Trudeau Acts Unilaterally to Ban “Assault Weapons” in Canada

Trudeau Acts Unilaterally to Ban "Assault Weapons" in Canada
Trudeau Acts Unilaterally to Ban “Assault Weapons” in Canada

U.S.A.-(Ammoland.com)- Trudeau acts, apparently unilaterally, and with speed, to ban “Assault Weapons” in Canada. On April 30, 2020, the Hill reported that:

“Canada’s government is set to announce a ban on assault-style weapons following a deadly shooting in Nova Scotia this month that killed 22 people.

Officials told The Associated Press on Wednesday that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's administration will announce the ban before the week’s end, though the key provisions have already been decided by his Cabinet.

Among the weapons set to be banned include the AR-15 and the Ruger Mini-14. It wasn’t initially clear whether Canadian citizens who currently own such weapons will be required to turn them in.

After a deadly shooting in New Zealand, officials banned assault-style weapons and instituted a buyback program.

Trudeau’s Liberal Party pledged to enact an assault-style weapons ban in last year’s election campaign, at the time pledging to implement a similar buyback program.

The move comes after a gunman killed 22 people, including a police officer, during a rampage through the rural province of Nova Scotia while driving a car meant to look like a Royal Canadian Mounted Police cruiser. The suspected gunman, 51-year-old Gabriel Wortman, was killed by police.”

At a news conference on that same day, global news reports, that:

“Trudeau was asked during a briefing with journalists in Ottawa on Thursday about a report published by the Globe and Mail newspaper that said the government plans to issue a new list of banned high-power firearms including the notorious AR-15 weapon used in recent mass shootings in the U.S.

‘We have made a firm commitment to Canadians to ban military assault-style weapons because, in Canada, there’s no room for weapons made to kill large numbers of people,’ Trudeau said.

‘We were almost ready to announce measures to strengthen gun control when Parliament was suspended because of the pandemic and we will be making announcements in days to come and will give more details on this then.’

Trudeau made good on his word. On May 1, one day later, the BBC reported Trudeau’s announcement to the world:

“Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has introduced a long-promised ban on assault-style weapons following the country's worst gun massacre in April.

New rules would make it illegal to sell, transport, import or use 1,500 varieties of assault weapons.

The ban is effective immediately but there will be a two-year amnesty period for law-abiding gun owners to comply.

Mr Trudeau also said he would introduce legislation, which has yet to pass, to offer a buy-back programme.

Unlike the US, gun ownership is not enshrined in Canada's constitution, but gun ownership is still popular, especially in rural parts of the country.

Mr Trudeau made a point of saying that most gun owners are law-abiding citizens, but argued that assault-weapons serve no beneficial purpose.

‘These weapons were designed for one purpose and one purpose only — only to kill the largest amount of people in the shortest amount of time,’ he said in a press conference on Friday.

‘You don't need an AR-15 to bring down a deer.’

The call to ban assault weapons was heightened after a number of high-profile shootings—in 2017, at a mosque in Quebec, in 2018 on a commercial street in Toronto and most recently, in a rampage across the province of Nova Scotia that became the deadliest shooting in Canada's history.

RCMP have said that the shooter was not licensed to own firearms, but had what appeared to be an assault-style weapon, as well as other guns. The RCMP did not specify which kind, so it is unknown if it will be covered by the ban.

Mr Trudeau campaigned on the ban ahead of last November’s election, and he said he was planning on introducing the ban in March, but it was delayed because of coronavirus.

His government had already expanded background check requirements and made it tougher to transport handguns, prior to November’s election.”

So that there is no mistake as to when the ban on “assault weapons,” takes place in Canada, The National Review announced, on May 1, 2020, that, as Trudeau makes clear, Canada’s firearms’ ban takes effect immediately.

“ ‘Effective immediately, it is no longer permitted to buy, sell, transport, import or use military-grade assault weapons in this country,’ Trudeau said at a press conference. Trudeau added that Canada was effectively ‘closing the market’ on certain firearms and categorized several mass shootings that have occurred in Canada as a ‘stain our conscience.’”

The ban will classify various firearms that have been used in mass shootings in Canada and around the world as ‘prohibited,’ including the AR-15 rifle, M14 semi-automatic rifle, Ruger Mini-14, and others.

‘From this moment forward, the number of these guns will only decrease in Canada,’ Public Safety minister Bill Blair said at the briefing alongside Trudeau. Blair emphasized that the ‘vast majority’ of Canadian gun owners are law-abiding and use their firearms safely.

Canada’s government will implement a buyback program for current legal owners of one or more of the 1,500 types of firearms covered by the ban. Owners will be granted a two-year amnesty during which time they must participate in the buyback program.”

Recall how Australia, back in 1996 also used a “mass shooting” as a pretext to ban semiautomatic firearms. Twenty-two years later in the U.S., Fortune Magazine expressed exuberance over Australia’s actions,

On March 21, 2019, as reported in the weblog, the Conversation:

“New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has just announced a ban in that country on specific military-style firearms. It will soon become an offence to own or possess semi-automatic firearms and shotguns with detachable magazines capable of firing more than five cartridges.”

“A rigorous study to ascertain ‘. . . the null hypothesis that the rate of mass shootings in Australia remained unchanged after introduction of the National Firearms Agreement’” was reported in the Annals of Internal Medicine, on July 3, 2018.

The bottom line: no causal connection can be established. The report states:

“ ‘Without a 22-year randomized controlled trial assigning only parts of a national population to live under the National Firearms Agreement, establishing a definitive causal connection between this legislation and the 22-year absence of mass firearm homicides is not possible.’ At most ‘a standard rare events model provides strong evidence against the hypothesis that this prolonged absence simply reflects a continuation of a preexisting pattern of rare events.’”

Strong evidence of a causal connection, though, is not definitive evidence, sufficient to establish a causal connection” between enactment of a strict “assault weapons” ban and a reduction in the incidence of “mass shootings.”

But, there is a more important point to be made here. The test reported in Annals of Internal Medicine applied the null hypothesis, as they state, only to “mass shooting” incidents, not all shooting incidents, and that limitation already limits and skews the results the null hypothesis at the outset.

In that regard the websitefee.org reported:

“In the wake of the March 15 New Zealand shootings, advocates for new gun restrictions in New Zealand have pointed to Australia as ‘proof’ that if national governments adopt gun restrictions like those of Australia's National Firearms Agreement, then homicides will go into steep decline.

‘Exhibit A’ is usually the fact that homicides have decreased in Australia since 1996 when the new legislation was adopted in Australia.

There are at least two problems with these claims. First, homicide rates have been in decline throughout western Europe, Canada, and the United States since the early 1990s. The fact that the same trend was followed in Australia is hardly evidence of a revolutionary achievement. Second, homicides were already so unusual in Australia, even before the 1996 legislation, that few lessons can be learned from slight movements either up or down in homicide rates.”

The takeaway from all this:

If you would like to live in a Commonwealth Nation, as the subject of the Queen of England, have at it. The Government will take good care of you:

Security proffered by Government = Tyranny

Unlike the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, the right of the people to keep and bear arms IS enshrined in the United States. Americans consider that a blessing—a fundamental, unalienable, immutable right bestowed on man by the Divine Creator, that no man or government can lawfully deny any man.

Let both the Queen of England and her subjects in the Commonwealth Nations and the atheist Marxists and Anarchists in our own Nation scoff at our God-given right, as a free sovereign people, to keep and bear arms.

We will never allow our Nation to be overrun with the ugly weeds of tyranny.


Arbalest Quarrel

About The Arbalest Quarrel:

Arbalest Group created `The Arbalest Quarrel' website for a special purpose. That purpose is to educate the American public about recent Federal and State firearms control legislation. No other website, to our knowledge, provides as deep an analysis or as thorough an analysis. Arbalest Group offers this information free.

For more information, visit: www.arbalestquarrel.com.

Subscribe
Notify of
56 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Truth
Truth
5 months ago

What else would you expect from Fidel Castro’s son?

Broadsword
Broadsword
5 months ago

How the hell can you buy back what you didn’t sell to begin with?!! It’s bull crap! Typical hoplaphobes, the action of one asshole induces punishment on law abiding! Lead first Canadians! Government can’t buy back without a NICS Background check, we all know all politicians can’t pass that!

Will
Will
5 months ago

The citizens of Canada need to ban Trudeau’s useless ass! What a POS!

reno
reno
5 months ago

FASCIST DICTATOR

Core
Core
5 months ago

Trudeau justifying gun bans due to illegally obtained gun crime: priceless..

chocopot
chocopot
5 months ago

Gun control is not now, and has never been, about crime or criminals. It is and has always been about disarming the citizenry. The Left could not give a rat’s behind about crime or criminals. Their goal is citizen disarmament for the simple reason that all of those armed citizens would be a major impediment to the security of the Leftist dictatorship once they finally manage to create one.

Will
Will
5 months ago
Reply to  chocopot

..and control!

Hankus
Hankus
5 months ago

Take off, hoser!

JPM
JPM
5 months ago

Like all liberal politicians, he was just waiting for (gleefully hoping for) an excuse to implement more gun control.

MICHAEL J
MICHAEL J
5 months ago
Reply to  JPM

Real Canadian birth certificate?

Mudhunter
Mudhunter
5 months ago

Since there is no room in Canada for guns that are made for killing large numbers of people, that means all law enforcement and military in Canada will be going to 38 special 5 shot snub nose revolvers, spears, bows and slingshot, right?

Sell off all the tanks and artillery pieces as scrap iron, or to Americans.

As to a buy back, they had to buy them from the government first. That is a fraud. They should be required to label it correctly. A little bit of money in exchange for slavery.

DonP
DonP
5 months ago

So far, I have not seen any article that identifies any firearm used in the Nova Scotia shooting as being an “assault weapon”. Due to that, it appears that the Canadian government comes up with gun laws just like our democrats do here in the U.S. They habitually come up with laws in response to a shooting that, had they been in effect prior to the shooting, would have had absolutely absolutely no effect on the shooting they were supposedly written in response to. This law is like writing a law, in response to a multi-car crash, that outlaws motorcycles…… Read more »

Catatonic
Catatonic
5 months ago
Reply to  DonP

“This law is like writing a law, in response to a multi-car crash, that outlaws motorcycles… even though there were no motorcycles anywhere in the area.”

Excellent analogy! I hope you don’t mind if I borrow it?

DonP
DonP
5 months ago

Roger,
In the article, you wrote: “It wasn’t initially clear whether Canadian citizens who currently own such weapons will be required to turn them in.“

Further on down, you included the quote: “Owners will be granted a two-year amnesty during which time they must participate in the buyback program.”

Seems to me that if they “must participate” in the buyback program, that would blatantly imply that they are required to turn them in.

Sushihunter
Sushihunter
5 months ago
Reply to  DonP

There is a two year amnesty that will expire on April 30, 2022.

They don’t yet have a plan for the poorly named “buy-back” – that will be coming in the future.

Wass
Wass
5 months ago
Reply to  Sushihunter

Unless I am mistaken. Canada attempted, in recent years, to institute a gun registry, and it was not successful. Therefore, current owners of now forbidden firearms can tell the government about the buy back: “Stick it you know where!” More importantly, where is the outcry against penalizing a whole swath of persons in no way responsible for the misdeeds of an individual madman? It’s gross injustice.

Will
Will
5 months ago
Reply to  Sushihunter

Don’t fall for any mandatory buy back bullshit! They can’t buy back shit they never owned! Don’t wait for the two year amnesty crap to expire! Start fighting this now and let them know they will get zero compliance right now,in two years,or whenever! It’s your country take it back!

hippybiker
hippybiker
5 months ago

It is estimated that 220 to 400 thousand people are killed in this country every yea4 by medical errors. Maybe we should start banning doctors. Makes about as much( sense as banning firearms!
As an aside. My brother and his wife traveled to Australia some years ago. They were in a Pub in Brisbane and my brother engaged the bartender in a conversation about the handgun ban. The bartender said, “:you got $500. I can ge5 you anything you want!

willyd
willyd
5 months ago
Reply to  hippybiker

HB; Oh how true, just lost a good friend on Thursday through a doctors mistake, but like most it has been swept under the rug!!!!!!!!!! This non-sense of banning weapons is a pipe dream of the left, heck China has now got something to attack our military with, our guns removed, the left has opened the door to any invasion that would come along, think about that for a little time and think about that out come!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Z
Z
5 months ago

Goes to show how free people we are as a nation Here in America…we might be civilized…but man is still an animal same as any other predator in this world…we are civilized but man does kill…with that said I’m grateful for my second amendment rights to defend and protect my country family and myself against that human predator who violates my civil rights…For a Canadian Prime Minister to have god like powers to write bills that’s complete insanity…!!!

Snuffy
Snuffy
5 months ago

I suspect this will succeed about as well as the infamous Bill C-68, which mandated registration of all firearms, with a deadline of 2003. Most Canadians simply refused to comply, and the registration scheme collapsed in 2012 after cost overruns of over half a billion dollars.

Sushihunter
Sushihunter
5 months ago
Reply to  Snuffy

The Chretien Liberal government said that the C-68 Firearms Act of 1995 would cost us $200 Million. By the time the registry was set up and running, actual costs were in excess of $3 Billion.

Now, the Trudeau Liberals are claiming this new gun ban and buy-back are going to cost Canadians $600 Million.

Knowledgeable people are now suggesting that this will cost in excess of $10 Billion.

And this is on top of the $650+ Billion in debt that the Liberals have run up in 4 short years as government.

#TrudeauMustGo

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
5 months ago
Reply to  Sushihunter

@Sh, I believe that libtard, would be tyrants, in every country, do not care about the cost because it is not their money.

Knute
Knute
5 months ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

There’s only four strategies in spending money: 1. Your money on you 2. Your money on someone else 3. Someone else’s money on yourself 4. Someone else’s money on someone else In the first case both price and quality are equally important. In the second case (example; a gift) price becomes the first consideration, quality a distant second. In the third (e.i. someone gives you a debit card to buy yourself a gift), Quality is the primary, price is the distant second. Guess which price/quality to find fair value calculation is important when spending someone else’s money on someone else… Read more »

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
5 months ago
Reply to  Knute

, Yes, and then there is creating money out of no where, too!

Knute
Knute
5 months ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

Exactly so. OFC “money” is something of value that cannot just simply be created out of nothing. That is why it is so important to the rulers that we confuse “currency”, which can be created at no cost, with “money”, which can’t be. 🙂
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyV0OfU3-FU&list=PLK8aHk5TqClBale3rjOeeQ1wdxZgtiJCA

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
5 months ago
Reply to  Sushihunter

@Sushi, Do you mean Chrétien, Jean |krāˈtyeN -ˈtyen| (1934–), Canadian Liberal statesman; prime minister 1993–2003; full name Joseph-Jacques Jean Chrétien.

nrringlee
nrringlee
5 months ago

This is how leftism reveals itself as the true fascism. One man rule. Rule by fiat. I guess he has a phone and a pen and it looks like he has the People’s Liberation Army backing him up. Next move is to make the trains run on time. All hail Il Duce!

Z
Z
5 months ago
Reply to  nrringlee

For a prime minister such as Trudeau to have King like powers that’s just to much power and pen…that’s insane power…!

Doszap
Doszap
5 months ago

I find it hard to believe the Canadian men would tolerate HIS shit.Mass rallies and thousands of threats would ensue, and if that didn’t work there are other ways to change his mind.

Rodoeo
Rodoeo
5 months ago
Reply to  Doszap

Why do you find it hard to believe? Virginians are tolerating Northam’s shit. He’s passed every law he’s wanted to pass during this pandemic and not a peep out of so called patriots.

Catatonic
Catatonic
5 months ago
Reply to  Rodoeo

Oh, the Virginian patriots are peeping, the MSM just isn’t giving them any air time. Also, like so many of the blue states, a majority of the patriots are rural and the blue cities out-number, out shout, and out vote them. Our country needs a some states to split up into two states, as has been done in the past, so that everyone has more equality of representation.

Catatonic
Catatonic
5 months ago
Reply to  Doszap

Doszap, why do you assume that Canadian women are any happier with his shit than the men are? Not trying to be a flaming feminist or start an argument here, but it just seemed odd to me that you specified Canadian MEN rather than just Canadians. As a woman who has been armed for over fifty-years, I care just as much about my liberties as my husband does about his. I’m sure there are many Canadian women who feel the same.

Stripeseven
Stripeseven
5 months ago

“One man”… yeah…”One man”…has somehow made everyone responsible for his cowardly actions. Yeah… Lets’ blame everyone for something that they didn’t do. How convenient…

Mike
Mike
5 months ago

Russia will love this.

Mattval
Mattval
5 months ago

It looks like to me the easiest thing to do is make it illegal to murder people. You know instead of banning random objects.

Catatonic
Catatonic
5 months ago
Reply to  Mattval

Oh my! What a revolutionary idea! Better be careful putting that kind of radical view out there. They’ll be coming for ya! ;-D

JoseyWales
JoseyWales
5 months ago

Open borders and World Order leaders, Canada’s finished. The Canadians are beneficiaries of a government they deserve. Canadastan

Deplorable Bill
Deplorable Bill
5 months ago

You can’t legislate morality! Fix the actual problem! The tool is just that, a tool. It doesn’t load itself, it doesn’t kill by itself, it is just a piece of equipment, nothing more. As far as power goes, there are several states that won’t allow the use of 223/556 for big game hunting. Maybe they should ban cars because of the carnage of accidents and drunk drivers. They would save many, many more people if they just ban cars.

Arm up, carry on.

DonP
DonP
5 months ago

“…Several that won’t…”? It’s more like ‘only a few that will’. The only state that I know of that will allow deer to be legally taken with .223/5.56 is Missouri.

Will
Will
5 months ago
Reply to  DonP

,in TEXAS you can legally hunt deer with 223/556,but I would NEVER recommend that! In TEXAS you can’t hunt deer with rimfire Ammo only.I always hunt deer with .308!

Deplorable Bill
Deplorable Bill
5 months ago
Reply to  DonP

Az. does also.

Arm up, carry on.

Will Flatt
Will Flatt
5 months ago

Time for Canucks to rise up & throw off their tyrants by force of arms. Do it now, Canada, or be forever cucked!

Doszap
Doszap
5 months ago
Reply to  Will Flatt

They don’t have the BALLS.

Hankus
Hankus
5 months ago
Reply to  Will Flatt

They are too polite for that.

Finnky
Finnky
5 months ago

Interesting argument about decline in Australian homicide rate. Given that rate in the US dropped more than twice as much (as percentage, far more in absolute numbers) over the same period while AWB expired, gun ownership climbed dramatically, and many states have instituted CCW. LTC or even constitutional carry. Hardly sounds like a ringing endorsement for gun control – does it?

Doszap
Doszap
5 months ago
Reply to  Finnky

With the most firearms of any nation on the planet the USA ranks 38th in Homicides.IF our numbers keepers removed SUICIDE from that number we wouldn’t even rate.

Green Mtn. Boy
Green Mtn. Boy
5 months ago

I wasn’t aware that Canada allowed full auto rifles, every thing of course is at the pleasure of the crown.

Will
Will
5 months ago
Reply to  Green Mtn. Boy

@GMB,and I sure as hell didn’t know my Ruger Mini-14 was full auto either!

Doszap
Doszap
5 months ago
Reply to  Will

It only is if the MSM say’s so, or a DUMB ass DemoNrat.
I have really been enjoying the Anger and hostilities here in the US,over walking dumb asses thinking(believing the news),and gong into Gun Stores thinking they can buy a weapon like an ice cream cone.It’s hilarious.They get pissed, and mad at the Dealers.The Dealers(several have said Its your fault for voting for crap and candidates that CAUSED this issue). Maybe we will have a lot of converts in 2020.

Mudhunter
Mudhunter
5 months ago
Reply to  Doszap

There are a lot of newbie gun owners that we need to reach out to. Teach them gun safety and how much fun it is to shoot them. Then slowly educate them about tyranny and firearms history. We need to be careful with bashing democrats because I suspect many of them are lifelong members of that party. Let them figure it out for themselves as you give them facts, then you not only have a new gun owner, but a person that finds out they are a true patriot. That will effect voting trends for years to come as they… Read more »

Doszap
Doszap
5 months ago
Reply to  Green Mtn. Boy

They don’t,hes a walking pecker head, just like the MSM, and our SO Called reporters.
An Assault weapon must have three features.

1- Fire an intermediate powered center fire rifle round.

2-Be capable of Semi auto Fire

3-Be capable of FULLY automatic fire.

THIS IS THE DEFINITION OF AN ASSAULT WEAPON.

NONE of which, these weapons he’s arbitrarily banned meet.

Arizona Don
Arizona Don
5 months ago
Reply to  Doszap

Absolutely correct!

chocopot
chocopot
5 months ago
Reply to  Doszap

Leftists have an agenda. Truth, facts, and reality are irrelevant.

RoyD
RoyD
5 months ago
Reply to  chocopot

In other words, commies are going to commie.

KC
KC
5 months ago

‘These weapons were designed for one purpose and one purpose only — only to kill the largest amount of people in the shortest amount of time.”

Then how did the Barrett 99 get on the list along with all the other bolt action rifles on the list?