The Great Gun Control Debate

[Fishbone Jones]

:goodpost:


Then this person - Wyatt-  should be arrested and charged.

Absolutely. He appears to be in contempt of an official court order.

However, instead of the Crown enforcing the court order, and arresting Wyatt, the lawful owner must now go back to court on his own dime to tell the court, that Wyatt won't cooperate with the judge's order. This is costing the complainant thousands in legal fees.

Prima facie, Ontario CFO Superintendant Chris Wyatt clearly deems himself above the very laws that he is sworn to apply and protect.

 

[BernDawg]

:goodpost:


Then this person - Wyatt-  should be arrested and charged.

There are several people in this country that agree with you Jim.

 

[The_Falcon]

Absolutely. He appears to be in contempt of an official court order.

However, instead of the Crown enforcing the court order, and arresting Wyatt, the lawful owner must now go back to court on his own dime to tell the court, that Wyatt won't cooperate with the judge's order. This is costing the complainant thousands in legal fees.

Prima facie, Ontario CFO Superintendant Chris Wyatt clearly deems himself above the very laws that he is sworn to apply and protect.

Sun News seems to like reporting on this kind of stuff....just saying....

 

[BernDawg]

Sun News seems to like reporting on this kind of stuff....just saying....

They have to because it doesn't fit into any of the other media outlets "liberal agenda only" reporting guidlines.

 

[The Bread Guy]

New paperwork demanded by chief firearms officers (CFO) for licensed gun owners carrying their registered, legally owned handguns to shooting ranges doesn't sit right with Public Safety Minister Vic Toews.

"Our government does not support placing needless red tape on law-abiding hunters, farmers and sport shooters," the minister's officials said in an e-mail.

CFOs in Ontario and New Brunswick say target shooters and instructors must get a paper permission slip before visiting a range where they don't have a membership.

In a Jan. 28 letter to gun clubs, Ontario CFO Chris Wyatt says those papers could be "a print-out of an e-mail" inviting someone to a host club, or a flyer advertising a shooting competition.

( .... )

It seems unlikely that Toews will step in to order Wyatt to stand down the way he did when Ontario's CFO tried to force gun shops to keep paper records of gun sales.

Toews's office said since this new issue "has the potential to be before the courts," the minister won't comment directly on Wyatt's actions.

QMI/Sun Media, 31 Jan 13

 

[Retired AF Guy]

It seems unlikely that Toews will step in to order Wyatt to stand down the way he did when Ontario's CFO tried to force gun shops to keep paper records of gun sales.

Toews's office said since this new issue "has the potential to be before the courts," the minister won't comment directly on Wyatt's actions.

QMI/Sun Media, 31 Jan 13

Which is nothing more than a cop-out.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Which is nothing more than a cop-out.

Really? How so?

What is it you expect him to do? Minister Toews has already bitch slapped Wyatt once when Wyatt tried to institute his own registry after the demise of the LGR.

CSSA has already advised they are going to court on this matter. Should the Minister jeopardize that case by showing a bias either way?

This is no different than any other action where the government, provincial or federal, is under a legal review.

If he wants to do something he should be studying the revamping the CFO office and Terms of Reference, if not eliminate it completely, but he should not get involved where there is legal action concerning the Crown and private citizens.

 

[KevinB]

Just to follow up....

Firebombers left Ontario homeowner no choice but to shoot
Court drops final charge against man who fired shots to protect his home
By Dave Johnson, QMI Agency
Article Link

WELLAND, Ont. — An Ontario court has ruled Ian Thomson did nothing wrong when he armed himself against thugs who were firebombing his home.

The landmark decision took a judge 45 minutes to read as he acquitted the firearms instructor of all remaining charges.

In August 2010, Thomson fired his registered pistol over the heads of attackers before calling police. The cops, however, charged Thomson for improper storage of a firearm because he set the gun down on a table as he waited for the authorities to arrive.

“I’m somewhat relieved, but it still hasn’t sunk in,” the Port Colbourne, Ont., man said late Thursday afternoon.
end

In the comments section of the article there is mention of a DAS Canada Legal Protection Insurance Policy.

For you legal gun owners out there, it might be a wise move in view of the paranoia local police services have about use and storage of guns...
http://www.firearmlegaldefence.com/

interesting times........

the insurance policy info
http://www.firearmlegaldefence.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/FirearmPolicy.pdf

I apologize for the backjump -- Missed this earlier.
IMHO, The Owner should have been charged with reckless endangerment or something along those lines.

I do not believe there is any legal justification for warning shots.  Discharging a weapon is deadly force, and if you need to shoot, you should be shooting center of mass...

  We are made to believe the individual had the belief his life was in danger from the firebombers, and as such he had the right to use deadly force to protect his life and his family.  However he endangered others by not aiming into the firebombers, bullets even from from pistols can travel a far distance and still retain enough energy to kill or main an innocent downrange from the discharge.

Me, well I would call dialed 911 to report the fact I shot two firebombers...

 

[cupper]

Absolutely. He appears to be in contempt of an official court order.

However, instead of the Crown enforcing the court order, and arresting Wyatt, the lawful owner must now go back to court on his own dime to tell the court, that Wyatt won't cooperate with the judge's order. This is costing the complainant thousands in legal fees.

Prima facie, Ontario CFO Superintendant Chris Wyatt clearly deems himself above the very laws that he is sworn to apply and protect.

If it were me, I'd be asking the court to order that I was reimbursed the costs incurred, especially having to follow up on the ordered enforcement.

 

[Old Sweat]

Am I noticing a tendency for the OPP to consider court orders as distractions? Think about Caledonia and Idle No More.

 

[Kat Stevens]

It's Ontario, and therefore not required to follow rulings like us tier 2 and 3 Canadians do.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Really? How so?

What is it you expect him to do? Minister Toews has already ***** slapped Wyatt once when Wyatt tried to institute his own registry after the demise of the LGR.

If he has slapped him down once, he can slap him down again.

CSSA has already advised they are going to court on this matter. Should the Minister jeopardize that case by showing a bias either way?

So, rather then stepping in and saving the CSSA members from spending thousands of their hard earned dollars in a court case, he could step in and end the whole thing and save everyone a bunch of heartache.

This is no different than any other action where the government, provincial or federal, is under a legal review.

Yep. You're right. And I'm sure we could look back over the years/decades and find lots of cases where the gov't (whether local/provincial/federal) have used the possibility of legal action as an excuse to stonewall the public.

but he should not get involved where there is legal action concerning the Crown and private citizens.

I think we all agree that the actions of the Ontario CFO is an abuse of authority and is intruding into federal law. Therefore, the Fed's should be stepping in and issuing clarifications before these issues ever get to the courts. 

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Am I noticing a tendency for the OPP to consider court orders as distractions? Think about Caledonia and Idle No More.

It's Ontario, and therefore not required to follow rulings like us tier 2 and 3 Canadians do.

Bantario, the nanny state at the centre of Canukistan.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

If he has slapped him down once, he can slap him down again.

So, rather then stepping in and saving the CSSA members from spending thousands of their hard earned dollars in a court case, he could step in and end the whole thing and save everyone a bunch of heartache.
Yep. You're right. And I'm sure we could look back over the years/decades and find lots of cases where the gov't (whether local/provincial/federal) have used the possibility of legal action as an excuse to stonewall the public.
I think we all agree that the actions of the Ontario CFO is an abuse of authority and is intruding into federal law. Therefore, the Fed's should be stepping in and issuing clarifications before these issues ever get to the courts.

When I retire I'd like to try some of that shit your smokin'

 

[cupper]

When I retire I'd like to try some of that shit your smokin'

That's just old age. >

 

[Retired AF Guy]

When I retire I'd like to try some of that crap your smokin'

Sorry. Haven't smoked anything in close to 40 years. We will just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Ex-SHAD]

I really do believe that it's time that firearms owners and the firearms lobbies in Canada finally stand up, and tell the government that enough is enough, and that the Registry and Canada's restrictive and draconian firearms laws must go.

A Canada with open carry, and an entrenched right to bear and keep arms, is a safer Canada, whereas gun control simply gives the advantage to criminals, while punishing the law abiding.

 

[Nemo888]

Open carry is very unlikely in Canada. Most crimes involve hand guns. They are a hard core criminals weapons of choice. By comparison few crimes are committed with rifles. 

Firearm laws are likely to become more restrictive. My choice for limited resources would be to give up on hand guns and concentrate on keeping rifles unrestricted.

 

[JorgSlice]

I really do believe that it's time that firearms owners and the firearms lobbies in Canada finally stand up, and tell the government that enough is enough, and that the Registry and Canada's restrictive and draconian firearms laws must go.

A Canada with open carry, and an entrenched right to bear and keep arms, is a safer Canada, whereas gun control simply gives the advantage to criminals, while punishing the law abiding.

I quite like our gun laws as they are. Loosening or tightening the belt will not change the pattern of gun crimes in Canada. Criminals who use guns use stolen or smuggled handguns which can't be restricted regardless.

What we need is amendment of Self Defence laws in Canada because, as they stand, tend to punish the defender more than the attacker. With the recent ruling in Ontario with the guy getting his house firebombed... I think we're slowly moving in the right direction, someone just needs to get on it a little faster (but I understand there are bigger problems to solve such as the economy).

Look at the United Kingdom. They have way more restrictive firearm laws and they have way more violent gun crimes than we do.
Don't quote me on Australia though, but last I heard, with firearm purchases and possession being next to impossible in Australia (like the UK, possibly more restrictive) they too have higher violent gun crime rates.

The common trend? Majority hand guns and are either stolen or smuggled.

More restrictions will not do any good, but neither will more freedom. More freedom will open the doors up to giving more people with Mental Illness or ill-character access to firearms and therefore an increase in gun deaths and injuries either by intent, or negligence. Canada's laws are not perfect, but they're good for us and have proven their effectiveness in the long term (especially with the screening they do these days, while some slip through, they do manage to do well).

 

[OldSolduer]

Can you imagine a CDS publicly enforcing what he considers Mil Law, not what the government and the NDA act says it is?

Can you say "fired"?