Justice
Ottawa’s gun buyback is rightly falling apart
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a0b9d/a0b9dd525e7c038535d92f147c2ac6d130454aef" alt=""
From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
Author: Gage Haubrich
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s gun ban and buyback policy is running out of steam.
And it hasn’t even left the station.
The buyback is broken. Law-abiding firearms owners don’t want to lose their guns. It doesn’t go far enough for gun-control advocates. And taxpayers don’t want to pick up the massive bill.
“It’s a waste of Canadian’s money,” said a spokesperson for PolyRemembers, a prominent gun-control advocacy group. “We are not reducing the risk level. It’s just for appearances.”
Instead, PolyRemembers wants the government to go further and ban even more models of firearms.
But if the recommendation is to ban more guns, the solution brings a lot more problems.
And Ottawa already tried that. The federal government tried to dramatically expand the list of guns banned with committee amendments. One of the additions included the semi-automatic SKS rifle, of which there are estimated to be more than 500,000 in Canada.
After the introduction of amendments to Bill C-21 that would have seen many common hunting rifles banned, the Assembly of First Nations passed an emergency resolution opposing the ban.
“It’s a tool,” said Kitigan Zibi Chief Dylan Whiteduck about the list of rifles to be banned. “It’s not a weapon.”
“No government has a right to take that away from us and regulate that,” said said Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations Vice-Chief Heather Bear. “That is our job as mothers, grandmothers, grandfathers, and hunters
The government backed down and removed the amendments.
Expanding the buyback to include even more firearms would mean more resistance from current firearms owners and a larger cost to buyback even more guns.
The government says the aim of the ban is to keep Canadians safe, but the evidence shows that it’s unlikely to help, even if it was expanded to include more firearms.
The federal government announced a ban on 1,500 types of what it called “assault-style” firearms in May 2020. It promised to provide “fair compensation” to gun owners whose firearms it confiscates.
New Zealand tried a gun ban and buyback program that was more far reaching than Ottawa’s, banning almost all semi-automatic firearms, not only so-called “assault style” rifles.
It didn’t work.
During the decade before the buyback, according to data from the New Zealand Police, violent firearm offences averaged 932 a year in New Zealand. In 2019, the year of the buyback, there were 1,142 offences. In 2022, the number of offences was 1,444.
New Zealand’s buyback wasn’t cheap either. Costs to administer the program were more than double the initial estimates.
Experts in Canada have seen enough to know the policy is a failure.
The National Police Federation, the union that represents the RCMP, says Ottawa’s buyback, “diverts extremely important personnel, resources, and funding away from addressing the more immediate and growing threat of criminal use of illegal firearms.”
And it’s a lot of funding and resources.
In total, estimates show that Trudeau’s scheme could cost taxpayers up to $756 million to buyback the guns, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer. That doesn’t even include the administration costs – it’s just the cost of compensating firearms owners.
Instead of taking away firearms from Canadians, that’s enough money to pay for the average salaries of 1,000 police officers for more than seven years.
The government has a history of ballooning costs for these types of programs. The government initially promised the long-gun registry would cost taxpayers only $2 million. The final tab was over $2 billion. The registry was scrapped by the Harper government and stayed scrapped under the Trudeau government.
If those were the overruns just to register the guns, how much money would the federal government waste trying to confiscate them?
Ottawa’s buyback has already cost taxpayers $67 million since 2020. Not a single gun has been “bought back” yet.
It’s time for Ottawa to cancel its gun ban and buyback. Because right now, all it looks set to do is cost taxpayers a boatload of money without making Canadians safer.
Business
Judge blocks Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency from accessing Treasury records
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fa375/fa37587534bc6f897cfe4a65d41556de5efd0da3" alt=""
From LifeSiteNews
The emergency ruling comes as 15 Soros-installed AGs seek to block Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from access to information that would reveal how activist groups in blue states have been funded by the U.S. government.
In a stunning and sweeping emergency injunction that has even stunned the people who demanded it, a Manhattan-based district judge has just removed Secretary of Treasury Scott Bessent from his authority over the Treasury Department; blocked any political appointee from accessing records within the Treasury Department; blocked any “special appointee” of President Trump from records within Treasury; and demanded that all information previously extracted be destroyed.
The emergency injunction, signed by District Judge Paul Engelmayer in Manhattan, was determined without any input from the Trump administration and applies until Friday, February 14, 2025, when U.S. District Judge Jeannette A. Vargas will hear the full arguments of the lawsuit.
The emergency ruling comes as a result of 15 (Soros-installed) attorneys general from New Jersey, New York, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, Rhode Island, and Vermont all filing suit in New York seeking to block Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from access to information that would reveal how activist groups in their states have been funded by the U.S. government.
READ: Judge blocks Trump plan that would put thousands of USAID staff on paid leave
From Reuters:
The lawsuit said Musk and his team could disrupt federal funding for health clinics, preschools, climate initiatives, and other programs, and that Republican President Donald Trump could use the information to further his political agenda.
DOGE’s access to the system also ‘poses huge cybersecurity risks that put vast amounts of funding for the States and their residents in peril,’ the state attorneys general said. They sought a temporary restraining order blocking DOGE’s access.
The judge, an appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama, said the states’ claims were ‘particularly strong’ and warranted him acting on their request for emergency relief pending a further hearing before another judge on February 14.
‘That is both because of the risk that the new policy presents of the disclosure of sensitive and confidential information and the heightened risk that the systems in question will be more vulnerable than before to hacking,’ Engelmayer wrote.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat whose office is leading the case, welcomed the ruling, saying nobody was above the law and that Americans across the country had been horrified by the DOGE team’s unfettered access to their data.
‘We knew the Trump administration’s choice to give this access to unauthorized individuals was illegal, and this morning, a federal court agreed,’ James said in a statement.
‘Now, Americans can trust that Musk – the world’s richest man – and his friends will not have free rein over their personal information while our lawsuit proceeds.’
Engelmayer’s order bars access from being granted to Treasury Department payment and data systems by political appointees, special government employees and government employees detailed from an agency outside the Treasury Department.
The judge also directed that anyone prohibited under his order from accessing those systems to immediately destroy anything they copied or downloaded.
The order by the judge is transparent judicial activism; it will almost certainly be overturned and nullified by later rulings. However, it creates blocks and slows down the goal of DOGE and the objective of the Trump administration.
On what basis do states think they can sue the federal government to stop the federal government from auditing federal spending? How can a judge block the executive branch from executing the functions of the executive branch? This lawfare activism is ridiculous.
Within the ruling:
… restrained from granting access to any Treasury Department payment record, payment systems, or any other data systems maintained by the Treasury Department containing personally identifiable information and/or confidential financial information of payees, other than to civil servants with a need for access to perform their job duties within the Bureau of Fiscal Services who have passed all background checks and security clearances and taken all information security training called for in federal statutes and Treasury Department regulations… [Emphasis added.]
So the unelected bureaucracy is in charge and not the secretary of the Treasury?
Reprinted with permission from Conservative Treehouse.
Alberta
Alberta calls for tough-on-crime approach from feds
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3fd93/3fd93ee4c707edebd3697282df23aeea7127b4b6" alt=""
Premier Danielle Smith and Minister of Justice and Attorney General Mickey Amery are demanding Ottawa get serious about drug crimes in Canada.
Premier Smith and Minister Amery have demanded Bill C-5 be repealed in its entirety and the federal government reintroduce mandatory minimum jail sentences for Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA) offences. Alberta also calls on the federal government to rescind guidelines prepared by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada that direct federal prosecutors to divert drug cases away from the criminal justice system to pursue alternative measures and leave criminal prosecutions for only the most serious cases.
If the federal government does not immediately undertake these actions, Premier Smith and Minister Amery have asked for federal funding to enable the province to permanently take over all CDSA prosecutions.
“For years, Alberta’s government has urged the federal government to reverse their soft-on-crime policies which have allowed illegal drugs to flood our streets and for repeat offenders to prey on our most vulnerable. The federal government must act now and put an end to their insane policies. And if they refuse to, then they must allow the Province of Alberta to take over all prosecutions under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. Let there be no mistake, Alberta’s government will find these dangerous criminals, prosecute them and keep them in jail where they belong.”
When the federal government passed Bill C-5, they further weakened the Canadian justice system and increased potential harm for Canadians by:
- Eliminating all mandatory minimum sentences of imprisonment for CDSA offences;
- Eliminating many mandatory minimum sentences for serious weapons and substance-related offences under the Criminal Code of Canada;
- Removing limitations placed on the use of conditional sentences;
- Forcing both police and prosecutors to first consider referring people to treatment and support programs rather than charging or prosecuting drug possession offences; and
- Continuing to emphasize an approach to drug possession that fails to address the death, disorder and victimization caused by the drug-crime nexus, by focusing narrowly on diversionary measures.
Under Bill C-5, law enforcement has lost the ability to effectively deal with serious crimes, lessening meaningful and impactful enforcement and prosecution. Drug dealers often face very limited consequences, with their charges dismissed or conditional sentences imposed. This allows these criminals to continue profiting from illegal activity while preying on vulnerable populations and worsening the drug crisis in Canada.
“Alberta is deeply concerned about the federal government’s failure to address the growing drug crisis in Canada. Federal prosecution directives and Bill C-5 have significantly weakened our justice system, allowing criminals and drug dealers to exploit loopholes while putting public safety and Canadian lives at risk. We demand immediate action to reverse these disastrous policies, prioritize the safety and well-being of Canadians, and restore Canada’s reputation on an international level.”
Issues with drugs and drug-related crimes continue to worsen in Canada, with drug trafficking often linked to other serious offences such as human trafficking, gun trafficking and money laundering. These concerns have also been underscored by the Trump Administration, which has called for Canada to secure the border to illegal migrant and drug activity. Alberta responded to that request by introducing a $29-million border plan to combat drug smuggling, gun trafficking and other illegal activities. The plan includes a new Sheriffs unit, a 51-officer Interdiction Patrol Team, four K-9 patrol teams, 10 weather surveillance drones and four narcotics analyzers to test for illicit drugs.
-
Alberta2 days ago
U.S. tariffs or not, Canada needs to build new oil and gas pipeline space fast
-
COVID-192 days ago
Freedom Convoy leader says Trudeau gov’t has spent $5 million prosecuting her, fellow protester
-
Alberta2 days ago
Premier Smith and Health Mininster LaGrange react to AHS allegations
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day ago
With Carney On Horizon This Is No Time For Poilievre To Soften His Message
-
Media1 day ago
Matt Walsh: CBS pushes dangerous free speech narrative, suggests it led to the Holocaust
-
National2 days ago
Carney Climate Plan is More of the Same
-
illegal immigration1 day ago
Trump signs executive order cutting off taxpayer-funded benefits for illegal aliens
-
COVID-191 day ago
Red Deer Freedom Convoy protestor Pat King given 3 months of house arrest