https://nfa.ca/the-gun-ban-court-is-here-and-we-are-in/

We’re In!

Canada’s National Firearms Association (NFA) is joining the Supreme Court Challenge brought by the Canadian Coalition for Firearms Rights (CCFR) against the Liberal government’s Orders in Council (OIC) banning hundreds of thousands of firearms.

NFA will participate in the case as an Intervenor.

At first, we weren’t sure whether the Court would accept us.

To participate as an Intervenor in a Supreme Court case, an organization must bring an argument that is different and distinct from that of the principal litigant.

But NFA believes that we have found the right argument.

With the help of civil rights lawyer Jason Gratl of Vancouver, B.C., we believe we’ve got a strong case to present to the Court.

Jason has a lot of experience with cases like this. He has argued before the Supreme Court and served as head of the B.C. Civil Liberties Union. He is the right guy for the job.

The question is this;

Are laws in Canada made through legislation and Parliament, or are they done by Order in Council?

Did the Liberals overstep their Authority by using the Orders in Council to target so many Canadians and so much lawfully owned property?

In case you are not familiar with what an Order in Council (OIC) is, it is a means by which the Prime Minister, using the powers of the Governor General—that is, the Government of Canada—can pass emergency orders as de facto law without having to introduce controversial legislation and get it passed by Parliament.

In other words, they used a tragedy and a political gimmick to push their agenda—without having to answer to anyone.

Apparently, the Liberals considered confiscating hundreds of thousands of legally owned firearms from law-abiding Canadians an emergency on the scale of a ‘Declaration of War’.

Which it was.

A Declaration of War on the Rights, Freedoms, and Property of Canadians

And this has happened with firearms in the past.

In the early 1990’s, governments prohibited scores of firearms through OIC.

However, shortly afterward, they prohibited those same firearms through legislation passed by Parliament instead.

Back then, maybe they weren’t so sure those OIC’s would pass legal scrutiny.

Are the Liberal OIC’s actually lawful?

Well, we’re going to find out. The Supreme Court Case will be heard in November 2026, and a decision will be rendered shortly after.

From our CCFR friends, of course the GSG16 is #1!!!

Parlement de Québec

Hello all. Looking for a debate on the other side of all of the gun laws / bans from a liberal point of view. How does it ACTUALLY make sense to liberals with the current laws. C21 was passed with hopes of lowering crime? How is that going? The OIC. How has the crime rate gone since? How are these “liberal experts” in power thinking this is actually going to make a difference? Canada could 100% ban every single firearm and gun crime would not go down 1 bit. I don’t really know any liberals to talk about it with I’d actually like to hear their side on it. I’m clearly not an expert on any of this but it just seems so ridiculous

There ya have it folks, if the LPC win this court battle, it’s scorched earth, war with every citizen who owns a restricted and police raids.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/article/most-crime-guns-traced-by-rcmp-came-from-within-canada-internal-reports-say/

"The RCMP centre defines crime guns as firearms that were used or suspected to have been used in criminal offences, guns whose serial numbers have been obliterated or altered, firearms that were found but not reported lost or stolen, and replicas, toys, 3D-printed guns, pellet or air guns that have been used in criminal offences"

Cool looking facility but not the smartest photo. Let’s just have an 8 person chain flagging each others face 🤦‍♂️

This one stings a bit more because this is where I grew up, and I’m just thinking that could’ve been my dad a couple years ago. Or even me when we had guys come onto our yard to steal gas and equipment.

I just feel so sad reading an article like this seeing the premier Manitoba support the charges, as well as the guy from U of Manitoba that they interviewed.

Obviously, there’s a lot of details that we don’t know but man it’s getting frustrated with the amount of theft that’s happening on farms these days.

EDIT: I realize now through some of the commenters (thank you) that this suspect was NOT a suspect in the festival shooting, but rather a different shooting that same night in Toronto. I apologize for mis-tagging this idiot to the festival shooting, but my points below still stand. Different shooting, but still an idiot, still a failure of our legislative structure around legal and illegal firearms.

Press release from Toronto Police on Omar Abdul Singateh: https://www.tps.ca/media-centre/news-releases/66411/

Also arrested in 2025 in Montreal on kidnapping, robbery, and crypto theft: https://www.ctvnews.ca/montreal/article/3-men-facing-kidnapping-robbery-and-other-charges-in-crypto-theft-montreal-police/

Also arrested in 2025 on firearms trafficking (out of 100 illegal firearms trafficked, 29 of them were recovered in Canadian crime scenes): https://www.justice.gov/usao-mdfl/pr/two-men-arrested-international-firearms-trafficking-conspiracy

Emailed the below to my MP, feel free to do the same:

Subject: URGENT: The Failure of Current Firearms Policies and the Need for Mandatory Minimums

Dear [Insert MP Name],

I am writing to you today to express my sheer disgust and profound frustration with the current state of our justice system and the misdirected firearms policies enforced by this government. The recent shooting and subsequent arrest at Polson and Cherry Street in Toronto on July 12 is a glaring example of how current legislation completely fails to protect Canadians, while simultaneously punishing law-abiding citizens.

The suspect in this shooting, Omar Abdul Singateh, is not a legal, vetted firearms owner. He is a known, violent criminal with a disturbing track record that the justice system repeatedly failed to address. Based on public reports and press releases, this individual was already known for:
- International Firearms Trafficking: He was previously arrested in connection with trafficking 100 illegal firearms into the country—29 of which have been recovered at Canadian crime scenes.
- Violent Kidnapping & Robbery: He was arrested in connection with a violent breaking and entering, forcible confinement, and cryptocurrency robbery in Montreal.
- The Recent Toronto Shooting: Despite his severe criminal history, he was out on our streets, where he recklessly exchanged gunfire, stole a rideshare vehicle, and struck pedestrians while fleeing the scene.

It is completely unacceptable that an individual with a history of smuggling illegal weapons and violent kidnapping was free to terrorize the streets of Toronto.

While repeat offenders and illegal firearms traffickers are met with a revolving door justice system, this government insists on pouring resources into arbitrary Order in Council (OIC) bans that strictly target legally licensed, heavily vetted, and law-abiding firearms owners. Legal gun owners are not the ones shooting up our streets, yet we are the ones bearing the brunt of the government's "public safety" measures. It is entirely unfair and ineffective to penalize citizens who follow the law while actual threats are repeatedly let out on bail or handed lenient sentences.

Canadians deserve real public safety, not political theater. Therefore, I am urging you, as my elected representative, to push for the following immediate actions:

1. Reverse the OIC Bans: Stop the arbitrary and unfair targeting of legal firearms owners. These bans do nothing to take illegal guns out of the hands of violent criminals.
2. Introduce Mandatory Minimum Sentencing: Champion immediate legislation that imposes harsh, mandatory minimum sentences for criminals convicted of smuggling and trafficking illegal weapons into Canada.

Our streets are becoming more dangerous because the government is focusing on the wrong target. We need laws that keep violent, repeat offenders and illegal gun runners behind bars.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this urgent matter and learning what actionable steps you will take in Parliament to address the real source of gun violence in our country.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[Your Phone Number]
[Your Email]

Not really too informed aside that the law was implemented back in 2022 when I couldn’t even get my license. (Parents wouldn’t let me lol) But all I know is that I’ve loved handguns since I was younger and always wanted to own one but year by year losing hope to have one added to my collection.

Ever since the bans started coming down 6 years ago, people were saying "buy so and before it's banned", as they (correctly) speculated that May 2020 was just the first step of many, and progressively the most scary unbanned gun would get added to the list until none are left.

What's the point though?

I don't understand the idea of buying a gun while you still can (currently the SKS), just to get ahead of the ban, use it for a while, then be stuck with it. Seems like you're paying an inflated price, to enjoy it for maybe a year, but then be stuck with it.

Although I don't have any, my friends have some of the banned rifles and they've just become white elephants. Can't do anything with them, tying up capital, can't sell, can't use, but, still have to store and have all the legal downside in case anything goes wrong.

So what's the logic of trying to buy something ahead of it being banned? Either it gets banned and you can never use it, or it doesn't and there's no issue picking it up in the future.

I recently had a discussion with a fellow PAL holder on some of the new exciting rifles that are coming into the country. To summarize his viewpoint in short, it was that no one needed such firearms as they have no use in hunting. It was reminiscent of the democrat argument of “just buy a shotgun”.

In my experience, the younger generation of enthusiasts view firearms in an opposite light of fudds, where firearms are a means of self defense from tyranny in form of government and intruders.

This got me thinking, how responsible are fudds for our current dire circumstances? I feel that most of us had to become political activists in recent years due to necessity whereas fudds choose to be politically complacent or have been convinced that less freedoms are better.

In some part I feel that we as a community actually deserve the hand that has been dealt. Even on our firearm based sub, I see some comments being massively upvoted that promote limiting our freedoms as Canadians or cope comments because it would mean we are superior to the US.

Would it have always turned out like this?

According to Calibre Magazine looking at Treasury Board documents,, the Liberals have apparently cut the money available for compensation in their "buyback" from $250 million to $64.8 million, with no notice to current or future participants.

We tried to to tell everyone their guns would be seized and they'd get nothing.....

That's a new one on me... nerver seen one of these before.

So less than half of their reduced number, even less than their reported number of know firearms and way way way less than the actual numbers of what’s out there. So who will blink first.

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)

Any ideas on what these are

***This is a post from CGN***

My firearms were seized by the RCMP 3 years ago and I just recently had them returned, including my prohib AR. It was a very long, exhausting, mentally draining and expensive process. It is not possible to navigate without experienced counsel representing you. Approx 13k in legal fees just relating to the s. 111 prohibition application the RCMP filed. They will do anything and everything in their power to ensure you lose and intimidate you into just giving up. This includes violating the criminal code, violating the RCMP act, creating false narratives that they stupidly commit to, manipulating and falsifying evidence, violating lawyer/client privilege, and abusing their authority. During this 3 year process approximately 6 RCMP members were found to have been guilty of; neglect of duty, breach of trust, and discreditable conduct on multiple counts. If they wouldn't have been caught they would have succeeded. As soon as one got caught they all started throwing each other under the bus. The file had to be reassigned to 4 different members. The last guy it got assigned to was a traffic cop that had zero involvement with the file whatsoever. I actually felt terrible for him because they fed this guy to the wolves and made him responsible for everything when he had zero involvement.

Seizure occurs in 2023 under "exigent circumstances". No criminal record, no charges laid. Half the detachment shows up running around pointing their C8's at me just because I own firearms. I obviously fully cooperate and provide them with all information, keys, trigger lock codes etc. Everything was stored above the requirements of the Firearms Act which they stated in their report. I return to my house after they finish the seizure. They had completely trashed my house to the point where it looked like it had been robbed and then intentionally trashed. Unnecessary damage to my home and destroyed personal property, they also trashed the carpets with mud and grass stains. This was the first issue that led to the superintendent having to write a formal apology on behalf of the entire detachment for how they conducted the seizure and desecrated my home. The secure room where the firearms were stored also housed approx 50k of sensitive electronic equipment for my work that was thrown around. They seized my spent primer collection, but left my XL650, primers, powder, bullets, and a few thousand rounds of ammunition. Not wanting them to show up with the circus and trash my house again, I literally just gave everything to my my friends with PAL's for free. I believe I retained counsel immediately after the seizure. RCMP immediately contact the CFO regulatory support unit to ask for my PAL to be placed under review. This is something they actively tried to hide, we were not aware of this until over 2 years later and it only came out from FOI requests that had to be made because absolutely nothing made sense. The Crown intentionally excluded it from disclosure. This is what is known as Breach of Duty. "The Crown prosecution has a constitutional obligation to provide the defense with full and timely disclosure of all relevant information."

A few months later I come home and one of the cops from the seizure that is in charge of the file (for now) is parked at my house. As I get out of my vehicle he comes up and serves me with an affidavit for a s. 111 firearms prohibition application. While he's serving me he is basically talking trash to me and trying to intimidate me and says something along the lines of "we know everything". I thank him for the affidavit and kindly ask him to serve any future legal documents to my counsel, or serve me at their detachment. Instead of showing up to wait for me and harass me at my home. Until this point I still had no idea what was going on. When I went inside I read the affidavit and it read equivalent to a 12 year old girls diary or a fictional story written by a schizophrenic person. Zero evidence other than hearsay, double hearsay, and triple hearsay. My counsel and I now start to paint a picture but still are so in the dark.

A month or two later. They messed up the affidavit so they had to re-serve me. I get a call from a new officer who is now assigned (for now) and says the previous officer is no longer involved. He asks me to come to the detachment to serve me a new affidavit. I show up and they have 3 officers waiting for me and wouldn't even let me in the front door without fully searching me. I believe all 3 were present at the seizure. I confusingly ask what is going on and what the reasoning behind the need to search me and have 3 officers present to serve me an affidavit is. The officer assigned says "We've seen your trophies, we are scared of you." I realized he was referring to my IPSC and USPSA trophies they must have all seen when they were conducting the seizure. I retired from competitive shooting in 2019 and have trophies from matches all over Canada, the US and EU. The cat is starting to claw its way out of the bag and I'm starting to realize what is happening. I thank them, leave and go home to read the new affidavit and speak to counsel. The changes in the affidavit seem irrelevant and negligible, but we have yet to receive any disclosure packages from The Crown.

A few months later a disclosure package is finally sent. Cat is out of the bag, except the cat is dead. If you guessed that this had something to do with an ex-girlfriend up until this point, you deserve a beer. But it gets so much crazier from here on out. When they seized my firearms because they were seized under "exigent circumstances" and not with a warrant. That only allowed them to search and seize the firearms. Turns out they went through everything they could get their fingers on while they were in my house unsupervised. Not only did they go through all my lawyer/client protected court documents from an ongoing civil supreme court lawsuit. They found a handwritten note in one of my drawers that was written by my ex-girlfriend before our final breakup. The note read; "I'm sorry. I love you. I didn't want any of this. Still and always here for you, promise." That note was written well before any of this and the relationship continued for months after it was written. When the RCMP "accidentally" found this note during the seizure they determined it to be a suicide note written by me. They never questioned me about it, they just incorrectly assumed. I'm sure you guys can see the road this is heading down by now.

S. 111 hearing date is scheduled for 2 years later.

Counsel starts to get really active and gets to work. He gets the RCMP to amend their false police report regarding the note and we start going after the officers involved for the other issues. The officers try to double down and it fails. He eventually learns The Crown won't touch my ex with a 40' pole. The S. 111 full day hearing approaches and we are excited. As the hearing date approaches Crown becomes desperate. They have no evidence against me so they release a new disclosure package that includes PRIME-BC records. These are like journal/diary entries from officers that cannot be used in court except in extremely limited circumstances. It's pure hearsay. One of their arguments for why I shouldn't own firearms was a PRIME-BC record where someone reported me for "brake checking" them on the highway. However the night before the hearing The Crown notifies us they are withdrawing their application citing they have no argument as to why I shouldn't be allowed to possess firearms. Their disclosure also said that I had a valid PAL, but mentioned nothing about my PAL being under review even though they were the ones to initiate the review. So Counsel and I think they must return everything now.

IT'S OVER! WE WON RIGHT?...No you idiot, they are just getting started with you.

The Crown withdrew the application instead of asking for it to be dismissed. They did this because if it was dismissed the judge would have issued a dismissal order which would aid in forcing the RCMP to return my personal property. I do as my counsel instructs and attempt to arrange to pickup my property after the application was withdrawn. They only allow me to pickup my physical valid PAL. I continue to get the run around for weeks. After persisting the officer asks when I would like to pick them up. I tell him and then get a reply. "I have been instructed by the evidence clerk and my ssgt to not release your firearms under any circumstances as your PAL is under review." It is now almost 3 years later and we are just finding out my PAL is under review. FOI requests later reveal the RCMP initiated the review immediately after the seizure. It was at this point I became quite frustrated, upset, and felt completely defeated. I felt that if I had known that my PAL was under review I would have not put myself through all the trouble and just had everything non restricted transferred to a friend and have counsel argue to export all the restricted/banned firearms to the US via a broker.