June 24, 2016

Canada’s backwards gun laws target law abiding citizens while criminals get away with murder

Holly NicholasRebel Commentator

Three years ago, Alberta was devastated by severe flooding that destroyed entire neighbourhoods with the worst damage occuring in High River. As 13,000 residents fled leaving their belongings behind, the RCMP raided homes and confiscated legally owned guns.

Hundreds of licensed guns, stored legally under the terms of the Firearms Act were seized in an act that exceeded the authority of the RCMP, going far beyond ensuring the town was evacuated.

They seized property of innocent civilians and caused unnecessary damage to homes entering them specifically to take guns without warrants and without reporting to a Justice of the Peace as required by law.
It wasn’t the first, nor the last time citizens were punished for owning legal guns, for protecting themselves and their property, or even just challenging gun laws peacefully.

I’ve talked about Bruce and Donna Montague. Then there’s Ian Thomson, a former gun instructor who fired three shots with a .38 caliber revolver to scare masked men from his home as they threw firebombs and yelled death threats. He faced four charges of careless use of a firearm, pointing a firearm and two counts of improper storage and though acquitted, was embroiled in a court battle for two years simply for defending himself.

Reclassification can also result in ridiculous consequences especially considering that the reasons for it are usually political or because a gun looks “scary”. When the government decided to reclassify two weak .22 calibre rifles to prohibited, it meant that owners of those guns could face up to ten years in jail for being in possession of them.

In Canada, legal responsible gun owners granted their firearms licenses from the RCMP are treated like second class citizens. When government decides to change the rules, or valid self defence measures are taken, or when peaceful protest of the law occurs, they’re more likely than not to be treated as criminals.

Under this Liberal government, promises have been made to change and enforce new gun rules. Some of those changes include background checks, keeping records of firearms purchases and showing a valid permit when purchasing a gun.

Unfortunately, government doesn’t consider that criminals are rarely legal gun owners and will get their hands on a gun regardless.

You don’t have to show a license to an illegal gun dealer.

Canada takes the wrong approach by keeping an eye on legal gun owners when what policy makers should be doing, is focussing on real criminals.

You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2016-06-27 10:14:36 -0400
Once more I’m frustrated by a media article that mentions the illegal warrantless search and seizure operations the RCMP conducted in High River for several weeks (after the flood including streets not flooded), but fails to mention the TONS of ammunition that was seized and destroyed by the RCMP. To date not one word of explanation or compensation paid. None. Nada. Zip.
commented 2016-06-27 00:34:43 -0400
How do you think the left-wing Urbo-weenies would respond if the RCMP had broken into homes in Toronto during the big ice storm and taken all the computers in order to keep them safe? The wailing and gnashing of teeth would be heard around the world.
commented 2016-06-26 07:21:58 -0400
I bet you guys just love it when the pigs break into your house , and do damage in the process, go through you wives’ underwear dresser and probably take a few things they shouldn’t from your childrens’ dresser. yup…cops are sex offenders and I could provide a thousand articles attesting to this fact.
and then they act like you are the bad guy.
commented 2016-06-26 03:39:55 -0400
JAY KELLY ; The RCMP targeted homes that they knew contained firearms. They knew the firearms were there by way of a long gun registry that was supposed to have been destroyed. Many things legally wrong with what the RCMP did in High River that violated charter rights.
commented 2016-06-26 02:21:56 -0400
Jay Kelly I am Canadian and i was appalled. Sorry but they only checked certain houses-FOR A REASON!!!!! And sorry they took properly stored arms as well. I do not want a police state, it makes you a slave.
commented 2016-06-26 00:07:39 -0400
It is so interesting that readership of The Rebel.media is around 50% Canadian, 25% from the United States, and he remaining 25% is from around the world.

In a story like this, Holly Nicholas adopts a sort of U.S. pro-gun stance. In the Alberta floods three years ago many people evacuated their homes and the RCMP went to check on the safety of those homes. When the RCMP went to ensure the security of peoples’ houses they also took into possession firearms that should not have been left lying around.

Residents were alright with that, but the pro-gun movement pointed out that those residents had a right to firearms and the police had no right to seize them.

American readers of The Rebel were automatically furious that the State could enter a person’s home and take away their firearms. Canadian readers were more relaxed.
commented 2016-06-25 20:46:18 -0400
Bottom line -

The police were patrolling with the military during the floods. When the police started breaking into houses to steal firearms the military refused to patrol with them any more.

The police broke in to houses and stole properly secured firearms from the list of license they had.

That is why I always tell people – hide your firearms and not in your house

Oil them up and secure them with 2 – 4 boxes of suitable ammunition each.

The police are not your friend.

The police are not obligated to “serve and protect”. The police cannot be sued for not protecting you – that has been tried and failed so many times as to be a definite waste of time.

The police are obligated to uphold the law.

They are given a great deal of discretion in this matter and can literally walk right by someone breaking into your car should they want to.

Always remember – the police are the enemy.

They are not your friends.

If you see them coming – leave now.

If you see them in a fight – stand back and watch – if you help you become liable for many legal issues – the police will not back you.

Again -never forget – the police are the enemy.
commented 2016-06-25 19:05:41 -0400
David Ross they took properly stored arms as well.
commented 2016-06-25 18:45:31 -0400
BILL ELDER ; Exactly. Like if someone forgets to have their transfer permit with them between home and the pistol range , it is an offence and could result in criminal charges. Something that Harper was working on to get changed and the Trudeau government hell bent on reinstating. Meanwhile gangs run rampant all over Surrey BC brandishing restricted firearms all day long with no PAL , no permits, no enforcement. Of course the law doesn’t apply to criminals, just law abiding citizens.
Naturally, more gun laws is what we need to make those gangs in Surrey behave.
commented 2016-06-25 18:06:53 -0400
David – my criticism centers on the fact that ALL regulation of lawfully obtained and used unrestricted firearms do not belong in criminal law – only criminal misuse – licencing, storage, personal transfer, posession and use of lawfullt obtained, lawfully used firearms is not a criminal matter – it is misdemenor law at best.
commented 2016-06-25 16:26:09 -0400
BILL ELDER : Yes, I forgot about the obvious Concealed Carry “may issue” law that gets abused by the CFO continually due to bias and conflict of interest . Yes , the insensible gun laws we have are legion.
commented 2016-06-25 16:05:55 -0400
David Ross – how about the CCC statute that makes lawfully obtained non criminal peaceful possession of a non restricted firearm a criminal offense? Is that reasonable? – because all the other unreasonable regulations are based in this basic statute premise – it is a paperwork crime.

Let your PAL renewal lapse and see what happens.
commented 2016-06-25 14:56:54 -0400
There are a few insensible gun laws in Canada; The one that has made any gun with an AR15 platform classified as “restricted” for the lone reason that it looks scary, is the most insensible since many other semi autos that are not as scary looking, fire just as fast and are more deadly. Other ridiculous laws that are not sensible are the restrictions on transporting and storage of firearms. Certain aspects of those laws are unnecessary and way too restrictive. If the gun laws were enforced as they are written in Canada, any anti-gun nut would be more than satisfied.
commented 2016-06-25 14:43:28 -0400
“This is why we won’t have any sensible gun laws.”
Can anyone elaborate where Canada’s gun laws as they are written are not sensible? Does the writer of this comment even know what our gun laws say? I think not.
commented 2016-06-25 13:03:35 -0400
We clearly have a difference between Politically Correct Progressive Conservatives and Politically Incorrect Rebel Conservatives, which the elites, including the maistream conservative media, do not like, and when both conservative groups merge like the PC Progressive Conservative party and the PI Reform party, the controlling elites turn the new party into the same old PC party.

This is why we won’t have any sensible gun laws.

This is why we will not consider leaving Quebec even though we cannot have a distinct country running the rest of the country and having to have two immigration policies, two legal systems (magna carta and Napoleonic) and bilingualism to suit this distinct country

– Canada is like England and France being one country – it would be better if both were separate countries, but the PC elite minority of consevatives will not let this happen especially since keeping Quebec means keeping the few French/English speaking politicains and bureaucrats holding powerful positions
commented 2016-06-25 13:03:34 -0400
The “informed” Liberal left regard us shooters as a bunch of hicks to be shunned and mocked with a vigor that, if it were directed at another group it would be condemned as bigotry. Recently the petition to have the AR15 moved to the non restricted weapon category was introduced in Parliament. It was a case of poor timing as it coincided with the the Orlando obscenity. The petition was seen as insensitive and met with disdain by the political class and the MSM even though the AR15 had nothing to do with the Floridian act of Islamic terrorism. The left took it out on Canadian shooting sports groups.
Here’s an excerpt from the Canadian Shooting Sports Association newsletter :
“If you can get MORE than 50% of the Canadian population to ask for less gun regulations, then you shouldn’t be asking at all for changes! You people are sick and disgusting. You are everything that’s wrong with humanity. You should gather the 25,000 idiots that signed your petition and all point the guns at yourselves! You do NOT represent the majority against your bullsh*t. Now go shoot yourselves kindly!”-Kerri (last name withheld because we are civil people)”
I get as wound up as anyone on the Rebel, but I have never invoked the use of firearms as a means of threat. Yet, the SJW above recommends mass suicide as a means of resolving her issue with gun control.
I signed the petition even though I don’t own an AR15. I signed it because I know one or two people who do have them. People who are rock solid tax paying citizens and not degenerate urban drug pushing gangsters who use illegal firearms to fuel their brand of street violence. I don’t know what the solution would be as we’re poles apart. It boils down to a cultural war between the noisy urban left and a more rural oriented, self sufficient but silent community of sport shooters…
My two cents worth…
commented 2016-06-25 11:40:35 -0400
BILL ELDER ; Well said Bill.
commented 2016-06-25 11:21:01 -0400
However, to focus on the illegal gun dealer in the black market that would mean focussing on those illegally importing the firearms to supply that market. One of the primary such suppliers being the Mohawk Nations and other traditional border crossing Indian Nations. There is no way the politicians or the police will blockade or put check points on these reserves, they don’t have the moral courage. Hence they will always hassle the legal firearm supplier and owner, because they do follow the law and have the paper work as a result. The police need no moral courage to check, and it is much easier to do as a job.

Up side is, there will always be the suppliers through the Nations of both firearms and ammo.
commented 2016-06-25 10:50:34 -0400
At this rate, there will be civil strife ahead. The general law abiding populace can only be pushed so far.
commented 2016-06-25 10:24:25 -0400
Sure, give law abiding Canadians a hard time about firearms but let in thousands of migrants from Syria without having a clue who they are.
commented 2016-06-25 10:06:40 -0400
BTW – Holly – great critical analysis of the abusive civilian gun control regime – best I’ve heard on Rebel for capsulizing the overall effect of abusive enforcement and malicious regulating.
commented 2016-06-25 10:04:09 -0400
Redundant laws that criminalize law abiding citizens are an indication the government is scape goating the innocent for the crimes of the barbaric who they have no control over. It’s not about guns it’s about control. It;s about creating an illusion of public safety.

The state is in control of those who obey laws but is out of control of those who break them – so when they want to extend their power they dream up a new way to criminalize the non-criminal – they can’t control innocent people but they do have the power to crack down on criminals – when it becomes obvious they are impotent in dealing with real violent criminals, they create strawman criminals through paperwork and petty regulation.

The pattern in police state governing is well established : Just pass enough of these seemingly petty paperwork and regulatory crimes and when so many guiltless things are decreed to be a crime that it becomes impossible for innocent men to live without breaking laws – then abusively enforce these kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced fairly nor objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on the patsy’s culpability with a police state flair and engage in mass media theatrics pretending these purges of civil rights are cavalry charges against remorseless savages who defy the law and endanger society – like in High River and many many other singular purges of licenced gun owners.
commented 2016-06-25 09:56:18 -0400
HENRY REARDON: Brian Lilley did a documentary on it. Many of your questions can be answered there.
commented 2016-06-25 09:54:00 -0400
DREW WAKARIUK: How about storing them in a fire proof, 1200 pound safe securely locked and bolted to the floor? I doubt they seized any of those firearms.
commented 2016-06-25 09:48:31 -0400
JAY KELLY; They were all nut cases. You can’t predict what they will do. That doesn’t mean everyone else needs to be disarmed. Everyone else needs to be armed to protect themselves from nut cases like them. Take away their guns and they will still commit their murder with something else. Like a bomb.
commented 2016-06-25 09:41:45 -0400
ACUUNA ; So you understand that it’s that kind of attitude and rehtoric that give law abiding gun owners a bad name. Your views do not reflect that of the respectful, law abiding gun owners of Canada, even though we condemn the actions of the RCMP in High River. However by the sounds of your comment you are one of the ones that should be banned from owning a firearm.
commented 2016-06-25 09:16:27 -0400
More guns in the hands of law abiding citizens, the less crimes against those ,aw abiding citizens. Those are the hard facts in the USA.
Also gun crimes are next to nothing in Switzerland yet nearly everyone is armed.
The low crime rate in Switzerland also has much to do with their immigration policies. They just don’t let this those radicals into their country. Canada and the US need to take a lesson.
commented 2016-06-25 09:09:38 -0400
Bravo Zulu You speak the truth, I live near high river and the rcmp threats towards residents was pathetic, threating them with arrest, kicking in doors ruining what was left of peoples houses even more, threatening to arrest them if they dare try to recover any items, Very good advise and people would be foolish to not take it. Especially in any rural area they could be up to an hour away, you cannot rely on them, it is just that simple. Protect yourselves and your property . THEY WILL NOT LOOK AFTER YOU, PEOPLE NEED TO LOOK AFTER THEMSELVES,
commented 2016-06-25 08:46:34 -0400
well…we know now to shoot the fucking filthy pigs in the face if a high river scenario happens again. oink oink.