A Canadian human rights tribunal in British Columbia has ordered a former school trustee from Chilliwack to pay $750,000 in damages for insisting there are only two genders.
The tribunal ruled that Barry Neufeld’s public comments about transgender and nonbinary people constituted discrimination under the province’s Human Rights Code.
Soviet Canada is looking to pass a bill that will essentially equip leftists to get their family members arrested if they don’t agree with their anti-human ideology. Bill C-16, the “Protecting Victims Act” would create a new classification of “crime” called “coercive or controlling conduct.” The bill appears to be intended to force Canadians to comply with the party’s orthodoxy at home or else be turned into the police by your own family members. The bill should be renamed the Secret Police bill.
Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis warned his constituents of the dark bill, telling them, “Do you think the government should criminalize everyday interactions in your home with your family? If not, you should read Bill C-16. The bill creates new offences… which are deeply concerning for normal, loving family interactions, based on a ‘pattern of coercive or controlling conduct,’ even when no violence, threats, or illegal acts occur. It criminalizes a pattern of otherwise lawful and often common behaviour that may later be perceived as threatening by an intimate partner.”
Canadian Government Pushes to Criminalize Everyday Family Conversations – slaynews.com
Canada’s Liberal government under Prime Minister Mark Carney is facing mounting backlash after critics warned that a little-noticed piece of legislation could dramatically expand state power inside private homes.
The proposed law, Bill C-16, titled the “Protecting Victims Act,” would create a new Criminal Code offense targeting patterns of “coercive or controlling conduct” within relationships.
But opponents say the sweeping language risks turning ordinary family interactions into potential criminal investigations.
Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis sounded the alarm in a public warning to Canadians.
EDMONTON, Alberta (LifeSiteNews) — Alberta Conservative Premier Danielle Smith said she has had enough of woke federal judge appointments, warning Prime Minister Mark Carney that unless he allows provincial input into new judge selections, her province will withhold funding.
“The appointment of justices to our Alberta courts should be non-partisan and reflect our province’s legal traditions and values,” Smith wrote Tuesday on X along with an attached two-page letter to Carney.
“I am urging Prime Minister Mark Carney @MarkJCarney to give Alberta a formal and meaningful role in the judicial appointment process that would boost public confidence in the administration of justice, support national unity within Alberta, and ensure judicial decision-making reflects the expectations of Albertans.”
In the two-page letter to Carney, Smith made clear her intentions to allow Alberta to have a say in judge appointments, saying her province needs to be consulted on all future judicial appointments to the Alberta Court of King’s Bench, the Alberta Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court of Canada.
“Alberta’s government will not agree to provide the necessary funding to support any new judicial positions in the province until such engagement and collaboration are provided,” she wrote.
After 5 years of having the “opportunity” to turn in their no-no guns and get paid in return, the time limit is running out. While the exact numbers are hard to find, the fact that the government has already extended the time limit three times tell you they’ve gotten themselves into an unenforceable situation, they lack the power to confiscate all the guns that haven’t been voluntarily turned in already.
Blair Hagen, an executive with the National Firearms Association, said the Canadian government has more problems than just non-compliance, saying, “We’re finding that they’re running into a lot of compliance issues,” said Blair Hagen, an executive with the National Firearms Association. They have no idea where [the guns are] or who has them. So it’s proving to be a very, very difficult situation for the government.”
Canadian Citizens Face Prison for Failing to Comply with ‘Voluntary’ Gun Buyback Scheme – slaynews.com
Hundreds of thousands of Canadian gun owners could face prison sentences if they refuse to surrender newly prohibited firearms under a federal “buyback” program that critics say amounts to forced confiscation disguised as “voluntary” compliance.
Since May 2020, the Canadian government has pursued what it calls an “assault-style firearms compensation program,” banning thousands of firearms and offering payment to owners who turn them in.
Gun owners who fail to comply by October 2026 could face up to five years in prison for illegal possession.
Gun rights advocates and several provincial governments argue the program will overwhelmingly impact law-abiding citizens while doing little to curb crime.
“We’re finding that they’re running into a lot of compliance issues,” said Blair Hagen, an executive with the National Firearms Association.
“They have no idea where [the guns are] or who has them.
“So it’s proving to be a very, very difficult situation for the government.”
Trudeau’s Order-in-Council Ban
The firearm ban was enacted through an order-in-council issued in May 2020 by then–Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, a mechanism that allows sweeping regulatory changes without a parliamentary vote.
Under the policy, participation in the buyback is described as “voluntary,” but compliance with the ban is mandatory.
“While participating in the program is voluntary, compliance with the law is not,” the federal government states on its website.
Firearm owners must “safely dispose of or permanently deactivate” prohibited weapons or risk criminal liability.
The government has extended an amnesty for possession three times, with the current deadline set for October 30, 2026.
‘Voluntary’ in Name Only
Gun rights groups dispute the government’s framing.
“If the option is either turn them in or you’re going to jail, I would not consider that voluntary,” said Justin Davis, public affairs director for the National Rifle Association.
The federal government also does not guarantee compensation, stating only that owners “may receive compensation subject to availability of program funds.”
Carney Denies Confiscation
Globalist Prime Minister Mark Carney has repeatedly denied that the policy constitutes confiscation.
“This is not about confiscation,” Carney said during a podcast interview in September 2025.
“This is about voluntary return of firearms for compensation.”
Carney also claimed that the ban does not affect hunting rifles or sport-shooting firearms.
However, critics point out that the policy includes explicit carve-outs for Indigenous subsistence hunters, suggesting that commonly owned firearms are indeed affected.
Provinces Refuse to Enforce the Ban
Several provinces, including Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, New Brunswick, and Yukon, have refused to assist federal authorities in enforcing the ban.
“We will have nothing to do with this program,” said Teri Bryant, Alberta’s chief firearms officer.
“We will not spend any Alberta taxpayer dollars on this program.”
As a result, federal authorities would be responsible for enforcement without local law enforcement support.
“If the feds want to try and enforce it, they are going to have to do it themselves,” Hagen said.
“The logistics get even more insurmountable and the price goes up.”
Program Yields Minimal Results
A six-week pilot run in fall 2025 reportedly recovered just 25 firearms, far below the government’s expectation of roughly 200.
Despite that outcome, officials declared the pilot a success.
Hagen said the lack of public participation reflects widespread resistance among lawful gun owners.
“There is a civil disarmament agenda in that bureaucracy,” he said.
“It started many years ago.”
Warnings for the United States
Gun rights advocates argue the Canadian model is a cautionary tale for the United States.
“There’s no criminal in the world who’s going to turn in their firearm for a few dollars,” Davis said.
“These policies disarm law-abiding citizens and create more soft targets.”
Gun confiscation schemes are already backed by top Democrats.
During her failed 2019 presidential campaign, former Vice President Kamala Harris openly supported a mandatory gun buyback.
“We have to have a buyback program, and I support a mandatory gun buyback program,” Harris said at the time.
Advocates note that Canada lacks constitutional protections comparable to the Second Amendment.
“You can ban firearms on paper,” Hagen said, “but actually making confiscation happen is another thing entirely.”
Whether Canada’s program collapses under its own cost and complexity, or is repealed by a future government, remains an open question.
However, laws such as this one are almost always a one-way street.
READ MORE – Canadian Government Euthanizes Woman Against Her Will
from slaynews.com
OTTAWA (LifeSiteNews) – One of Canada’s most senior federal ministers seemed to suggest that the government needs more, and possibly new powers, to ensure it can deal in the future with “hostile actors” more swiftly than it did during the Freedom Convoy clearout in 2022.
The comments were made by Minister of Industry Mélanie Joly during a recent House of Commons industry committee meeting after she was grilled by Conservative MPs about concerns over a new bill relating to the internet.
Joly claimed that the federal cabinet under Prime Minister Mark Carney needs the new powers to deal with “a chaotic and dangerous world.”
“I think it’s important for people to remember that, since we’re living in a much more chaotic and dangerous world, the government has to deal with a lot of hostile actors that can sometimes go after our critical infrastructure including the state ones,” she told the committee.
Joly was giving her testimony regarding Bill C-8, known as An Act Respecting Cyber Security.
Without oversight from elected federal MPs, Canada’s Department of Immigration had research done to investigate a national ID system using digital passports for domestic use and how such a system would be enforced.
According to Access to Information documents, a senior analyst wrote in a staff email, “One of the things that came up in our discussions with Canadian Digital Services is the assumption the passport would be used within Canada as an identity document.”
“This warrants a policy discussion,” the staff email added.
MPs have soundly rejected any national ID system as both dangerous and costly.
Conservative politicians and Canadians are in an uproar after the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a mandatory one-year sentence for possessing or accessing child pornography is “unconstitutional.”
The Supreme Court released its ruling on October 31 in a 5-4 decision. The court dismissed the Crown’s appeal of the ruling n 2025 SCC 33 (File No. 40882). The ruling upholds a Quebec Court of Appeal decision, meaning that in such cases moving forward it will be up to the judge to hand over a ruling.
The case was based on a recent argument made by two men from Quebec, who had pleaded guilty to child pornography offenses. The two had argued that a one-year jail sentence was a violation of their Charter right of not being a party to “cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.”
It was the Crown that had asked the Supreme Court to rule that having child pornography is a grave offense worthy of strict sentences, noting the harm it causes the victims and families.
Justice Barbara Young of the British Columbia Supreme Court has ruled that the Cowichan Tribe now has “aboriginal title” to the land. The ruling happened in August, though it received little attention. Now, residents are sounding the alarm, and even legal experts are unsure if this mean people will lose their homes should the tribe simply choose to take them.
A Blaze article quotes Doug Newman, a University of Saskatchewan Law Professor, He said of the ruling, “If the law from this decision were maintained, it would be possible for them to pursue a claim against private residents too. Private residents might have some different defenses, but we don’t know how that plays out… The fact I can’t give you an answer [about whether residents could lose their homes] with any certainty is maybe the most concerning part. This could all play out in various ways.”
Could some Canadian homeowners soon be evicted due to a recent controversial court ruling?
Due to an August ruling by Justice Barbara Young of the B.C. Supreme Court, residents of Richmond, British Columbia, could be forced to give up their homes and hit the road.
According to The Blaze:
Members of the Cowichan Tribes, an Indian band in B.C. comprising around 5,500 souls, brought a legal action several years ago against the Canadian federal government, the Province of British Columbia, the City of Richmond, and other parties, seeking a declaration of aboriginal title to 1,846 acres of land in Richmond.
from www.americanthinker.com
Canada’s top constitutional freedom group warned that government officials have “relinquished” control over “future health crises” by accepting the terms of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) revised International Health Regulations (IHR).
The warning came in a report released by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF). The group said that Prime Minister Mark Carney’s acceptance earlier this year of the WHO’s globalist-minded “pandemic agreement” has “placed Canadian sovereignty on loan to an unelected international body.”
“By accepting the WHO’s revised IHR, the report explains, Canada has relinquished its own control over future health crises and instead has agreed to let the WHO determine when a ‘pandemic emergency’ exists and what Canada must do to respond to it, after which Canada must report back to the WHO,” the JCCF noted.
Anand says Canada is in a ‘strategic partnership’ with China CityNews Halifax
from news.google.com
Canadian Justice Minister Sean Fraser admitted that his new “hate crime” bill would indeed allow a person to be criminally charged for social media posts deemed offensive by the government.
Recently asked about Bill C-9, the Combating Hate Act, Fraser said the bill would indeed apply to certain online content that involves the “willful promotion of hatred.”
“Generally speaking, the law will apply equally online as it does in real communities,” he said, adding, “just in the limited circumstances where there is the willful promotion of hatred against someone.”
Canada’s former princess, Justin Trudeau, spent his final days in office doing what a good communist opening act should: disarming his citizens so that his successor can “seal the deal” and hand Canada over to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-dominated New World Order.
FACT-O-RAMA! In January 2025, Canada added 324 more types of guns to Canada’s already exhaustive list of banned boom-boom sticks. Three months later, as Trudeau was about to step down, the filthy sitzpinkler pinko added another 179 firearms that are now verboten, for a total of more than 2,500 types of guns that Canadians are no longer allowed to own.
Three bills racing through Canada’s parliament could give the government the power to search and seize their citizens at random, ban anyone from gaining access to the internet, and arrest citizens for statements they made in the past that the government deems “hateful.”
Bill C-2 allows the government to randomly search citizens’ mail, computers, and cellphones. Bill C-8 essentially empowers the government to ban anyone, for any reason, from the internet. Bill C-9 removes barriers to citizens being charged for hateful comments and retroactively charges anyone that said hateful things in the past.
One of Canada’s leading constitutional law experts warned that Canada will be a “police state by Christmas” if lawmakers pass three new bills introduced by the federal Liberal government of Prime Minister Mark Carney.
In a recent video posted to X, Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) president John Carpay was direct in his assessment of the three Liberal bills, warning of a future Canada under true totalitarianism.
“Canada will be a police state by Christmas if Parliament passes bills C2, C8, and C9 in their current form,” he said. “C2 is the Strong Borders Act. It should be called the Strong Surveillance Act. It empowers Canada Post to open letter mail without a warrant. It criminalizes the use of cash in amounts greater than $10,000.”
Reflecting on her recent sentencing of over a year’s house arrest for her role in the 2022 Freedom Convoy, Tamara Lich laid bare the fact that when all is said in done seven years of her life will have been spent in a government-imposed “lockdown” in one form or another.
Last Friday on X, Lich wrote, “I did the math this morning.”
“Between the ‘pandemic,’ our bail conditions, and now our sentence, @ChrisBarber1975 and I will have been in lockdown, in one form or another, for a total of seven years by the time we complete our sentences,” she noted.
Last week as well, Lich launched what she called her “house arrest” podcast, with her fellow co-leader of the Freedom Convoy Chris Barber. The pair spent over an hour talking about their recent sentence, as well as the state of affairs in Canada.
