Bruce Montague
Bill C-68 Court Challenge
CCF Takes Montague Case | News | Sign-Up for email-updates | donate Donate
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»

News Archive


Site Map

Nov14-2010: Transcribed Update Letter from Bruce @ Prison

News Archive Index

November 6, 2010

Dear Supporters,

Itís been almost two months since the Supreme Court of Canada turned down our appeal. Iíve been sitting in prison since then and adapting to my new lifestyle. :( Actually, now that Iíve accepted my fate in prison, Iíve been handling it pretty well for the most part. The hardest part about being in prison is that ironically itís my family and friends that are suffering the most! Everything (almost) is provided for me in here but all the things I used to provide for my wife, kids, and community are now missing.

As I mentioned, in my last letter, our constitutional challenge is over and we lost. There is nothing left we can do. I tried my best as did the rest of our volunteer team that put in countless hours and money into this effort. Iím only sorry we couldnít have done better.

I guess there is some minor good news about our constitutional challenge and that is the fact that we didnít make it to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC). That means there is still a faint hope that someone can still challenge the law with the hope of being heard at the SCC and winning. This person will definitely not be me. For one thing, Iím not good enough to accomplish this task and Iím also exhausted and ďused up.Ē

In closing I would like to thank all of you that have written letters of support to Donna and myself. Weíve gotten hundreds of them, and I love reading every one of them. Iím sorry I canít write back, but Iím only allowed to send two letters a week and I need these for dealing my continuing legal fight to retain our property.

Yours in Prison,


[ Write to Bruce @ Jail: ]

CASE COMMENTARY: As Bruce implies, it appears that the judiciary had already determined to "dismiss" ancient constitutional law and principles of fundamental justice before the Montague firearms challenge began. Therefore a ruling from the SCC would likely have further solidified the government's war against private firearms ownership in Canada. That being observed, the full value of the Montague firearms challenge may not be realized in our time. It has been an exercise pursuing the idealism of a bygone era of legal and judicial principles. It has proved the point of those who warned us that Bill C-68 was not about public safety, but all about eliminating firearms ownership by prohibitions, confiscation, and harsh criminal penalties for paperwork violations. It has proved the point of those who warned that judges no longer uphold the constitution, safeguarding citizens against tyrannical laws. Instead judges interpret the law according to their enlightened vision of how the New Canada should look. Good-bye to fundamental principles of justice, such as innocent until proven guilty. Good-bye to the individual right to defend life and property. Good-bye to the right to own property, and to not be deprived thereof except according to principles of fundamental justice. Good-bye to a fair and impartial court system. Remembrance day just passed. Bruce and Donna did what they believed was their duty to defend all Canadians against bad laws -- laws that remove individual rights and freedoms while enabling the actions and objectives of a police-state. At this time each of us might ask ourselves, do our actions and commitments show that we value the freedoms our fathers fought terrible wars to preserve? - Ryan for the Case Management Team


Remember Bruce and Donna are still facing the confiscation of their home and life savings.

If you can donate to the their ongoing legal defense needs please do so today:

Write to voice your opposition to the Civil Home Forfeiture:

back to top | search | home | site map
DISCLAIMER: is maintained by friends and supporters of Bruce Montague.
It is NOT an official mouth-piece for Bruce Montague's legal defense.