Well, a good first step. The SCC ruled in favor of the federal government. If Quebec wants a gun registry they will have to fund it themselves.
Printable View
Well, a good first step. The SCC ruled in favor of the federal government. If Quebec wants a gun registry they will have to fund it themselves.
Did they yet determine if provinces can legally start registries? This is a bigger question than who pays, Quebec has the largest debt of any province, they could care less about money.
I am pretty sure that was not on the table wrt the decision. Though there is strong support in Quebec for a registry that is not the case across the rest of Canada. I think any Premier that tried to institute a registry would run stiff opposition. Having said that, remember the registry in Quebec was a good idea as long as they could keep the data. If they have to fund it themselves I am willing to believe the support will nose-diveQuote:
Originally Posted by Fox
I wonder how a Quebec provincial registry would work WRT transporting rifles from Ontario to NB, NFLD, and back through Quebec.
Ontario is run by Toronto, and we do not have any say once the elected officials get in.Quote:
Originally Posted by DGearyFTE
I could see this group of Liberals putting in a registry if they legally could.
ESPECIALLY if they're able to turn it into one more money-grab. Only 1.5 more years till that budget has to be balanced afterall.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
Though not a legal expect, in reading the ruling by the SCC it seems to me that what they are saying is that legally Parliament is within its right to establish policy and laws for gun control including wresting those decisions from the provinces.
Here is the issue I see.
If you are a gun owner in Quebec and want to sell it outside the province then the new owner is going to become part of that registry. For me personally I would state that violates my right of privacy and possession.
I always thought firearms were a federal responsibility, I seem to remember that being used when the registry was created and some provinces suggested opting out
In 2000, Alberta went to the SCC to protest Chetien's move to impose the gun registry. They lost. So I am thinking that there was a connection between being allowed to keep the data and the federal legality of imposing a provincial registry.
This should prove interesting. Again, I just don't see Quebecers wanting to pay for this. Of course I could be wrong but there are a lot of hunters in Quebec.
I wonder where they'll get the money to pay for one, should they pursue. Quebec receives more equalization payments than any other province in the country and have a huge debt.Quote:
Originally Posted by DGearyFTE
FishFrenzy
I haven't read the entire ruling,but,it appears to me that the SCC struck down Quebec's attempt to save the data to use in their own registry. If that's the case,then,Quebec must destroy all records making any attempt at starting their own registry null and void,given the previous Alberta ruling that everything pertaining to firearms is the sole domain and authority of the federal government. This is a huge victory for us. The data could have been used to backdoor another registry by another federal government. Now,they'll need to start from scratch. Given the political disaster of the last attempt by The Liberal Party of Canada,it would be sheer lunacy for them to try it again.
Ok... when you read this try not to laugh too hard. Quebec Minister is telling everyone that the registry will cost only $30 million!
Now then, according to several sources I have read there are some 500,000 gun owners in Quebec. So for just $60 each, they will create a registry. Is it just me or does that math not work?
If they are right, then the simple way to pay for the registry is to make all 500,00 gun owners pay $100 each to register their firearms. It might go over better if one was allowed to register multiple for a single tax of $100
Actually the registry had quite a bit of support in Quebec. Expect Harper's poor numbers to get worse over this which is why I find the timing of the ruling suspicious. Not unlike why Wynne didn't have to go into the election with the OPP investigation findings. Quebec can't afford a registry so I can't see it materializing until the next election as a carrot and only if polling pretty well guarantees a good return on it.
I honestly believe that if a provincial gun registry was a viable possibility,McGuinty-Wynne would have been all over it like a hound on a hamburger. Quebec has always been the Canadian "wild child",so,really,who knows what the idiots are capable of,but,there has to be some reason no other Liberal government has broached the idea,especially B.C. with their left wing weenies.
His numbers may get worse but as to being "suspicious," this makes no sense as 7 of the 9 current justices were appointed by Harper and if they are in anybody's pocket it would be his.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
Oh I'm aware of that. But he has been sparring with SC and they have kneecapped quite a bit of his bills so I don't think the court belongs to Harper even if he appointed them. I see them as thinking they are demigods who feel they can make laws not just interpret the charter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Species8472
As long as they are not knee-capping based on political views I think this is fine (and the fact that they are willing to shoot down the bills of their appointer supports this) as they are supposed to be independent i.e. kneecap anything that is unjust regardless of where it comes from. As far as creating laws goes, this is one of their (and any judge's) roles as much of our system is largely based on case-law and not just interpreting the charter.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
For the record I generally don't have a lot of use for lawyers (too many in the family) but think for the most the SCC does a good job.
I agree with the first part of your comment but not the part about judges making laws. The day they become elected and have to answer to the people every 4 years maybe but not until then.
Not sure if elected judges are better or not as you than get into the circus that they have south of the border. Our system has been this way since before Canada was a country and goes back over 800 years in England. No system is perfect but on the balance I would say our system works pretty well when I look at what happens elsewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
Yup. I would like to see term limits though. At all levels. Municipal, Provincial and Federal. I would like to see the loopholes closed that the Working Families Coalition/Unions use to buy every election too. Not sure it being 800 years old makes it the best it can be in these times. They used to burn witches too.....