Bruce Montague
Bill C-68 Court Challenge
CCF Takes Montague Case | News | Sign-Up for email-updates | donate Donate
Online
This Case Epilogue written February 1, 2017 is intended to provide context to this web site as it documents a Canadian constitutional challenge spanning from 2004 to 2016. Bruce Montague determined to expose the constitutional violations in the Canadian Firearms Act. After being charged, mounting a constitutional challenge and appealing to the Supreme Court of Canada, Montague's case was dismissed without reasons. With Bruce in jail, the Montagues then faced an another twist of injustice -- the confiscation of their home and property by the Ontario government. The Montagues fought the civil forfeiture of their home for years until, in the summer of 2016, the Canadian Constitution Foundation was instrumental in negotiating with the Ontario Civil Forfeiture department to drop the lien against the Montague home. The Canadian Constitution Foundation deserves our support as they continue to fight other cases of injustice around the country. YOU COULD BE NEXT! Canada is undergoing a quiet revolution and your fundamental rights and freedoms are at stake!
What's Wrong with Civil Forfeiture» | Write to Stop Civil Forfeiture»

About
YouTube
News Archive
Testimonials
Rationale
Quotes
Letters
Editorials
Audio/Video
Photos

Volunteer
Donate
Advertise
Write

Donors
Contact
Links
F.A.Q.
Search
Site Map

CĖ68: Protection or Oppression?

Editorials Index

by Ariel Kidd

Bill C-68, the legislation supporting gun control in Canada, is wasteful, oppressive, and ineffective.

First, this bill wastes the money of our nation. When introduced in 1995, the bill was expected to cost $119 million, but this figure has climbed over the years until the cost was estimated at over $1 billion in 2006! (1) Sadly, this money has not been spent effectively, but, as Dr. Ted Morton states, "...has been spent primarily on hiring bureaucrats to run the new registry, not on law enforcement officers." (2) The allotted funds could have been spent much more wisely. Other more important causes could have been supported, or the funds could have been used to discover and punish gun-related crimes.

Secondly, bill C-68 oppresses the innocent and upright citizens of Canada. Their rights are violated when they lose their ability to defend themselves through the effects of this law. This bill makes owning a firearm extremely difficult because of the many rules and regulations one must follow to be "legal." People for whom firearms are a necessity (such as farmers or trappers) therefore find great difficulty in possessing what to them is a basic tool. Not only does this bill place a heavy burden upon those who seek to keep their firearms while obeying all its regulations, but it oppresses those who conscientiously object. A prime example of this is the case of Bruce Montague. Peaceful yet resolute, this citizenís open protest of what he sees as a violation of his rights and freedoms has caused him to be treated as a criminal, to be sentenced to jail, to be deprived of his means of livelihood, and to have to fight for his very home.(3)

Lastly, gun control is not only wasteful and oppressive, but it is ineffective! Wasting the efforts of law-enforcement officers, it harasses innocent people rather than the real malefactors. Criminals are made more confident, knowing that most people no longer have a firearm for protection. Bill C-68 does not stop criminals from using guns. Studies conducted in various countries show that gun control does not lower the gun crime rate but rather increases it. This bill does not even stop criminals from getting guns: they donít register their firearms, and can still get more by smuggling them into the country.

The Firearms Act is inefficient, tyrannical and useless. Therefore, I urge that it be abolished and that the justice department focus on enforcement of existing laws against real crimes.


Notes:
(1) BBC News. January 22 2006, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4636102.stm
(2) Dr. F.L. (Ted) Morton, "How the Firearms Act (Bill-C-68) Violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms," University of Calgary, 2002, online version.
(3) Bruce Montague. April 15 2008, http://www.brucemontague.ca


To learn how to be added to or removed from the ScrapC-68 e-updates list visit: http://www.BruceMontague.ca/elist


back to top | search | home | site map
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.