by Cindy Lightheart
Are those who have been charged for doing wrong been wronged themselves? I've become involved in a firearms law prosecution that appalls me. Charges have been laid against a man and his wife. The husband and wife are well liked, respected, and widely supported. They are supported, not only by the people in their community, but by many others outside it. They haven't killed anyone, they haven't hurt anyone, they haven't threatened anyone. They haven't kidnapped anyone, or ehld anyone against their will. They are not even accused killing, hurting, threatening, kidnapping, or imprisoning anyone.
However, they are facing a variety of C-68 gun control system charges. They are accused of being in possession of certain pieces of property that some other Canadians can legally own. They never used any of those firearms for any violent criminal purpose.
The Crown also made a vicious decision to use the law about "Proceeds of Crime" in this case--a law enacted for the use against drug lords and mafia bosses. Using a law that was sold to Canadians as a way of combating drug lords and mafia bosses for the purpose of taking a family home over missing paper work in a firearms control case is, in my personal opinion, despicable! It is also a red warning to every firearms owner--Crown prosecutors can be remarkably vicious in firearms law cases.
The prosecution decided that, if they are convicted, the Crown prosecutors want the Montague family to lose their family home. They want it to be forfeited to the Crown as the "proceeds of crime." Having set up their claim to the family's home, they then demanded that the family pay for new insurance to protect the Crown in case the family's home burns down. That way, if the home burns, the Crown prosecutors think they will still get its value. I wonder if the Queen has any idea what they are doing in her name?
Is it right to use an anti drug lord and and mafia law to try and take away the home of a family? When all the family has been accused of is being in possession of pieces of property that other Canadians can legally own? If they can do this to the Montague family, is my family home also at risk? Is yours?
Calvin Martin, Q.C., has already fought the Crowns in court. He said to the judge, "If the Crown wants the home insured, let the Crown pay the premiums." The court, apparently sensing the danger of bringing the law into disrepute, agreed with Mr. Martin, and so ruled.
This family hasn't hurt anyone, but is now caught up in a serious firearms court case over paper crimes. According to the Crown prosecutors in this case, the C-68 firearms control system demands that every firearms owner have the correct paperwork--or else. Now this family are facing the reality that they might lose their home--a home they, as a family together and literally with their bare hands, built together by proud, hard, and honest labor.
When a serious court case like this comes up, the National Firearms Association is often called into it. For a very long time, the NFA has been working quietly, and very closely, with Calvin Martin, Q.C, on this case. We stay quiet because it is better not to let the Crowns know what they will be facing until the last minute. Now that it is in open court, I am able to tell you that David Tomlinson, the NFA's National President and legal expert is preparing one of the three "expert witness" affidavits that will form the basis of the constitutional challenge to the charges in this case.
As a nation we need this constitutional challenge because C-68 firearms control system is affecting everyone, not just some, and in many different ways. It is quite clear that this vicious system cannot be correct in its present form. It is necessary to step back from it and examine it in detail. It is necessary to consider the actions, the words, and the existing laws--and see if they are legal.
And that is the NFA's job.
DISCLAIMER: BruceMontague.ca is maintained by friends and
supporters of Bruce Montague.
It is NOT an official mouth-piece for Bruce
Montague's legal defense.