No. You keep it and tell them not a f#@&ing thing!!!
They are treating us as if we're criminals so we might as well become criminals. At least we'd finally be free from all of this government oppression
C-71 set for third reading Tomorrow.
- Thread starter ATRS Shaun
- Start date
- Status
No. You keep it and tell them not a f#@&ing thing!!!
They are treating us as if we're criminals so we might as well become criminals. At least we'd finally be free from all of this government oppression
- Location
- calgary alberta
Well they did, and so we have decided to use this against them.
whether or not you get to keep the banned gun vs it being seized, whether or not you can buy others if you have the similar type of license (as now with a 12.6) I think many people miss the point that even if you can still legally possess the gun, the Govt / RC's can just deny ATT's to any new/old prohibited firearms. Yep, you can't buy new … (reaction … oh fine I'll live with what I have), yep you can't sell what you have .. (reaction … well crap, there goes my investment but at least I still have my toy) BUT … oh by the way, it can never leave your safe .. (reaction … WTF??) And in that case .. WTF do you do with all that 9mm, 45, 38 super ammo, reloading equip, storage containers?
This isn't benign, even in its best case scenarios.
This isn't benign, even in its best case scenarios.
Can't grandfather what doesn't exist.
Getting the new prohib license is some of the only way any of us can choose to become discriminated on by age / socioeconomic status. Those who couldn't afford or legally purchase by a certain date are screwed. Even though the object is the same in any one's hands
CaptainPhillips
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- in the country
IMHO, the Turdo and all his band of criminals should be tried for treason; any found guilty should be dealt with appropriately.
I agree, however how can a person tell them you don't have the restricted firearm that they have paper on registered to you!
Now, if they come for my restricted firearms, they will get the stripped receiver only, nothing else, whatever is deemed the firearm and you need an rpal to buy/own, is all they get and I will request a receipt with the officers name/badge number etc. As we will fight this and appeal it to win back our property and they will have to keep safe our property until that day!
They didn't. The laws haven't changed.
I am pretty sure that "hanging" is the penalty for treason.
When world war 3 gets underway and we get invaded as the public is disarmed... in the event we survive, I want that turd tarred... feathered, then a public hanging.
after TPP (Transpacific trade) which offshore jobs and profits as written by transnational oligarcs
UN Migration compact... which opens our borders to unvetted migrants whose culture is not compatible with ours. (Just ask the sweedes, germans & EU who let them in)
SNC lavilin / Bombardier corporate welfare and corruption scandles
-Im not totally keen on giving rights to people that have never earned them (IE GLBQT snowflakes)
Judged on his body of work... trudeau has in 4 years completely ruined this nation in his service to the globalists at the UN.... Treason with extreme prejudice
MountedMadness
Regular
- Location
- Currently BC
Although frequently used as a term of expressed frustration, TREASON in Canada is clearly defined under Section 46 of the Criminal Code.
Here's a link if anyone wishes to read it: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-8.html?txthl=treason#s-46
Also, the Oath of Office (various) can be reviewed at this link: https://www.gg.ca/en/official-oaths
AT NO TIME does the PM or Ministers of Canada make any oath regarding protecting the people of Canada - or maintaining the rights under our constitution as written and presented to Her Majesty by Prime Minister Trudeau and future PM Chretien.
Compare the Canadian Oath against that of the Presidential of the United States as follows:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."
There is NO Protection of Property Rights in Canada, unlike that in the US Constitution's IV (4th) Amendment (The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized).
Though it looks similar, our Canadian Constitution Act reads "Search or seizure Section 8. Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure." Firearms seizures in High River by the RCMP is a prime example and has yet to be answered as to its lawfulness.
I dare say, that there might be a Charter challenge in the event that 'Tator Tot imposes a disarmament plan - it would take a Charter Challenge and at the very least the intellect and capabilities of a lawyer like Ms. Henein of V/Admiral Norman fame.
So I might suggest that you write your respective Member of Parliament and seek out their position on such things as 'property rights' being added to our Constitution.
Until then, the Governments of Canada can and will impose whatever legislation they deem necessary to limit Canadians in lawfully owning and enjoying the property they lawfully obtained.
Perhaps it should be included in any platform presented by any political party in Canada...
Here's a link if anyone wishes to read it: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-8.html?txthl=treason#s-46
Also, the Oath of Office (various) can be reviewed at this link: https://www.gg.ca/en/official-oaths
AT NO TIME does the PM or Ministers of Canada make any oath regarding protecting the people of Canada - or maintaining the rights under our constitution as written and presented to Her Majesty by Prime Minister Trudeau and future PM Chretien.
Compare the Canadian Oath against that of the Presidential of the United States as follows:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."
There is NO Protection of Property Rights in Canada, unlike that in the US Constitution's IV (4th) Amendment (The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized).
Though it looks similar, our Canadian Constitution Act reads "Search or seizure Section 8. Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure." Firearms seizures in High River by the RCMP is a prime example and has yet to be answered as to its lawfulness.
I dare say, that there might be a Charter challenge in the event that 'Tator Tot imposes a disarmament plan - it would take a Charter Challenge and at the very least the intellect and capabilities of a lawyer like Ms. Henein of V/Admiral Norman fame.
So I might suggest that you write your respective Member of Parliament and seek out their position on such things as 'property rights' being added to our Constitution.
Until then, the Governments of Canada can and will impose whatever legislation they deem necessary to limit Canadians in lawfully owning and enjoying the property they lawfully obtained.
Perhaps it should be included in any platform presented by any political party in Canada...
Last edited:
The Firearms Act seems to present one fairly straightforward option. After reviewing every reference to the word "destruction", there appears to be absolutely no restriction on your ability to destroy your own property. The only references to destruction in the Act are with respect to the destruction of records in certain circumstances, as well as the requirement of the CFO to inform the Registrar of any firearms reported to have been destroyed. For clarity, refer to Firearms Act - S.C. 1995, c. 39 (Section 88).
So... if you own a bench grinder... I'm at a bit of a loss how anyone can confiscate something that was duly reported as having been destroyed. They should never get the satisfaction of confiscating anything.
Last edited:
On the off chance that happens they will nickel and dime you. The firearm would have to be functional (not just the lower) and you'll be given the equivalent of a weeks worth of latte's for your wife.
If confiscation happens, we are in SHTF territory. History will repeat itself, tyranny will ensue.
- Location
- calgary alberta
Well you are partially correct. They did state in a memo that any 80% lowers were now prohibited, the question I posed to them is at what point do we assign a serial number? The reply was that IF a piece of material is intended to become a controlled part (frame/reciever) as soon as it is no longer in the condition it arrived in, it was then destined to become a firearm hence a serial number must be applied.
You are correct however that the actual laws have not changed so whether their memo would stand up in court is questionable. I just like screwing with them.
Thank you for the clarification / schooling
I will have to hold off on the hanging... but keep the tar and feathers warm!
nuthin would be more funny that a tarred and feathered turd...
I remember when Jean Chretien got "creampied"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOXfbtWPZjw
I will have to hold off on the hanging... but keep the tar and feathers warm!
nuthin would be more funny that a tarred and feathered turd...
I remember when Jean Chretien got "creampied"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOXfbtWPZjw
So as soon as you drill a hole or remove some material.
- Status
