The firearms community has lost many battles as the culture war between
rural and urban Canada rages. C-68 is an excellent means for political
parties to accentuate this war and to appeal to the big cities with growing
populations. It seems no major political party wants to be stuck with the
dwindling number of votes from rural Canada. Therefore, the Conservative
govt.'s. actions have not been that favourable to the firearms community.
This party readily enforces the Liberals' C-68 and has confiscated more
firerarms from Canadians than any govt. in Canadian history. Provincially,
the rural supported Sask party "accepts" the Conservative's "licensing
regime" while it too sets its eyes on the large city votes. Both parties
support mandatory firearms owner licensing, an individual property rights
issue in addition to many others. Mr. Harper said, "licensing is cost
effective." Cost effective for his govt. to disarm the firearms community
and without compensation. Over 15 years the federal govt. has located only
2 million of the 5 million Canadian gun owners and merely 7 million of their
16.5 million or more firearms. Finding the remaining guns and unlicensed
firearms owners is challenging even with the lure of Mr. Harper extending an
We've learned that we can not fight this war in the courts using Mr.
Trudeau's Charter of Rights because many of our most significant rights
we've inherited from England have been severely altered and/or deleted from
this document. Still, we are entitled to our rights from these early parts
of our constitution; the Magna Carta, the English Bill of Rights, John
Locke's Second Treatise and Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of
England. But, our courts too many times, permit the govts. of the day to
trample our liberties. Remember, civil rights can never be revoked.
Such organizations as the Canadian Professional Police Association, the
Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, some health associations, some
women's groups, the Coalition for Gun Control, the major political parties
and the Canadian Bar Association (CBA) have all unfairly shifted the blame
of gun violence and the criminal misuse of firearms upon innocent,
responsible Canadians who own firearms.
The significance of the CBA's antigun stance since 1972 may become one of
the most onerous problems we have to face. There has been long-held
unsubstantiated feelings within the firearms community that the scales of
the Canadian justice system were weighing against it. However, there was no
tangible evidence that widespread legal unfairness was actively propagated
towards them from within the justice system until May 26, 2010.
It was then that the CBA presented their three page Letter to Standing
Committee on Justice and Human Rights, "Re: Bill C-391 - Repeal of Long-Gun
Registry" to Garry Breitkreuz, M.P., Chair, Standing Committee on Public
Safety and National Security. The CBA volunteered this information exposing
themselves as to the extent and duration of their conspiracy against the
Canadian firearms community.
No major political party expresses a desire to repeal C-68. In addition,
the judicial system has tarnished its own image of fairness losing the trust
of the firearms community. A community whose expectation to an impartial
legal counsel, a fair-minded judge and a neutral court has became a
Thomas Jefferson once said "I consider Trial by Jury as the only anchor yet
imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its
constitution". Here Jefferson described a solution to the firearms
community's dilemma as well as its problem. The jury is powerful in
preserving our freedoms, for without its consent the government may punish
no person and all its unjust laws and oppressive application of those laws
are of no effect. Trial by jury is the final legal check on tyranny and thus
a symbol of and a prevention for losing our free society. In addition,
"jurors have always had the ability to ignore the judge, ignore the law and
acquit. Jury nullification serves as an important check on government
power." (University of Alberta law professor Sanjeev Anand ...Edmonton Sun
January 15, 2006)
In Canadian law a juror or a jury may nullify a law if they wish. Many
precedents date back to the times Henry Morgentaler was acquitted by
several juries for performing abortions. Abortion procedures were illegal
at the time but accepted by the local communities. They did not ask the
judge, the prosecutor or any lawyer involved with the trial whether they had
this right. As a juror, don't ask the judge, prosecutor or any lawyer
involved with the trial whether you have this right. As officers of the
court these people have a duty to divert and deceive you from jury
nullification. Therefore, the juries used their right to nullify the law and
acquitted Morgentaler in spite of the abortion law.
If you are in jury deliberations concerning members of the firearms
community, acquit and keep acquitting until the rest of the jury stops
trying to change your mind. It only takes one brave juror to nullify a gun
law. "If the jury wants to disbelieve any piece of evidence, it's entitled
to do that. That's the basis of the power of jury nullification."
University of Alberta law professor Sanjeev Anand, Calgary Sun, Nov. 16,
Legal challenges to the licensing aspect of the Firearms Act.
1. (a) Ontario, Bruce and Donna Montague v. Her Majesty The Queen, going to
Court of Appeal of Ontario, Feb. 18, 2009.--- lost appeal. Applied for
leave to appeal to Supreme Court of Canada ---appeal denied no reasons
provided, Bruce is serving time in Thunder Bay . Write to him:
(b) On September 23, 2010 the Montagues received a letter from the office of
the Attorney General of Ontario resuming proceedings to confiscate their
property as "proceeds of crime."
2. (a) Sask., Edward Burke Hudson v. The Attorney General of Canada, lost at
Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan. Appliedfor leave to appeal to the Supreme
Court of Canada---appeal denied no reasons provided
(b) November 09, 2010, Edward Burke Hudson v. The Attorney General of
Canada, --- constitutional appeal presentation of Criminal Code section
117.03 before The Honourable Mr. Justice R.C. Mills of the Court of Queen's
Bench in Saskatoon. Justice Mills 'reserved judgement' and promised a
Nipawin Fish & Game League
Chair Firearms Committee
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.