admin
Canada’s new assault-style firearms compensation program is not a theoretical policy — it’s a rolling government effort to take prohibited firearms out of private hands under the banner of safety, and the federal buyback processes and declaration windows are already live for individuals and businesses. Conservatives should not reflexively dismiss public-safety goals, but Ottawa’s one-size-fits-all approach raises serious questions about property rights, due process, and whether the state should be in the business of deciding which tools law-abiding citizens may own.
That policy sits squarely under Prime Minister Mark Carney’s ambitious domestic agenda, which has prioritized sweeping economic and regulatory interventions since his election — moves that critics say confuse technocratic fiat with genuine prosperity. Whether it’s trillion-dollar industrial plans or aggressive regulatory campaigns, Carney’s Ottawa is clearly choosing central planning over local control, and Canadians who prize liberty are noticing the consequences.
Back on this side of the border, outlets like The Rob Carson Show are framing Canada’s gun measures as another example of elites using policy to disarm dissent and consolidate power, while arguing that the collapse of legacy outlets is simply the market correcting a media that long ago abandoned skepticism of power. That narrative — that journalism is not “dying” but shifting toward reporters willing to call out hypocrisy and failed elites — resonates with conservatives who have watched major papers trade rigorous reporting for partisan narratives.
Senator Eric Schmitt’s recent Senate grilling of a George Soros–funded NGO captures the larger mood: enough with rhetorical labels that shut down debate; fraud, lawbreaking, and mismanagement deserve prosecution regardless of the politics of the accusers. Conservatives cheering Schmitt’s line aren’t celebrating intolerance; they’re demanding accountability and refusing to let ideology immunize bad actors from scrutiny.
Local breakdowns of governance are the predictable consequence when cities and national capitals lose faith in rule of law, and the reports out of Minneapolis — of politicized liquor licenses, heated reactions to ICE operations, and serious fraud allegations that prosecutors appear reluctant to pursue — show how policy and enforcement choices matter on Main Street. If municipalities prioritize ideology over order, the result is hollowed-out neighborhoods, frightened business owners, and a civic culture where good citizens pay the price for official neglect.
The through-line here is simple: whether in Ottawa or in U.S. cities, an aggressive, centralized state combined with a captured media and selective enforcement creates more problems than it solves. The conservative case is plain and practical — protect lawful ownership, insist on even-handed enforcement, and cultivate a free press that holds every power center to account rather than serving as its echo chamber.
