When it comes to Canada’s often tense debate around gun laws, most Canadians likely will not have heard of an RCMP database called the Firearms Reference Table, or FRT.
The FRT is a database used by the RCMP to help classify firearms. That classification determines whether a gun is non-restricted, restricted or prohibited.
Technically, the FRT isn’t a legal instrument, but instead just an internal RCMP tool based on definitions set out in the Criminal Code and Firearms Act. But in practice?
“It’s both the law and not the law,” said A.J. Somerset, the author of Arms: The Culture and Credo of the Gun.
Can you cite exactly which part of the charter and constitution it violates? Or is this more gun nut, trying not to sound like a gun nut, bullshit?
Last time I checked, the charter provides you with no guarantees to buy AR-15 mock military rifles that you don’t need for hunting.
Yeah, cause pistol-calibre carbine shooting it not for hunting deer, it’s for killing as many human beings as possible as quickly as possible. It’s a fucking joke that gun nuts think anyone should give one rats ass about this. Because, let’s be clear, the problem here is not with banning this gun, and not with the RCMP being the agency banning this gun, the only problem is that manufacturers are allowed to start manufacturing and selling new guns without oversight or regulation:
Criminal Defence lawyer & Firearms lawyer - Ian Runkle (YouTuber: Runkle Of The Bailey) has made a request to the Supreme Court challenging for procedural fairness in regard to the firearm confiscation fiasco, given that Justin Trudeau bypassed the House of Commons and Parliament with his OIC, it’s fair to say Canadians are expected a proper judicial due-process especially when it comes to confiscating people’s private property.
It’s not a “buyback”, the Canadian Government never owned these firearms to begin with, it’s a forced confiscation with a monetary compensation. You know it’s bad when the Ontario Government won’t divert RCMP resources to assist in this confiscation and that Canada Post won’t assist either.
You forget about sports shooters and that the International Practial Shooting Confederation exists, which rely on these firearms being accessible to practice and participate.
Just recently Wes Steven’s had to borrow a firearm from an American competitor just to participate in the competition.
I don’t suppose he has made a video about his request on his YouTube channel?
I swear there was a short video discussing it, I can’t seem to find it anymore. If I see it I’ll link it.
So, you basically think that when Canadians broadly elected Trudeau on a platform of reigning in gun crime and banning assault style firearms, they were mistaken in their choice?
You’re nitpicking a procedural issue, not grossly violating a charter right.
“You know it’s bad when a conservative idiot panders to his base?”
“You know it’s bad when Canada Post doesn’t want to take on the responsibility of collecting and storing mass amounts of firearms, something they’ve never done before, have no training or expertise in doing, and would make them obvious targets for violent criminals?”
LMFAO. What the fuck are you talking about?
No, I didn’t. I explicitly asked why anyone should give two shits about gun nuts participating in fake sports. Buy a big buck machine, or take up darts, they’re cheaper and more fun.
Trudeau never reigned in gun crime which ruined his credibility, he had 10 whole years to accomplish that task, the statistics are public knowledge.
You call people who own firearms gun nuts but it’s a hobby just like any other, it’s like if I called people who like to knit sewing-freaks.
Frankly quite insulting and unnecessary.
That has literally nothing to do with the constitutionality of his mandate.
No, it’s fucking not. It’s a hobby that requires the mass manufacture and ownership of instant, point and click, murder tools.
Out of curiosity, in a perfect world and existing regulations excepted, what sort of firearm regulations would you like to see in Canada?
Trudeau having a mandated doesn’t mean he has carte blanche to violate the constitution. Unconstitutional laws have been passed, and struck down, before, and doubtless will be again. I’m not saying this particular situation is violating the constitution, but saying someone is elected prime minister means they can do whatever they want, or that it’s legal to do so, is demonstrably false.
My response wasn’t made in a vacuum, it was made in response to someone claiming that the issue was that he can’t delegate authority to the RCMP.
I never said that Trudeau couldn’t delegate authority. I said that the RCMP alone should not be designating which guns are legal or illegal.
In fact the Governor-in-Council (aka the Governor General) and the Privy Council have been doing this for years (https://www.securitepublique.gc.ca/cnt/trnsprnc/brfng-mtrls/prlmntry-bndrs/20200930/005/index-en.aspx and https://www.constitutionalstudies.ca/2019/07/governor-in-council/).