do not have property rights like the state's. It was deliberately excluded when the charter of rights was being written, cause Provincial premiers worried that constitutional property rights would prevent governments from regulating industries, zoning land, or seizing property for public infrastructure (like highways). If this happens say goodbye to everything you love and hold dear. They are definitely taking your sks and anything else they want. If the courts rule no, which if they dont would set an extremely dangerous precedent, then i still expect hurdles. Realistically the courts will rule that although the use of OIC was improper, since this is relating to firearms, they might let the bans stay on temporarily to let the government put something through the courts, and the fact that the liberals have now snaked their way to a majority, i doubt thats gonna be too hard. So realistically either way, we're absolutely screwed, just a matter of how screwed. The new bans although might not be at the scope of the OIC tho since now they have to justify bans so theres that.

3

u/saneboy Aug 07 '26

Time to invest in cosmoline and pvc pipe frens.

3

u/Silver_Pollution_297 Aug 07 '26

When the dust settles between the SCC decision and any inevitable gun control bills that get passed, I'm fairly confident we'll actually be able to keep our guns.

I'm not very confident that we'll ever be able to use or buy them again.

I have no doubt that Carney is just as anti gun as any other Liberal and fully supports complete civilian disarmament, but I also think he is more grounded in reality than Trudeau or Provost, and realizes that mass confiscation of firearms from unwilling owners is just not realistic. I think we'll eventually see grandfathering regardless of the SCC outcome. So we get to keep our guns, but unfortunately it will be the death knell for ever being able to legally shoot or acquire them again.

5

u/Cre_AK47 Name Prohibited by OIC Aug 07 '26

I think we'll get some minor wins but I think overall the ban will remain whether through a stay of proceedings, giving Carney enough time to pass legislation to ban them, or even worse, SCC says the government has a lawful authority to use the executive branch to create criminal law, saying the ban was still legal.

2

u/Status_Ticket5044 Aug 07 '26

You must be new here.

2

u/__phil1001__ Aug 07 '26

The government is testing what it can get away with. A full revolution of the peasants will show the government they need to revoke this nonsense and do it legally and make common sense rules about firearm classification and focus on illegal weapons. They also need to show that Canadian gun laws are far different from the USA

2

u/Flyboy019 Aug 07 '26

Anyone who realistically expects the OIC to be struck down is in for a huge disappointment. Do I want it to be? Yes absolutely. Will it be? No

2

u/Previous_Search3122 Aug 08 '26

I think we are f*cked, not because we don't have a case, but because we are fighting the liberal government and the one making the decision will be a liberal appointed judge.

We are screwed before we even get started, but what else can we do.

8

u/BigheadReddit Aug 07 '26

Nothing. If anything, it’ll be worse. They will pass legislation with the majority and close every loophole that exists, including the exemption for Olympic shooting and the SKS will be banned. Then, they’ll come for shotguns and .22’s.

4

u/Metalock Aug 07 '26 edited Aug 08 '26

As much as I hate to agree with you; you're absolutely right.

Now that the Liberals hold a majority; it's all but over, and I say that as an optimist.

The corporatocracy now holds all the power. Property rights/civil liberties are a thing of the past in this nation.

EDIT: Downvoters are in denial and in for some harsh truths in the near-future. I don't like it, either! But it's an undeniable truth...

3

u/CringelordCameron Aug 07 '26

I personally don't think they will pass legislation. They could be using their majority right now to preemptively pass legislation and make the court challenge moot, but they have chosen to stay as far away from the gun file as possible. Carney clearly has zero interest in expanding the gun bans. Aaso it'll probably take a year or more to pass legislation regardless, meaning all of those banned guns would scatter across the country quickly of we win.

1

u/nicolasthedog Aug 08 '26

Carney clearly had zero interest in expanding ding the gun bans

I mean, he's literally the one who commanded Gary to roll out the buyback/confiscation. By his own admission, to gain votes in Quebec. Why anyone thinks Carney is against the bans/buyback is BEYOND me.

6

u/I-LOVE-HENRY-RIFLES Aug 07 '26

Judges laugh and side with the LPC who are paying them to rule against things that conservatives support.

5

u/AndreiHoo Aug 07 '26

The government and media gonna be like: look evil American deregulated their gun law. Good thing we are Canadians so here’s another OIC.

See you guys in the States.

3

u/tesseractivism Aug 07 '26

We not doing politics /ban mega threads anymore?

2

u/pablito_87 Aug 07 '26

I don’t want to be pessimistic or conspiratorial but…..it’s one big club and WE ARE NOT in it! I think all the judges tend to lean liberal - no?

5

u/SBI_INC Spectre Ballistics International (Verified) Aug 07 '26

I doubt we'll see a positive outcome from the case.

2

u/Successful_Swim6332 Aug 07 '26

Until the conservatives can regroup and more importantly come up with a coherent strategy of repealing everything passed from 2022 onwards. We are screwed.

2

u/Lumindan Aug 07 '26

There's been a fair amount of talk about simplified classification for a while.

The problem is that we're in the middle of a Liberal majority so it's going to be a hot minute before there's potential for a new government

1

u/Successful_Swim6332 Aug 07 '26

Yeah the Carney government is here for a while. This is the time to actually come up with a plan.

The CSSA and all the other smaller lobby groups NEEDS to draft a plan and get it ready for another party to adopt it as their platform for 2029. If they sit around with their thumbs up their ass they are just going to keep taking shit away.

1

u/under_hunter82376 Aug 07 '26

im not optimistic . if it does somehow happen , at least I get my ruger mini 14

1

u/Vahuo89 Aug 08 '26

I don't foresee anything major happening for our side

1

u/Used_Abrocoma9404 Aug 08 '26

Liberal judges. Nothing will change.

1

u/hatethelcbo Aug 09 '26

Liberal appointed Judges. The outcome is clear.

1

u/nejnedau Aug 09 '26

Courts Defer to govt and its agencies. Depts only have to say their action is reasonable to win. The NFA lost on the trappers case that way,, Look back on fire crackers or lawn darts. Govt says it banned, Its banned in the end of the day.

1

u/Remote_Insect9087 Aug 10 '26

OIC will be overturned. Provost will throw a tantrum, between her and Gary they will put it all into a bill and use the majority to ram it through the house and senate. In other words, we are fooked

1

u/Caulkguy Aug 13 '26

Doesn’t make any difference to me.

-1

u/itsmeAG32 Aug 07 '26

It gets tossed and carney moves on saying oh well we tried. Hopefully the police get more funding..