Connect with us

World News

Justin Trudeau Uses “Administrative Action” To Ban All Handgun Sales In Canada

Published

on

Monica Schipper/Getty Images for WWF International

Using mass shooting events in the US as an excuse, PM Justin Trudeau has been tinkering with the idea of banning or “freezing” firearms in Canada since this summer and now it appears that he is ready to take unilateral measures.  Trudeau is placing a nationwide freeze on the sale, purchase and transfer of handguns, effective immediately and sidestepping legislators and political opponents in parliament. 

The measure is considered an “administrative action,” much like executive orders used by presidents in the US as a means to circumvent the constitution and checks and balances in government.  Such direct restrictions are often subject to extensive legal obstacles and, at least in the US, can be ignored by states and the public at large (as we witnessed with the covod mandates over the past two years).    

“When people are being killed, when people are being hurt, responsible leadership requires us to act,” Trudeau said at a news conference on Friday, announcing the new measure. “Recently again, we have seen too many examples of horrific tragedies involving firearms.”  

Again, the trigger for Trudeau’s war on firearms rights in Canada started with mass shootings in the US, not Canada.  Though, it might not be far fetched to point out that the Prime Minister and regular attendee of the World Economic Forum took a sudden strong interest in gun control not long after the enormous Trucker Convoy protests against Canada’s draconian attempts at vaccine passport laws.

The trucker protests inspired widespread dissent in Canada and the refusal of freight workers to comply could have paralyzed the country’s supply chain.  This led to an attack campaign by the government and the mainstream media, seeking to portray the anti-passport movement as “terrorists” simply for not wanting what they felt was a suspect mRNA cocktail injected into their bodies.  As pharma giant Pfizer recently admitted under oath, they never tested the vaccine to see if it prevents transmission.

A realization that non-compliance was far more prevalent than the establishment assumed resulted in numerous bizarre narratives and legislative actions in the US and Canada in an attempt to suffocate rebellion.  Gun control has been consistently broached as a primary goal of the same people that were desperate to enforce mandates and passport requirements but failed.  It is unlikely that this is pure coincidence.      

Canada is one of the few countries in the world with gun access on a wide scale similar to the US, though permits are still required, making firearms more of a privilege than a right.  Trudeau is hellbent on whittling away Canadian gun ownership, and seems to be following a model similar to the UK. The UK banned the majority of guns starting with handguns and then incrementally restricting the rest.  

Propagandists in the UK and the EU will claim that gun ownership is “legal” when calling for further limitations in the US.  This is a bit of a con based on the fact that permits can be had, but are rarely given by the government.  In most countries in Europe the ownership of a firearm is relegated to the upper middle class and the rich – People who can afford the permit process, classes and high fees involved.  These people usually have a spotless record, own property and must be able to provide a “reason” for owning a gun that government bureaucrats will accept.

A large portion of firearms in private hands in the UK are shotguns, perhaps the most useless weapon for rebellion given its limited range, which is why most authoritarian regimes will still allow citizens to own them long after banning everything else.  Permit holders in the UK are only around 3% of the total population

At bottom, gun control laws tend to follow a pattern which gives the public a false sense that they still have firearms access when the majority of them actually do not and never will.  The rich get the guns while the middle class gets nothing, and this is by design.  The differences with the US in terms of individual rights is vast.  Canada may be going in the same direction as the UK and Europe if Canadians do not act accordingly.         

This post was originally published at Zero Hedge

Continue Reading
Comments

World News

Aussie Cops Ask Neighbors To Rat Out ‘Anti-Government, Anti-Police, Or COVID-Vaccine Conspiracy Theorists’

Published

on

Zero Hedge

Screenshot

Australian police are using a brutal ambush on two cops to encourage residents to rat out neighbors who are skeptical of the Covid-10 vaccine, or harbor anti-government views.

On December 12, two Brisbane police officers were gunned down by a family of rural Australians, who opened fire as the two officers approached their home. Constables Rachel McCrow, 29, and Matthew Arnold, 26 died in the attack, while a third officer, Constable Randall Kirk, was shot in the leg but managed to escape. A fourth officer, Keely Brough, fled to safety in the bushes.

Later that evening, members of the rural family were killed in a shootout with tactical police.

In response to the incident, Deputy Commissioner Tracy Linford suggested that neighbors need to assume anyone who harbors non-mainstream views is clearly a threat.

“As I said before, if there’s anybody out there that knows of someone that might be showing concerning behavior around conspiracy theories, anti-government, anti-police, conspiracy theories around COVID-19 vaccination as what we’re seeing with [shooting perpetrators] the Train family, we’d want to know about it. We want to know about that. And you can either contact the police directly or go through Crime Stoppers,” she said.

In response, Rebel News‘ Avi Yemini replied: “Queensland Police appealing to the public to dob in their neighbours who “are anti-government or believe Covid-19 vaccine conspiracy theories.””

This has not sat well with many:

This post was originally published at Zero Hedge

Continue Reading

World News

Was Video Of Brittney Griner Release Edited To Remove Handshake With Russian ‘Merchant Of Death’?

The optics wouldn’t go down well as even Democrats are slating the ‘only deal on the table’

Published

on

Steve Watson

Screenshot

A video of the Brittney Griner prisoner exchange between Russian and U.S. officials was mysteriously edited, prompting speculation that the State Department edited out a handshake between the athlete and the Russian terrorist she was traded for.

Internet sleuths are suggesting the weird cut in the footage comes right as Griner was posturing herself to shake the hand of arms dealer Viktor Bout, known as the ‘Merchant of Death’.

Bout was convicted on terrorism charges over a decade ago for attempting to sell missiles worth tens of millions of dollars to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), specifically for the purpose of shooting down U.S. Military helicopters.

The optics of Griner shaking Bout’s hand wouldn’t play too well for the Biden administration, which is already being heavily criticised for making such a horrible deal, and leaving behind other U.S. prisoners including Marine veteran Paul Whelan.

Even Democrats are slating the administration’s actions:

Fox News reporter Peter Doocy asked the White House Press Secretary “Why did Russia get such a better deal?” to which she replied, it was that deal or nothing.

“In bringing home a professional athlete, we gave up a prolific arms dealer who was convicted of trying to kill Americans who’s called the ‘Merchant of Death,’” Doocy bluntly noted.

Another reporter asked how on earth this doesn’t send a message to Russia and other authoritarian regimes that all they have to do is kidnap Americans in order to broker a deal to get their criminal scum back.

Of course, she had no answer.

But hey, lets not miss an opportunity to alphabet and race virtue signal:

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————
Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/ PJW Shop

ALERT! In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here.

Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, we urgently need your financial support here. ———————————————————————————————————————

  • Continue Reading

    World News

    New Zealand Takes Baby From Parents Demanding “Unvaccinated” Blood For Heart Surgery

    Published

    on

    Zero Hedge

    Laurence Monneret / Getty Images

    New Zealand’s High Court on Wednesday took custody of an infant whose parents demanded he only receive blood from donors who are unvaccinated against Covid-19 for an urgently needed heart surgery to repair a congenital defect.

    He remains in urgent need of an operation, and every day that the operation is delayed his heart is under strain,” reads the order, citing one of his doctors.

    The parents, Cole Reeves and Samantha Savage, rejected doctors’ assertion that using blood donated from outside normal channels was “impractical” for the child’s circumstance, and that surgery without donated blood was “not an available option.”

    “That Is Where Tyranny Starts”: New Zealand May Take Baby From Parents Demanding ‘Unvaccinated’ Blood For Heart Surgery

    Apparently an unvaccinated volunteer with the same blood type is not ‘an available option.’

    Judge Ian Gault ruled that it was in “Baby W’s best interests” for the court to take temporary custody of him so the surgery could be performed. The infant was placed under the guardianship of the court from Wednesday until he recovers from surgery, but not beyond January 31st, the Washington Post reports.

    The surgery, which is set for Friday morning, is estimated to take 48 hours to complete. Two doctors were appointed as Baby W’s legal representatives for the purpose of consenting to surgery, and Reeves and Savage were appointed as his representatives for “all other purposes.” Doctors said they would “take the parents’ views into consideration” whenever possible — as long as doing so wouldn’t compromise “Baby W’s interests.”

    The decision followed a tense period of several weeks fraught with baseless claims, according to the order. -WaPo

    Reeves and Savage how now tried to stop doctors preparing the infant for the operation on Friday – which the High Court responded to by ordering the parents not to obstruct staff at Starship Hospital.

    Te Whatu Ora has asked for the police to step in and also asked the court if officers are entitled to use reasonable force to remove the baby from the parents. 

    In his decision yesterday, Justice Gault also said doctors from Te Whatu Ora had been made agents of the court to carry out the surgery, including the adminstration of any blood products.

    In a minute issued this evening, Justice Gault said he had been informed by the lawyer acting for Te Whatu Ora that the baby’s parents had prevented doctors from taking blood tests, performing a chest X-ray and performing an anaesthetic assessment.

    The lawyer understood the parents had threatened to lay criminal charges against medical staff if they went ahead, Justice Gault said. –RNZ

    “You touch our child and we will press criminal charges against you,” the parents told hospital staff, according to the filing.

    The parents’ lawyer, Sue Grey, petitioned the judge, asking for the opinions of two US doctors to be considered, adding that it would be “extreme overreach” if police were called in to remove the baby from his parents in order to perform the surgery.

    Justice Gault denied the request, saying Grey was effectively seeking to re-open the case he had already ruled on.

    “Baby W urgently requires surgery and, as I concluded in my judgment, an order enabling the surgery to proceed using NZBS [New Zealand Blood Service] blood products without further delay is in Baby W’s best interests,” wrote Gault.

    This post was originally published at Zero Hedge

    Continue Reading

    Trending