Firearms Owners Association
Sunday, 05 September 2010
The Honourable Don Morgan Q.C.
109 – 3502 Taylor St.
Dear Mr. Morgan,
Re: Petition for your Assistance in Declaring Criminal Code s. 117.03 Unconstitutional
On Tuesday, 09 November 2010, Joe Gingrich, Jack Wilson, and I will be in Court of Queen’s Bench in Saskatoon asking the Court to declared Criminal Code section 117.03 unconstitutional.
I realize that you and I do not share the same view of the mandate of the federal Firearms Act to have a licence merely to possess a firearm. But s. 117.03 goes far beyond that requirement.
Section 117.03 – a Criminal Code subset of the Firearms Act – allows the police to seize, confiscate, and obtain a court destruction order of our legally acquired, safely owned, and responsibly used firearms without the police laying a single charge or obtaining a conviction in any court.
I have enclosed a copy our Brief of Reasons. In summary, we believe that we have a right and a responsibility as good citizens to protest what we regard as an unjust law by all peaceful means. We firmly based the Canadian Unlicensed Firearms Owners Association (CUFOA) upon the principles of peaceful, nonviolent civil disobedience of Henry David Thoreau, Mohandas Gandhi, and Martin Luther King, Jr. and founded CUFOA’s actions on the legal philosophy of John Rawls. Our position in court is that the police and the Crown’s use of s. 117.03 to seize, confiscate, and destroy our firearms without a trial by our peers unjustly negates our use of peaceful, nonviolent civil disobedience.
As John Rawls states in A Theory of Justice, peaceful, nonviolent civil disobedience is a suitable means of public discourse noting that:
Significantly, Rawls considers peaceful civil disobedience a “part of the theory of a free government”, noting that:
The persistent and deliberate violation of the basic principles of this conception over any extended period of time, especially the infringement of the fundamental equal liberties, invites either submission or resistance.
The police, and the courts of Saskatchewan, have been persistent, and we believe, deliberant, over an extended period of time in the infringement of our fundamental liberties.
Please note well that in court we will not be arguing against the licencing mandate of the Firearms Act. We will be arguing for the right to a trial by a jury of our peers before the court may order the destruction of the most vital piece of personal property a citizen can own.
Since the Saskatchewan Party’s Policy directs that:
I believe it is eminently reasonable for the Government of Saskatchewan to become actively involved in this court proceeding.
I have served Mr. Thomson Irvine, Crown Counsel, Saskatchewan Department of Justice, with all the documents in support of our arguments. I petition you to instruct Mr. Irvine to be involved directly in this case aggressively defending our right to a trial by a jury of our peers.
We remain committed to peaceful resistance to an unjust law. I trust you will be willing to support our court action.
Edward B. Hudson DVM, MS
Encl: Brief of Reasons
Firearms Owners Association