Is gun ownership a right?
- Thread starter datnig
- Start date
handofzeus
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Trout Creekish Ontario.
We as Canadians have been raised from birth with the notion that we have no 'rights' like americans, but the gracious ever protective nanny state grants us 'privileges' as long as we are good little serfs and don't abuse them. Short answer....NO.
"Is gun ownership a right?"
No, not any more. The Liberal government of the day removed our right to own a firearm(s) by introducing and criminalizing firearm licensing. Welcome to Canadian social (Liberal) re-engineering.
No, not any more. The Liberal government of the day removed our right to own a firearm(s) by introducing and criminalizing firearm licensing. Welcome to Canadian social (Liberal) re-engineering.
The constitution only lists rights. The government is supposed to guarantee them. But rights don't come from the state and the state can't take them away, no matter how much they decide to infringe on them. The constitution, any constitution, isn't worth spit once the commies seize power.
So, to review, you have God-given human rights because you are human.
Historically, governments like to pretend this isn't so and enjoy trampling the citizenry.
Among your rights are the right to property and the right to self-defence.
So, to review, you have God-given human rights because you are human.
Historically, governments like to pretend this isn't so and enjoy trampling the citizenry.
Among your rights are the right to property and the right to self-defence.
You have the right to own firearms for the purpose of defense under the British common law from the 1600's all of which including the Magna carta are included in Canadian law. They has used these old but included laws many times to overturn and to counteract laws that have gone against these original legislation. So YES we do in fact have the right to own firearms. Because they all used one part of these old laws means that they MUST recognize ALL of them. The times they are a changing.
Curious, I've never heard of this. Do you have source?
Because my answer was going to be "No, it's not a birthright. No in this country."
The source is British common law, a particular piece of legislation enacted in 1660 ish if I recall correctly. All English common law became part of Canadian law. There are many references to this. Look at the CSSA site. These old pieces of english legislation are being referred to a lot more lately.
Avalonthas
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Toronto ON
Is it a right in my opinion yes
But is it a right in the context of the law....no, its a privilege unfortunately. We do not have rights in the same sense that Americans have.
But is it a right in the context of the law....no, its a privilege unfortunately. We do not have rights in the same sense that Americans have.
Being an atheist, while I reject this wording, I spent a few years enjoying and espousing the non-theistic version of it (something like "rights come from within").
But in recent days I've been questioning what this means. It's essentially meaningless, as I don't ascribe any special mysticism to humans over any other species (or even a rock) that "should" grant us any more inherent rights. We're all just evolutionary bundles of chemicals and chromosomes and to ascribe some inherent form of ethics (including "rights") doesn't work for me.
The truth is that for most of human history, and in fact the history of every other social species as well, the alpha-males tend to dominate and rule their little slice of the world via force. We are now able to limit this via the idea of human rights and the force of the people to back it up (and, let's face it, because most of us in the developed world have enough food/water/shelter that we're not constantly violently desperate or angry), but make no mistake: we invented these ideas, because they're good for most of us.
Personally, I think this is actually an even more compelling argument for the existence of human rights, even if they are a human-mind-created notion. Rights aren't granted by the government, or god, or an inherent inner force. They're whatever we are able to demand from ourselves and retain; a social contract. If anyone steps on what you consider to be your rights, you have the ability to fight for them in one way or another as long as you breathe or speak. If you fail... join millions throughout history. Not a lost cause.
Anyway, Canada doesn't have a Constitution document per se. We have a Charter of Rights and Freedoms that came about from the Constitution Act.
Just read it and answer your own question. It's not difficult reading.
Last edited:
TheRussian
Regular
They can ban anything they want, but firearms isn't rocket science, people make 1000 of them in caves in Khyber Pass. Fully functional, full auto, pumps etc... Al thought unsafe to shoot with full power ammo.
They banned alcohol in the States in the 40's, people started making moon shine and whiskey.
They banned drugs, people made drugs.
They banned guns in India, people started making guns and ammo, and right know its a blooming black market in India.
When people get creative...
They banned alcohol in the States in the 40's, people started making moon shine and whiskey.
They banned drugs, people made drugs.
They banned guns in India, people started making guns and ammo, and right know its a blooming black market in India.
When people get creative...
Halger280HVMag
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- B.C. XMU Local .454
Do you have an authenticated list of these "God-given" Rights?
No property rights in Canada, sorry.
No property rights in Canada, sorry.
I think the more appropriate question should be, does the government have a right to ban firearms. They have authority to legislate laws, yes, but is there a 'right' guaranteed to our government? The government is an entity, a group of people, no more, so how can it have 'rights' more so than the individual?
TB
TB
Do you have an authenticated list of these "God-given" Rights?
No property rights in Canada, sorry.
While of course there has been much debate about that list, property rights are most assuredly on it. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a deficient document written by deficient men. About this there can be no serious debate.
If you want to argue that your rights are no more broad or narrow than the half wits in Ottawa decree at a given moment, then you'll probably end up with fewer than you started. That is, after all, exactly how we got where we are.
The Charter barely scratches the surface of our constitution, which is bound up in a thousand documents and centuries of legal tradition.
I won't enter into a debate on religion here. I'll only point out that atheism is foreign to the entire Western concept of rights and does, as you suggest, render the discussion meaningless. Under this paradigm, you are entitled to nothing more or less than you can grab and defend.
We have a right to own firearms in Canada because we have a common law right to own property and firearms are property. The charter doesn't mention property rights but that is irrelevant because other parts of the charter preserve the common law.
A great lot of good that does when we've allowed laws that limit that right or have the majority convinced that firearms ownership is a 'privilege'.
Rights are not derived from the law. They are derived from the nature of man and the universe. You have a right to liberty, which means, the right to any action which is not a violation of anyone's rights or an initiation of force. This includes the right to own guns.
