Alberta Govt passes a motion to protect firearms owners.

[Puma]

Today I moved a motion in the Legislature to recognize and support responsible firearm ownership in Alberta. The passing of this motion proves that the Government of Alberta will stand side by side with law abiding Albertans against any Federal Government that attempts to mess with our rights. The motion passed, and proves how important this is to the Alberta Government.

Jason Nixon
House Leader and MLA Rimbey Rocky Mountain House
(From Mr. Nixons facebook page)

Motion 41 make it clear that Alberta will stand up against any legislation that further restrict lawful firearm owners in Alberta.

[RandyBoBandy]

[hogie]

Good news.

[amosfella]

They really have to have a look at the 1950 Lord Nelson Hotels Supreme Court case.

[Positrac]

It saw that earlier. It a proud day to be an Albertan and good on Jason Nixon!

[RO CC]

Could you post a link to the transcript of the motion, please? Google can’t seem to find it.
Thanks, C.

[32-40win]

Little more on it here, I expect it is mostly lip service, no actual changing anything as far as laws go most likely, although, with the possibility of the Calgary City Council having a motion put before it, to join with Toronto and Montreal in supporting the feds giving them the ability to ban handguns in the city, and support the "assault gun" ban, maybe it is a warning, but, probably just lip service.

https://thegunblog.ca/2019/11/27/alb...3hZPQ8Rq77SIcg

[teledogs]

A good start for sure!!! Good news which we don't get enough as legal gun owners.

[owlhoot]

Right On, Thank You

[gramps73]

great news.
thank you

[Dick284]

This in part is Alberta fire walling itsself from the Federal narrative.

Alberta plans on appointing its own CFO which by provincial direction will be far more firearms friendly.

Things that the CFO has done in the past which is discretionary on the CFO’s part (range const guidelines, range memberships for Restricteds, ATT conditions, ATC conditions.....) will be driven by the Provincial narrative.

This motion fits in with the intended push forward, which will drive the Feds bonkers, and also stick a finger in the eye of Calgary’s mayor too.

[Brbpuppy]

Awesome news, thank you.

[Bigwoodsman]

Well that is some amazingly good news!

BW

[KGB]

Now sure if it’s actually can achieve anything... I thought that the gun laws are the Federal Jurisdiction, not provincial.... Correct me if I’m wrong please.

[Dick284]

Originally Posted by KGB

Now sure if it’s actually can achieve anything... I thought that the gun laws are the Federal Jurisdiction, not provincial.... Correct me if I’m wrong please.

Except on items related to being under the CFO’s discretion Sec. 58 and others have this intertwined within the current laws and acts. If the narrative is to be more firearms friendly, and less obstructionist, its a win, especially if the CFO takes his paycheque from the province.

How’d you like an ATT for any rural property you have access to take your AR15 out coyote calling?

How’d you like to have the whole range construction guidelines utilized more loosely as they are only guidelines, which could mean a few new ranges around Calgary.

How about sped up licence renewals because you don’t need to provide a copy of your range membership if you’ve got restricted’s registered to you?

How about the ability to use your restricted firearms on your own property if said property is over 40 acres?

How about getting an ATC for wilderness carry because you hunt in grizzly country?

[CaberTosser]

Originally Posted by KGB

Now sure if it’s actually can achieve anything... I thought that the gun laws are the Federal Jurisdiction, not provincial.... Correct me if I’m wrong please.

It could make a difference as to seizure actions though. If municipal forces are not motivated to go on such expeditions then that would all fall to the RCMP, who not only won’t have the manpower to invade the homes of every law-abiding firearm owner in Edmonton & Calgary, but also might not even be serving Alberta very much longer to boot.

[Scott N]

When C-68 first came into effect, don't forget that the PCs instructed provincial LEOs not to enforce any of the "paperwork" part of the Firearms Act. Anyone ever been asked for their firearms license while out hunting, or your registration paperwork when it was required for non-restricted? The province does have some say on how the law will be enforced, or not enforced, what this new proclamation means has yet to be seen. We all have to wait until the 6th, or when ever the date is, to see what the Liberals have in mind, then the province can decide on any possible action.

[qwert]

Originally Posted by KGB

Now sure if it’s actually can achieve anything... I thought that the gun laws are the Federal Jurisdiction, not provincial.... Correct me if I’m wrong please.

AFAIK,
Provincial Governments existed before, Confederation.
Municipal government is a creation of, and responsible to, and functions at the pleasure and direction of, the Provincial Government.
It is reported that Toronto would require the permission of Premier Ford to approve any municipal zoning regulations banning firearms, (which much opinion speculates is unlikely).
Similarly, (but not necessarily identical,) for Alberta.

Good Luck, YMMV.

[amosfella]

2 Supreme Court Cases are of extreme interest in the gun control debate. One is the reference hearing re social insurance 1936, and the second is 1950 Lord Nelson Hotels. Private property is the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces.

The reference case states:
In accordance with the principle inherent in these decisions their Lordships think it is no longer open to dispute that the Parliament of
[Page 460]Canada cannot, by purporting to create penal sections under s. 91, head 27, appropriate to itself exclusively a field of jurisdiction in which, apart from such a procedure, it could exert no legal authority, and that if, when examined as a whole, legislation in form criminal is found, in aspects and for purposes exclusively within the Provincial sphere, to deal with matters committed to the Provinces, it cannot be upheld as valid.

Lord Nelson Hotels:
The Parliament of Canada and each Provincial Legislature is a sovereign body within its sphere, possessed of exclusive jurisdiction to legislate with regard to the subject matters assigned to it under s. 91 or s. 92, as the case may be. Neither is capable therefore of delegating to the other the powers with which it has been vested nor of receiving from the other the powers with which the other has been vested.

[bushbug]

Glad to see someone is listening to us westerners.Thank you

[6.5 shooter]

AWESOME thanks.

[roper1]

Sure nice to see someone has our back. Responsible gun ownership should be a right, irresponsible gets you a record! Thanks UCP !

[Drewski Canuck]

Originally Posted by Dick284

This in part is Alberta fire walling itsself from the Federal narrative.

Alberta plans on appointing its own CFO which by provincial direction will be far more firearms friendly.

Things that the CFO has done in the past which is discretionary on the CFO’s part (range const guidelines, range memberships for Restricteds, ATT conditions, ATC conditions.....) will be driven by the Provincial narrative.

This motion fits in with the intended push forward, which will drive the Feds bonkers, and also stick a finger in the eye of Calgary’s mayor too.

Look at Section 1(a) of the Alberta Bill of Rights. No Alberta Legislation can interfere with the right to enjoy property without the due process of law.

Municipalities are CREATURES of the Province. Their Bylaw making Power is subject to the Municipal Government Act.

Mayer Ninshi cannot do a firearms ban as the Bylaw would contravene the Alberta Bill of Rights.

Just saying.

Drewski

[K.J]

Thank you Jason for sticking up for us. I am tired of seeing the rights of our citizens being eroded. You are doing a great job. Keep it up!

[michaelmicallef]

We have rights? Who knew.

[markg]

Originally Posted by Dick284

Except on items related to being under the CFO’s discretion Sec. 58 and others have this intertwined within the current laws and acts. If the narrative is to be more firearms friendly, and less obstructionist, its a win, especially if the CFO takes his paycheque from the province.

How’d you like an ATT for any rural property you have access to take your AR15 out coyote calling?

How’d you like to have the whole range construction guidelines utilized more loosely as they are only guidelines, which could mean a few new ranges around Calgary.

How about sped up licence renewals because you don’t need to provide a copy of your range membership if you’ve got restricted’s registered to you?

How about the ability to use your restricted firearms on your own property if said property is over 40 acres?

How about getting an ATC for wilderness carry because you hunt in grizzly country?

Wow That would be amazing. If true I would buy an AR in a second. I could take it out to the farm and slay gophers all day long. That would be so stinking fun.

[IR_mike]

Originally Posted by Dick284

Except on items related to being under the CFO’s discretion Sec. 58 and others have this intertwined within the current laws and acts. If the narrative is to be more firearms friendly, and less obstructionist, its a win, especially if the CFO takes his paycheque from the province.

How’d you like an ATT for any rural property you have access to take your AR15 out coyote calling?

How’d you like to have the whole range construction guidelines utilized more loosely as they are only guidelines, which could mean a few new ranges around Calgary.

How about sped up licence renewals because you don’t need to provide a copy of your range membership if you’ve got restricted’s registered to you?

How about the ability to use your restricted firearms on your own property if said property is over 40 acres?

How about getting an ATC for wilderness carry because you hunt in grizzly country?

I think we have found a very good candidate for a provincially appointed CFO.^^^^^^^^

[birdseye]

Thank You

[IronNoggin]

Gun crime in Toronto has escalated this year. So, of course, because the Trudeau government draws a third of its seats from the Greater Toronto Area, any problem in Toronto is mistaken for a national problem.

However, the feds seem reluctant to take direct action on a national scale. Studies done for cabinet earlier this year showed very few legal guns are used in crimes. Most crime guns are smuggled in from the States. So barring duck hunters and sport shooters from owning guns will do almost nothing to stop Toronto’s gun spree.

The current federal government, though, often (always?) confuses symbolism for substance. All guns are bad in their minds, so banning any guns is good.

This is Alberta, we don’t take guns away from lawful owners in the ludicrous belief that somehow that will prevent drug dealers and gang members from shooting one another.

https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/colu...-feds-meddling

[David Henry]

Thanks Jason.