I am a lawyer who has worked with charities and nonprofit clients for several years. We may not like it, but my legal opinion is that DU's position is not only reasonable, but mandatory under the CRA guidelines for charities.
There is a very short list of things a charity can do, and if it does anything else it can be stripped of its charitable status and associated tax benefits. The list is this:
relief of poverty
advancement of education
advancement of religion
certain other purposes that benefit the community in a way the courts have said is charitable
Environmental conservation is something falling in the last category, and that's how DU maintains it charitable status. Firearms advocacy has not (as of yet) been seen by courts as a charitable community benefit, and it today's political and media climate, it is exceedingly unlikely that the courts would rule that guns are a community benefit worthy of charitable protection.
Source:
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-ag...red-charity/establishing/what-charitable.html
