In Part One of this series, we introduced Christine Generoux, shared some of her life story and what led her to challenge the federal government’s Order in Council gun ban.
Here in Part Two, we’ll take a closer look at how Christine Generoux is using Canada’s Multiculturalism Act[i] to challenge the largest single firearms ban in Canadian history.
“But before I dive into the cultural defence of firearms ownership in my application, I first want to express my gratitude to Tony Bernardo. He was the first person to reach out with a helping hand, and I’m thrilled with this opportunity to share more about my challenge of the Liberal government’s OIC gun ban.”
“There are three areas of interest in the cultural defence,” Generoux says.
“First, there is the Legislative Framework, which includes the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Canada’s Multiculturalism Act.
“Second, we must define Canadian Gun Culture in terms of the Charter and the Multiculturalism Act before we can understand how the term ‘Cultural Genocide’ applies.
“With a solid understanding of those frameworks in mind, we can easily see how the current government, through this Order in Council, seeks to end our culture and heritage almost overnight. That might sound extreme, but when you follow the logic you will see how it interconnects.”
The Legislative Framework in Defence of Our Culture
Section 27 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms[ii] states,
“This Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians.”
“Section 27 is specifically designed to preserve and enhance the cultural heritage of all Canadians, not just those cultures favoured by the government of the day,” Generoux explains.
Section 3(1) of the Canadian Multiculturalism Act states:
“It is hereby declared to be the policy of the Government of Canada to (a) recognize and promote the understanding that multiculturalism reflects the cultural and racial diversity of Canadian society and acknowledges the freedom of all members of Canadian society to preserve, enhance and share their cultural heritage;
“Section 27 of the Charter is, I believe, the direct cultural link to Canada’s Multiculturalism Act, which is the foundation for my cultural defence of firearms ownership.”
Ms. Generoux also believes Section 27 may support a claim that culture is an ‘analogous ground upon which discrimination under the law is prohibited’ under Section 15 (1) of the Charter.
“Responsible ownership and use of these firearms is our culture and the government has no business forcing us to abandon our culture to appease someone’s delicate sensibilities,” she says.
What is Culture?
The Cambridge Dictionary defines culture as:[iii]
- the way of life, especially the general customs and beliefs, of a particular group of people at a particular time
The Government of Canada answers the question ‘What is culture?’ with this:[iv]
- “…the things produced by a culture which we perceive with our five senses are simply manifestations of the deeper meaning of culture – what we do, think and feel.”
The Government of Canada’s Multiculturalism page says:
“Discover the significance of multiculturalism in Canada — ensuring that all citizens keep their identities, take pride in their ancestry and have a sense of belonging.”[v]
At its core, members of Canada’s gun culture just want to “keep their identities, take pride in their ancestry and have a sense of belonging” – both in our communities and in our political landscape.
Christine Generoux says PAL/RPAL holders “fit the accepted definition of a culture, yet we’re the subjects of a targeted campaign of harassment that uses slander, intimidation, demonization and regulatory attacks to destroy our ability to pass our cultural values, practices, rituals, beliefs and artifacts onto future generations.”[vi]
This Generoux defines as “cultural genocide”.
In Axis Rule in Occupied Europe (1944), Polish jurist Raphaël Lemkin wrote, “genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation … [but] is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves.”
Cultural Genocide is defined, therefore, as the wilful and intentional destruction of a group’s heritage, traditions and identity by a government.
“The government is killing Canadian gun culture through attrition (grandfathering), by preventing members of our culture from passing these items, beliefs and practices down to their children and grandchildren,” Generoux says.
“A Governmental campaign of cultural genocide is indeed what Canadian firearm licensees have historically been subjected to,” she says.
“And the job of ‘finishing us off’ is done by this OIC. This OIC bans and de-legitimizes integral parts of our cultural rituals, gatherings, activities and objects.”
“We believe this order in Council (OIC) is unconstitutional, and is an affront to every Canadians’ Charter Rights and Freedoms and to the legal idea of “innocent until proven guilty” in our common law and history. This is especially insulting and frustrating for the 2.2 million + law abiding Canadians who own firearms in this country who have been (and will be) unfairly penalized, criminalized and discriminated against due to this unlawful OIC and, the future restrictions on our private property they plan to enact soon.”
To learn more about Christine Generoux’s Notice of Constitutional Question and Judicial Review please read her court filings, listed below:
- Christine Generoux’s Sworn Affidavit
- Form 69 Notice to Crown
- Notice of Motion
- Memorandum of Fact and Law
To support Christine Generoux’s efforts on all our behalf, please donate generously to her GoFundMe Page.