71 Replies to “Pierre Trudeau: Not Dead Enough”

  1. “Ian Thomson, 53, is charged with careless use of a firearm.”
    Heh, Thompson employed a handgun for its only intended and legally justifiable purpose – self defense.
    This is how civilly dysfunctional our society has become under the self destructive oversight of our insulated social engineers – who BTW are prepared to pimp their silly notion we define ourselves as Canadians by NOT being Americans to the point of sacrificing Blackstone and 900 years of civil law to the gods of politically corrected society.
    Americans can defend themselves so we can’t, just to show we are NOT Americans.
    The bodies of defenseless Canadian victoms of crime can pile up higher than parliament hill and send out a stench indicating our justice system is as rotten as the corpses it creates – BUT WE ARE NOT AMERICANS!
    There will be no armed self defense here! You must die for this bizarro Kanadian “value”.
    Know what? F them! When or if the time comes Canadians will defend themselves with what ever they have to put down a potentially lethal criminal attack – and the crown attorney and all the social engineers in the justice department can deal with the jury of average Canadians who will refuse to convict a man for defending himself or his home from potentially lethal criminal attack.

  3. I do not agree with this weird definition of what constitue self defense,
    If someone is tring to kill you with an axe you can kill him WHILE he is doing it, but if he turns away to run away then from that instant killing him is now murder? ( or whatever term is correct )
    It does not make sense.
    Why was it self defense a split second ago and now it is murder? ( or whatever term is used to describe it )
    Can I use this when I run a red light ?
    While I was running the red light it WAS an Infraction,
    but now that it is over – that the running of the red light is in the past by several seconds – I am no longer a treath to other drivers and pedestrians so I should not be fined anymore?

  4. I know it’s fun to slag the police, but isn’t it the crown prosecutor(i.e. yet another flavour of lawyer) that lays these types of charges?

  5. Hey, never mind civilian self-defence, think of our “peacekeepers”. The Bosnian rules of engagement only allowed shooting someone actively trying to kill you. One famous example was what if a man threw a hand grenade at you, could you shoot him? The answer was no because he had already thrown the grenade and was no longer a threat! As long as our betters in their gated communities make the laws us little people are screwed.

  6. Friend: if you are striking me with an axe, and I produce a gun, and you run away, then the gun has served its purpose of defending my life, and I need not fire upon you. In fact, if I do so under those circumstances, my act has moved from the realm of self-defense, and into the realm of taking revenge. At least, in a nutshell, that is how the law views it.
    On the other hand, if you continue striking me with that axe even after I’ve produced the gun, then I am entitled to shoot you, as I am justifiably afraid for my life.
    As a practical matter, if, when the cops arrive, I’m standing there bleeding from an axe wound, and you are lying there with a slug in your gut, and powder burns around the entrance wound, the presumption would probably be self-defense, even if you had an “Oh Sh*t!” moment when I produced the gun and checked your second swing. But if they find you 20 yards away, with the bullet wound in your back, the cops might think otherwise.
    Sheesh! Talk to people who have taken a concealed-carry course in those U.S. states which permit that. The over-arching idea is that a lawful carrier can produce a gun in a show of force and de-escalate an encounter, and strangely enough, sometimes it actually does play out that way.
    As to what I would really do if faced with such a situation, it would depend upon the circumstances of the attack as known to me at the time. If it’s just some random nut-job with the axe, and there are witnesses, well, I’d play it by the book. No point getting my ass thrown in jail for nothing, eh? If it was some creep that had been making death threats, well, I’d shoot him and take my chances, because there’d be every reason to expect a future attempt.
    And, no, I don’t pack a pistol, nor do I own one. I see no need for it at present where I live. Too much red tape to own a legal one, and too much risk to own an illegal one. But if I ever faced a credible death threat, the risk/benefit calculation would have to be redone.

  7. @ gordinkneehill:
    Agreed. That is exactly how the law is interpreted in most states in the US. The CCW (Concealed Carry Weapon) courses make it very clear, even with Stand Your Ground laws, shooting someone clearly running away is no longer self defence. And in most cases of gun self defence no shots are required. Intimitely familiar with one case myself…
    There isn`t enough info in this article to determine exactly what was going on.
    There are cases in CANADA where people have used firearms for self defence (includes handguns) and not even been charged. A jeweler in BC used a handgun a few years ago to devastating effect, and the perps were even running away, though they also had a gun and it all happened too fast I think for the jeweler to be certain the threat was over.
    Even in CANADA once a person`s home is violated, self defence becomes broader and more liberal. I have been pleasantly suprised by the intelligent correct decisions judges in Canada have made. Unfortunately you have to spend years in legal process before you get exonerated.

  8. From the Criminal Code:
    “Careless use of firearm, etc.
    86. (1) Every person commits an offence who, without lawful excuse, uses, carries, handles, ships, transports or stores a firearm, a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device or any ammunition or prohibited ammunition in a careless manner or without reasonable precautions for the safety of other persons.”
    The case law I’ve read suggests that aimed shots do not qualify as ‘careless’ use. Careless use or improper storage are the catch-all charges used by police whenever a firearm is involved.
    Recall the jeweller in Port Alberni BC who shot one of the two thieves in his shop – Dennis Galloway? The RCMP recommended he be charged with
    unsafe storage and careless use of a firearm. The Crown did not carry either charge forward.

  10. In times past the doctrine of necessary force and what is reasonable held sway….pre PET….
    The doctrine of necessary force is subject to many factors.
    An able bodied man wounding/killing a teenager breaking into his house in broad daylight is considered excessive force.
    A disabled, senior or especially female with children has more licence in the application/execution of force.
    Darkness of night is also an important factor.
    Allan Runt declared that no circumstances justified use of force….
    Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6….
    Don’t count on a sympathetic jury…judges can and frequently do set aside jury verdicts and rule otherwise.

  11. At least he had time to put out most of the fires before the police arrived and charged him.

  12. Am I reading something wrong here?
    First off,we have NO private property rights in Canada,therefore,the guys were just trying to get what was their’s,even if it meant burning it to the ground.
    Secondly,the home owner,which he cannot be under Canadian law,made a big error using a gun,which is prohibited again by Canadian law.
    Then again,try it in my place of residence.You will be dead in two seconds,and swords are still legal weapons in Canada,of which I am well versed of in using (as is my better half).Then again,I believe in protecting my life and my famalies from whatever reprobate scum try to attack it,contrary to the lefties thinking.
    A good judge would sentence the bombers to probation,to be served in their defence lawyers homes!

  13. A disgusting sense of justice and the right to protect ones property and life.
    You can only laugh when Liberal twits get jacked and hurt in places like Van & TO. They brought it on themselves and still have the mental incapability to see the problem.
    Every time one of you left wing morons get jacked on a subway or bus stop without any means to defend yourself, remember that there is a bigger part of Canada laughing their guts out at your stupidity.
    As for conservatives harmed because your hands are tied by the liberal establishment – sympathy & outrage.

  14. Posted by: gordinkneehill at August 24, 2010 11:12 PM>
    “too much red tape”.
    All the more reason you should take the time to own at least one gun while you can. There may come a day that your circumstances change and you feel that you do need one. That would seem like a very bad day if then you needed to jump through all that tape – or couldn’t get one at all.
    Generally Canadians have a right to property. Usually when new gun restrictions are inacted, most people qualify for grandfathers right on the property they already own. First was the machine gun ban (I know some old boys that still legally own some) and then the other bans. I myself have grandfathered rights to some firearms that I could not pass to my kids if I wanted to. Anyway food for thought.

  15. The greatest gift I was ever given for any of my birthdays was the commie Canada hating Turdeau died. When your pallbearers are Fidel and other assorted communists, you are a communist, the wrath of this bastard has and will be felt monetarily in Canada forever unless we nut up and throw his stinking charter into the hole with his stinking corpse!

  16. “Agree with mojo, sasquatch and others. The guy was clearly careless, not only because he didn’t hit his intended target, but because popping off rounds with a handgun in an urban area puts any number of innocent bystanders at risk.
    I’ll second the suggesstion that a shotgun would have been a better choice, both more chance of nailing the perps, and less of an image problem for the user.”
    A shotgun may have been a better choice but may not have been within distance when it was needed. Either way he would have been charged the same (with careless use of a firearm). I’m not convinced that there was much danger to others in the community – not enough information on that to decide. I also don’t agree that if the person flees from your gun that you shouldn’t have a right to shoot them. If you were an unfortunate who didn’t believe in owning guns, you might be dead. Even really horrible murdering ba5tards will run from a gun but it doesn’t stop them from being those people who will murder someone else. A bullet placed nicely will stop that. If you are willing to attack me and my family, good luck escaping.

  17. Occam’s Disposable Razor
    Heh, Thompson employed a handgun for its only intended and legally justifiable purpose – self defense.
    The only acceptable and legal purpose for owning a handgun is for target practice or collection. To register/get possession you MUST be a member of an accredited gun club or be a recognized collector.
    The difficulty is the statute, C68. AND the regulations made by bureaucrats, allegedly based upon the statute. Then come the various interpretations by Police, Crowns and Judges. In practice basically they make it up as they go……
    This why certain magazines are “prohibited weapons”……whereas the firearms that accept them are not.

  18. Occam’s Disposable Razor
    “Heh, Thompson employed a handgun for its only intended and legally justifiable purpose – self defense.”
    The only acceptable and legal purpose for owning a handgun is for target practice or collection. To register/get possession you MUST be a member of an accredited gun club or be a recognized collector.
    The difficulty is the statute, C68. AND then regulations made by bureaucrats, allegedly based upon the statute. Then come the various interpretations by Police, Crowns and Judges. In practice basically they make it up as they go……
    This why certain magazines are “prohibited weapons”……whereas the firearms that accept them are not.

  19. To Gord and all niggling over the minutia of justified self defense.
    The facts in this case are: Multiple assailants toss molotovs at this guy’s home and leave it burning with god knows how many people inside. He breaks off the attack by discharging a firearm. No time for 911 or the fire dept. He acts instead by the statute authority given him in the criminal code.
    1) The criminal attack was still in progress when he discharged his weapon (the house was burning)
    2) He was within citizen’s arrest rights in shooting at fleeing felons(using what ever force is necessary to stop the attackers) during a crime in progress (the house burning representing a threat to life).
    Even in our officially misinterpreted criminal code sections on self defense and citizen’s arrest the only thing he did wrong was not telling the perpetrators he was acting in legal authority by yelling “halt you’re under arrest”!
    All the ensuing dyslexic gobbledegook the police and crown concocted in this case is pure misdirection and abuse of the law.
    “Careless use of a firearm” is a subjective charge as opposed to the objective proper statute use of a firearm in effecting justified self defense and a lawful citizen’s arrest of felons during a major crime in progress. You now see the real purpose of the Liberal firearms act. It is used to intimidate citizens from defending themselves. It offers the crown a way to still lay a charge in a clear cut case of self defense.
    “”Section 494. (Criminal Code)
    (1) ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT BY ANY PERSON
    Any one may arrest without warrant(s)
    (a) a person whom he finds committing an indictable offence; or
    (b) a person who, on reasonable grounds, he believes
    * (i) has committed a criminal offence, and
    * (ii) is escaping from and freshly pursued by persons who have lawful authority to arrest that person
    (2) ARREST BY OWNER, ETC., OF PROPERTY
    Any one who is
    (a) the owner or a person in lawful possession of property, or
    (b) a person authorized by the owner or by a person in lawful possession of property
    may arrest without warrant a person whom he finds committing a criminal offence on or in relation to that property.
    All citizens are permitted to use “as much force as is reasonably necessary” as stated in section 27 of the Criminal Code of Canada and under section 34 deadly force may be used in self defense where there is reasonable apprehension of lethal harm by an attacker”
    The law (read; crown) is an ass! I would NEVER convict this citizen for exercising his statute right to self defense and citizen’s arrest. Of course the police statists in the enforcement and judicial elite would love to remove jury trials the way they fraudulently now deny the right to civilian self defense and arrest powers.
    A 20 says the crown will never let this guy near a jury trial – thus the firearms charge its a summary offence where there is no jury involved.

  20. Using hollow point self defence ammunition in a handgun is no more dangerous than using a shotgun with 00 buck. In my opinion. The HP ammunition is designed not to easily penetrate walls, cars etc.
    Shooting any gun in the vicinity of other houses carries a risk of harming others. Which is why if you are going to use a firearm for self defence you should be 100% sure of your target and what is beyond your target, and the ammunition you are using.
    People have used handguns, and other firearms for self defence in this country and been exonerated by the courts. ie: Galloway. He wasn’t charged by crown because the community made a large push on his behalf.
    People have even used firearms to stop fleeing burglars by shooting out the tires of cars and had charges dismissed.
    Unfortunately you cannot prepare for self defence in this land, and have to be lucky to be able to defend yourself. ie: Bryant. That is what stinks.

  21. The best GUN for self defense is the one in you hand, along with dozens to hundreds of hours of practice, practice, practice.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation