Indigenous hunters excluded from Ottawa�s assault weapons ban under Section 35
Thanos @ Tue May 05, 2020 3:28 pm
Have they published a list of banned weapons yet or are they still in some sort of official "we'll make it up as we go along" moment? 
Freakinoldguy @ Tue May 05, 2020 4:34 pm
we
Thanos Thanos:
Have they published a list of banned weapons yet or are they still in some sort of official "we'll make it up as we go along" moment?
Try this link.
https://www.scribd.com/document/4593700 ... from_embed
They published it and you can see that the people who banned these weapons know less about rifles than I do about brain surgery. If you look at z.118 you'll see this:
screenshotAtUploadCC_1588720985472.png [ 83.93 KiB | Viewed 114 times ]
Black Water BW-15
Well here's what a Blackwater BW-15 is.
$1:
Blackwater BW15 FPS-330 Electric Airsoft Rifle
Model Number: 250904
You just gotta admit this is almost better than the real thing, the Officially Licensed King Arms Blackwater BW15 Magpul AEG is truly a well-designed high-performance Airsoft with superior long-lasting durability! It boasts a bunch of features that no ordinary or competitive gun replica could equally match. This AEG was clearly made for the enthusiast and had the complete player experience in mind. Don't miss out because supplies are very limited! Hurry and grab your own Blackwater BW15 FPS-330 Electric Airsoft Rifle today and rise above the competition with a true AEG!
Model Number: 250904
You just gotta admit this is almost better than the real thing, the Officially Licensed King Arms Blackwater BW15 Magpul AEG is truly a well-designed high-performance Airsoft with superior long-lasting durability! It boasts a bunch of features that no ordinary or competitive gun replica could equally match. This AEG was clearly made for the enthusiast and had the complete player experience in mind. Don't miss out because supplies are very limited! Hurry and grab your own Blackwater BW15 FPS-330 Electric Airsoft Rifle today and rise above the competition with a true AEG!
https://www.hobbytron.com/BlackwaterBW1 ... ifle.html#
So if anyone the lying gov't included tells you this ban was a well thought out and well organized exercise in gun control they're lying. The banning of an airsoft rifle with a scary name just shows that the reason Trudeau and crowd rammed this bill through so quickly was to prevent it from being stopped by the other parties and also prevented the other parties from debating it in parliament and pointing out it's utter lunacy to the Canadian public.
Thanos @ Tue May 05, 2020 5:20 pm
Too hilarious for words. Someone should troll the shit out of the them and send in a list of weapons from video games to see if they'll add them to the list. Like see that little douche Bill Blair issue a memo from his ministry stating that the BFG from Doom "has been added to the prohibited list". The joke would probably work because odds are terrific they know as much about video games as they do about real firearms. Jesus Christ, this country sometimes... 
JaredMilne @ Tue May 05, 2020 5:47 pm
As someone who supports Native peoples' right to hunt, I'll just come out and say that this whole ban is probably a bad idea.
How much of an American-style militia/gun culture do we even have up here? The closest I can probably think of is the FLQ, and they used bombs, not guns. I'm just a city slicker so I may be misinformed, but from everything I've seen rural Canadians generally are far more likely to use their long guns for hunting their food and/or pest control in keeping wild animals like coyotes away from their livestock.
Remember when Stephen Harper repealed the requirement for non-restricted guns to be registered? That was in 2009 when he only had a minority government, but he pulled it off with the help of 8 Liberals and 12 New Democrats who broke with their party leaderships. That sort of thing doesn't happen often in a Canada where party discipline is usually so strict, so I can only imagine how much of an earful those Opposition MPs were getting from their constituents.
Besides, wasn't there a lot of talk about 10-15 years ago of the fact that the real threat was all the handguns being smuggled up here from the United States? Whatever happened with that?
And just for the record, every single Albertan who identifies as a conservative I've ever asked supports the public healthcare system. Every single conservative Albertan I've ever asked, many of whom own long guns, also support the handgun registry that's been in place for nearly 45 years. Trudeau the elder passed it in 1976, and while people have been pissed off about the long gun registry I've never heard anybody complain about having to register a handgun.
The ban just gives rural Canadians another headache to deal with, and the way Trudeau's handled it only drives more wedges between Indigenous people and the rest of us.
Thanos @ Tue May 05, 2020 6:12 pm
JaredMilne JaredMilne:
Besides, wasn't there a lot of talk about 10-15 years ago of the fact that the real threat was all the handguns being smuggled up here from the United States? Whatever happened with that?
That would require them to do something about the smuggling corridor for guns/drugs/cigarettes from the US that goes through the Mowhawk reserves bordering Ontario and Quebec. And they won't do anything about that because (a) they'd be called racists and even a Tory government can't tolerate being stuck with that label anymore, and (b) there'd be too much resistance on the reserves from the inhabitants who are either sympathetic to the organized smuggling criminals or who have been intimidated into silence for fear of their lives. As per anything to do with Native issues in this country expect nothing to ever be corrected or repaired because that's just the way it is. And no one in government or law enforcement will make the effort anymore just to avoid setting off the expected explosions of media and social reaction.
DrCaleb @ Wed May 06, 2020 6:28 am
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
Nobody is disputing the fact that natives have the right to hunt but, in your post there is zero mention of what type of weapons they may use for their "traditional" hunting rights.
So, given that it doesn't mention anywhere in your post about the use of banned or restricted weapons for natives it must be okay if one of them decided he wanted to go hunting with a 155 mm Howitzer or how about if one get's a little hungry and takes a couple of grenades down to the Fraser during tourist season and tosses them off the pier at the New West Quay, nope, no problems with that is there?
So, given that it doesn't mention anywhere in your post about the use of banned or restricted weapons for natives it must be okay if one of them decided he wanted to go hunting with a 155 mm Howitzer or how about if one get's a little hungry and takes a couple of grenades down to the Fraser during tourist season and tosses them off the pier at the New West Quay, nope, no problems with that is there?
My post mentions nothing about weapon type because it has nothing to do with weapon type. Recall that Trudeau's order-in-council (not legislation!) applies to non-restricted arms like the Ruger Mini-14, some bolt action rifles that are too powerful, some shotguns because of bore size, and many semi-automatic rifles simply because they are semi-automatic. And a bunch that we don't know why he decided, maybe because he's just scared of how they look.
My post was about rights. They currently have the right to hunt with those non-restricted rifles, the constitution says they have a right to hunt, so any legislation must include an exception for those rights or it would be found unconstitutional in court.
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
And for the record allowing one race to use banned weapons while denying all other races the same right is a racist policy and you'd be the first in line screaming about it if the roles were reversed.
I'm sorry but this has sweet fuck all to do with hunting and everything to do with creating divisions in Canada based on a persons race.
I'm sorry but this has sweet fuck all to do with hunting and everything to do with creating divisions in Canada based on a persons race.
The only one who is playing the race card is you.
Recall, this is an order-in-council. There is no policy, and there is no legislation written yet. How can a bill be passed when Parliament isn't sitting because of Covid-19? The APTN article simply states that an exception will be made to the order-in-council so that first nations hunters can continue to use the same non-restricted hunting rifles they have been, because of their constitutional rights.If everyone had a right in our constitution saying everyone had a right to hunt, the fact that first nations do wouldn't even be a issue.
Freakinoldguy @ Wed May 06, 2020 7:01 am
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
Nobody is disputing the fact that natives have the right to hunt but, in your post there is zero mention of what type of weapons they may use for their "traditional" hunting rights.
So, given that it doesn't mention anywhere in your post about the use of banned or restricted weapons for natives it must be okay if one of them decided he wanted to go hunting with a 155 mm Howitzer or how about if one get's a little hungry and takes a couple of grenades down to the Fraser during tourist season and tosses them off the pier at the New West Quay, nope, no problems with that is there?
So, given that it doesn't mention anywhere in your post about the use of banned or restricted weapons for natives it must be okay if one of them decided he wanted to go hunting with a 155 mm Howitzer or how about if one get's a little hungry and takes a couple of grenades down to the Fraser during tourist season and tosses them off the pier at the New West Quay, nope, no problems with that is there?
My post mentions nothing about weapon type because it has nothing to do with weapon type. Recall that Trudeau's order-in-council (not legislation!) applies to non-restricted arms like the Ruger Mini-14, some bolt action rifles that are too powerful, some shotguns because of bore size, and many semi-automatic rifles simply because they are semi-automatic. And a bunch that we don't know why he decided, maybe because he's just scared of how they look.
My post was about rights. They currently have the right to hunt with those non-restricted rifles, the constitution says they have a right to hunt, so any legislation must include an exception for those rights or it would be found unconstitutional in court.
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
And for the record allowing one race to use banned weapons while denying all other races the same right is a racist policy and you'd be the first in line screaming about it if the roles were reversed.
I'm sorry but this has sweet fuck all to do with hunting and everything to do with creating divisions in Canada based on a persons race.
I'm sorry but this has sweet fuck all to do with hunting and everything to do with creating divisions in Canada based on a persons race.
The only one who is playing the race card is you.
Recall, this is an order-in-council. There is no policy, and there is no legislation written yet. How can a bill be passed when Parliament isn't sitting because of Covid-19? The APTN article simply states that an exception will be made to the order-in-council so that first nations hunters can continue to use the same non-restricted hunting rifles they have been, because of their constitutional rights.If everyone had a right in our constitution saying everyone had a right to hunt, the fact that first nations do wouldn't even be a issue.
Sorry but you're wrong.
An order in council does allow legislation to be passed without Parliaments consent.
$1:
A federal order-in-council is a statutory instrument by which the governor general (the executive power of the governor-in-council), acting on the advice and consent of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada, expresses a decision. In practice, orders-in-council are drafted by Cabinet and formally approved by the governor general. Orders-in-council are not discussed by Parliament, and do not require legislation by Parliament, before being implemented.
In some cases, orders-in-council are notices of federal appointments or regulations. Others are legislative orders, forming part of the law and enforceable by the courts. Most legislative orders are made under authority expressly conferred by an Act (Statute) of Parliament. Acts are often cast in general terms and empower the governor general to make regulations to carry out the intent of the legislation.
In some cases, orders-in-council are notices of federal appointments or regulations. Others are legislative orders, forming part of the law and enforceable by the courts. Most legislative orders are made under authority expressly conferred by an Act (Statute) of Parliament. Acts are often cast in general terms and empower the governor general to make regulations to carry out the intent of the legislation.
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/ ... in-council
And as for your assertion that we have to allow Natives the rights to use "assault" rifles while hunting while denying it to everyone else because the SCoC "MIGHT" side with the natives is utter conjecture right along the lines of Trudeau settling with Omar Kahdr by giving him 10 million dollars before the SCoC had even ruled on his lawsuit, because.
As for first nations hunting rights nobody is disputing that fact. What people are pissed about is that they are being given the right to retain weapons that, the Liberal Gov't through an order in council made illegal for everyone else in Canada including one weapon that was specifically banned for "hunting" back in the 70's. So, if pointing those facts out makes it "playing the race card" then I suppose i'm guilty as accused.
Thanos @ Wed May 06, 2020 7:09 am
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
...we don't know why he decided, maybe because he's just scared of how they look....
You know for a fact that this is the only criteria they used. "That one looks militarist and intimidating. Get rid of it!".
DrCaleb @ Wed May 06, 2020 7:16 am
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
And as for your assertion that we have to allow Natives the rights to use "assault" rifles
I made no such assertion. Stop assigning strawmen to me. I am not responsible for your reading comprehension.
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
while hunting while denying it to everyone else because the SCoC "MIGHT" side with the natives is utter conjecture
Not "might", it will. The right is clearly in the Constitution, and any legislation (or order-in-council) that violates a right is unconstitutional.
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
right along the lines of Trudeau settling with Omar Kahdr by giving him 10 million dollars before the SCoC had even ruled on his lawsuit, because.
Where do you get your information? The SoC ruled five or six times that I recall in favour of Kadhar, and found the Harper and Cretien governments in violation of his rights and complicit in his torture.
They didn't 'give' him anything.
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
As for first nations hunting rights nobody is disputing that fact. What people are pissed about is that they are being given the right to retain weapons that, the Liberal Gov't through an order in council made illegal for everyone else in Canada including one weapon that was specifically banned for "hunting" back in the 70's. So, if pointing those facts out makes it "playing the race card" then I suppose i'm guilty as accused.
They can be pissed off all they want, but a lot of people can't go out and spend hundreds of dollars on new rifles that they use to feed their families.
And again, restricted weapons are, have and always will be, illegal for hunting.
DrCaleb @ Wed May 06, 2020 7:17 am
Thanos Thanos:
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
...we don't know why he decided, maybe because he's just scared of how they look....
You know for a fact that this is the only criteria they used. "That one looks militarist and intimidating. Get rid of it!".
Like FOG showed above, if they are banning Airsoft rifles, then it's definitely about form and not function.
Freakinoldguy @ Wed May 06, 2020 7:53 am
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
And as for your assertion that we have to allow Natives the rights to use "assault" rifles
I made no such assertion. Stop assigning strawmen to me. I am not responsible for your reading comprehension.
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
while hunting while denying it to everyone else because the SCoC "MIGHT" side with the natives is utter conjecture
Not "might", it will. The right is clearly in the Constitution, and any legislation (or order-in-council) that violates a right is unconstitutional.
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
right along the lines of Trudeau settling with Omar Kahdr by giving him 10 million dollars before the SCoC had even ruled on his lawsuit, because.
Where do you get your information? The SoC ruled five or six times that I recall in favour of Kadhar, and found the Harper and Cretien governments in violation of his rights and complicit in his torture.
They didn't 'give' him anything.
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
As for first nations hunting rights nobody is disputing that fact. What people are pissed about is that they are being given the right to retain weapons that, the Liberal Gov't through an order in council made illegal for everyone else in Canada including one weapon that was specifically banned for "hunting" back in the 70's. So, if pointing those facts out makes it "playing the race card" then I suppose i'm guilty as accused.
They can be pissed off all they want, but a lot of people can't go out and spend hundreds of dollars on new rifles that they use to feed their families.
And again, restricted weapons are, have and always will be, illegal for hunting.
Except for the natives if Trudeau is to be believed?
$1:
Indigenous hunters will be excluded from Canada’s sweeping ban on 1,500 assault weapons announced Friday.
“There will be an exception for Indigenous people’s exercising a section 35 hunting right, as well as those who use the weapon for hunting to feed themselves or their family,” said Justice Minister David Lametti.
“They may continue using firearms that were previously non-restricted for these purposes until a suitable replacement can be acquired.”
“There will be an exception for Indigenous people’s exercising a section 35 hunting right, as well as those who use the weapon for hunting to feed themselves or their family,” said Justice Minister David Lametti.
“They may continue using firearms that were previously non-restricted for these purposes until a suitable replacement can be acquired.”
But do me a favour. You keep mentioning the Charter so could you show me where, in the constitution it mentions the type of weapons the natives can use to hunt with and I'm guessing you won't be able to find it. And the reason for that is because civilian gun laws were up to this point enacted for "all" Canadians not just some of them.
Hell, Native rights aren't even included in the Charter per se because to have included them would have made them susceptible to the "not withstanding clause" and Trudeau the senior didn't want that to happen.
$1:
Section 35 falls outside of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and it begins Part II of the constitution. This allows Section 35 to be exempt from the “notwithstanding clause” that applies to the Charter. In other words, the federal government cannot override Aboriginal rights.
https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc. ... ection_35/
BTW there is no mention of what weapons they can use to hunt. It just states that they have the right to hunt.
Here's the firearm act and guess what? It specifically states that Aboriginals are subject to the same firearms regulations as the rest of us.
$1:
Application
2 For the purposes of these Regulations, an Aboriginal individual is an individual who
(a) is a member of one of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada;
(b) is a member of an Aboriginal community;
(c) engages in the traditional hunting practices of the individual’s Aboriginal community; and
(d) for the purposes of applying these Regulations, other than section 20 of these Regulations, has made an application in accordance with section 3, 8 or 9 of the Firearms Licences Regulations, as adapted by section 6 of these Regulations.
3 Subject to sections 4 to 20 of these Regulations, the Firearms Act and any regulations made under that Act apply to Aboriginal individuals.
2 For the purposes of these Regulations, an Aboriginal individual is an individual who
(a) is a member of one of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada;
(b) is a member of an Aboriginal community;
(c) engages in the traditional hunting practices of the individual’s Aboriginal community; and
(d) for the purposes of applying these Regulations, other than section 20 of these Regulations, has made an application in accordance with section 3, 8 or 9 of the Firearms Licences Regulations, as adapted by section 6 of these Regulations.
3 Subject to sections 4 to 20 of these Regulations, the Firearms Act and any regulations made under that Act apply to Aboriginal individuals.
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/reg ... lText.html
So in light of this legislation there is no legal precedence for the Liberal gov't to allow the natives to keep their "assault" rifles. They just used the section 35 of the constitution to try and bullshit the legal gun owners into thinking the natives had some special right of gun ownership when nothing could be further from the truth.
DrCaleb @ Wed May 06, 2020 8:22 am
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
But do me a favour. You keep mentioning the Charter so could you show me where, in the constitution it mentions the type of weapons the natives can use to hunt with and I'm guessing you won't be able to find it.
Again with the strawmen. You know this thing doesn't exist, yet you want me to prove the impossible thing or the consequence is that your argument is right. Guess what? Logical debate doesn't work like that.
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
BTW there is no mention of what weapons they can use to hunt. It just states that they have the right to hunt.
And if the government takes away their legally purchased hunting rifles, can they hunt?
Or, would that be unconstitutional?Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
Here's the firearm act and guess what? It specifically states that Aboriginals are subject to the same firearms regulations as the rest of us.
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
So in light of this legislation there is no legal precedence for the Liberal gov't to allow the natives to keep their "assault" rifles.
So, on one hand you show that Natives are subject to the same laws as everyone else, and then you keep harping on the made up fact they they will be able to use assault rifles to hunt.
Another strawman.
Zipperfish @ Wed May 06, 2020 9:40 am
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
OK Boomer
Good to know you've still got nothing except childish, ageist insults.
Fortunately I'm a patient man so I'll wait for your answer and for the record, take all the time you need to formulate a logical explanation for Trudeau's racist guns laws?
You already got the answer, and it wasn't me providing it. Different law for indigenous peoples, through S 35 of the Constitution, UN declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples and 150 years of evolving jurisprudence.
I don't know enough about guns to be for or against this, but my gut is against it. You got the "OK Boomer" comment because you just couldn't resist turning this into another reason for you to hate Indians.
PublicAnimalNo9 @ Wed May 06, 2020 9:42 am
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
Fortunately I'm a patient man so I'll wait for your answer and for the record, take all the time you need to formulate a logical explanation for Trudeau's racist guns laws?
Well, I'm not one of the anti-gun crowd you were looking for, but I like to point out the obvious flaws in people's arguments. Your answer is actually in the title: "Section 35". What is Section 35?
Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982:
35. (1) The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.
(2) In this Act, "aboriginal peoples of Canada" includes the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.
(3) For greater certainty, in subsection (1) "treaty rights" includes rights that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.
(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the aboriginal and treaty rights referred to in subsection (1) are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.
(2) In this Act, "aboriginal peoples of Canada" includes the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.
(3) For greater certainty, in subsection (1) "treaty rights" includes rights that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.
(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the aboriginal and treaty rights referred to in subsection (1) are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.
So it's not Trudeau's racist laws (that haven't even been written yet), it's actually the Constitution that protects the right of Indigenous people to hunt.
DrCaleb @ Wed May 06, 2020 9:43 am
PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
Fortunately I'm a patient man so I'll wait for your answer and for the record, take all the time you need to formulate a logical explanation for Trudeau's racist guns laws?
Well, I'm not one of the anti-gun crowd you were looking for, but I like to point out the obvious flaws in people's arguments. Your answer is actually in the title: "Section 35". What is Section 35?
Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982:
35. (1) The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.
(2) In this Act, "aboriginal peoples of Canada" includes the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.
(3) For greater certainty, in subsection (1) "treaty rights" includes rights that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.
(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the aboriginal and treaty rights referred to in subsection (1) are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.
(2) In this Act, "aboriginal peoples of Canada" includes the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.
(3) For greater certainty, in subsection (1) "treaty rights" includes rights that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.
(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the aboriginal and treaty rights referred to in subsection (1) are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.
So it's not Trudeau's racist laws (that haven't even been written yet), it's actually the Constitution that protects the right of Indigenous people to hunt.
Strawman.
If you take away the rifles they already have, you deny them their constitutional rights.