Question of the Day: Canadian Pro-Gun Rally at Sight of Massacre. Inappropriate?

Montreal's École Polytechnique massacre memorial (courtesy

“A pro-gun lobby group in Quebec is looking for another spot to protest after being roundly condemned for planning a rally at the park commemorating the 14 women killed at Montreal’s École Polytechnique in 1989,” reports. “The rally planned for Dec. 2, just four days before the 28th anniversary of the shooting, aims to bring attention to what the lobby group calls ‘excessive firearm control.'” And boy did they get slammed for their choice of venue . . .

Nathalie Provost, who has been a prominent advocate for gun control since surviving the Polytechnique shooting, said earlier Tuesday the planned rally showed “a profound lack of respect for the families of victims.”

The Place du 6-décembre-1989, the Montreal park commemorating the 14 victims, has become a “place of peace and commemoration” for all victims of gun violence, said Provost, who was shot four times.

Observers have pointed to the massacre on Dec. 6, 1989, as a turning point in the history of gun control in Canada and the event that solidified Quebec’s more restrictive attitude toward guns.

‘Needless and cruel provocation,’ PM says

Politicians were quick to speak out against the planned protest. Montreal Mayor Valérie Plante said it showed a “lack of judgment” and “lack of respect towards the victims of this tragedy and all women victims of violence.”

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called it a “needless and cruel provocation.”

Your thoughts?

Oh and “After the pro-gun group announced it would change locations, counter-protesters created a poll on their event page to decide whether to hold their silent vigil [at the memorial] anyway.” So it’s OK for gun control advocates but not pro-gun groups?



  1. avatar ATFAgentBob says:

    That’s in bad taste. Says the ATF Agent that likes Jaegermeister mixed with Everclear in Dr. Pepper.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      Man, the only thing Jaegermeister is good for is improving the taste of Codine cough syrup…


      1. avatar ATFAgentBob says:

        I like black licorice though.

        1. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

          You need to toss back a few glasses of Opal Nero.

  2. avatar raptor jesus says:

    Well, they sure got publicity, even if it was a tasteless stunt

  3. avatar Ralph says:

    I guess that area is now hallowed ground where nobody should be allowed to walk without golden slippers.

    Just in case you thought that the outrage industry is confined to the US, the Canucks rise up to prove that idiocy is international.

  4. avatar Gregolas says:

    There is nowhere more appropriate to show the ineffectiveness of the The Government Myth of Safety.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      Bingo. I would unfold a banner simply reminding them when seconds count the cops are minutes away, at best.

      1. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

        Assuming the victims were unarmed a list of their names and a check in a box next to “No Gun”.

  5. avatar El Bearsidente says:

    Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called it a “needless and cruel provocation.”

    Oh, does that mean he’ll resign? Because him in office every day is a needless and cruel provocation as well.

  6. avatar CLarson says:

    I guess the pro-gun Facebook group doesn’t believe in the strength of their own arguments. LOL Why pick the ground if you don’t have the testicular fortitude to hold it? Weak. Gun rights in Canada are gone forever.

  7. avatar Specialist38 says:

    They could wait till late December and take a bus down to Wounded Knee.

    Another great example of the government taking your guns so they can “protect” you.

  8. avatar Huntmaster says:

    They just want to control the narrative, the history and how things are remembered.

  9. avatar little horn says:

    bad taste and poor judgement. they just set the gun rights movement back 10 years for themselves, if thats even possible.

  10. avatar Raoul Duke says:

    If anti-gun tards can pontificate gun control after every massacre, then we can pontificate at the grave sites of their victims that it was the anti-gun zealots that allowed the massacres to happen by mandating gun free zones and giving free publicity to psychos so new ones can follow in their footsteps for their 15 minutes of fame.

  11. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

    “So it’s OK for gun control advocates but not pro-gun groups?” No. It’s either inappropriate for both sides or neither side.

  12. avatar ColdNorth says:

    Some additional context is useful- this is a legal issue specific to the Canadian province of Quebec (though it may start showing up elsewhere). Quebec is implementing a number of new restrictions on gun owners, and is creating its own long gun registry. They are forcing gun owners in Quebec to engrave a new number on their long guns for the registry, along with some other nonsense regulations and additional restrictions.

    The average Quebec gun owner is law abiding and peaceable. The government of Quebec treats them all like they’re one step away from snapping and going on a rampage. Is it truly surprising that many gun owners in Quebec are frustrated? Whatever the case may be, this protest will be used as yet another excuse when the anti gunners in government roll out their next series of restrictions- as if they hadn’t planned them long in advance.

    1. avatar Manse Jolly says:

      I thought Canada already went through the National Registry experiment and lost major tax payer money attempting to put it in place. Finally dropping the idea? I may not be remembering correctly.

      1. avatar ColdNorth says:

        The Canadian (Federal) Long Gun Registry was put in place by a Liberal government, cost 2 billion more than expected, and was scrapped by an incoming Conservative government. A Liberal government is now in charge in Canada, federally. Quebec (the province) objected to the LGR being scrapped, so they implemented their own one. It is about to “go live” as it were, and Quebecois gun owners are angry.

        The argument against it was that it should be a federal, not a provincial thing, but the judges disagreed, and said that a province could implement their own registry if they wanted to. This is interesting in that when the first LGR was implemented, a couple other provinces sued the federal government saying that it should be a provincial decision (they didn’t want a gun registry). This was thrown out by the courts. There’s some more complexity to it, but all that really counts is that in Canada it’s always okay to have more regulation.

  13. avatar former water walker says:

    Canada aaaaaaa? Our weak neighbor never had the cahonies to breakaway from their British overlords. Makes me ashamed of those French Canadian ancestors😫😫😫

  14. avatar FlamencoD says:

    If you didn’t like that muslims wanted to build a mosque across the street from the World Trade Centers in New York after 9/11, then how is this outrage any different? That said, I’m certain the same people defending the mosque location are the same people making a loud fuss about the gun rights group trying to gather at the sight of the massacre.

    1. How is this any different?
      Too many ways to list.

  15. avatar Evey259 says:

    Site, not sight, Robert.

    This site seriously needs proofreaders.

  16. avatar anonymoose says:

    So form a counter-counter-protest against the vigil and hold the protest at the park anyway. Screw Justin Trudeau and his Redcoats.

  17. avatar Macofjack says:

    Leave it to the liberal Canadian government to block free speech! Oh wait they are to stupid to have free speech! I know there was a good reason I am NOT Canadian!

    1. avatar raptor jesus says:

      You weren’t born there?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email