Carry a semi-auto handgun in Canada with unsafe storage and...

[desy]

precisely why I won't vote Liberal and haven't since C-68 actually come to fruition. Well that and some other stuff

Nobody wants firearms on the streets, if the model student realized that just posessing a restricted firearm automatically got you jail time he probably wouldn't risk it.

A girl from Sweden was visiting a few years back and said that the penalty was 1 yr jail for drunk driving no excuses, she also said nobody drives drunk over there.

 

[imported_thefonz]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Boy Julian and Ricky better watch out.

:laugh: :laugh: I dunno, sometimes they like to get busted to play floor hockey.

3-4 years is an exaggeration,they don't actually make you serve that, most likely the guy will get community service and a large fine. They always ask for the longest sentence. Even if he did go to prison, here in Canada, on good behavior you would be out in around a year.

 

[eleison]

Originally posted by: desy
precisely why I won't vote Liberal and haven't since C-68 actually come to fruition. Well that and some other stuff

Nobody wants firearms on the streets, if the model student realized that just posessing a restricted firearm automatically got you jail time he probably wouldn't risk it.

A girl from Sweden was visiting a few years back and said that the penalty was 1 yr jail for drunk driving no excuses, she also said nobody drives drunk over there.

The law needs to be changed if a model student who has never committed any crime is going to be jailed for years simply for having a gun at home.

Drunk driving is bad... owning a gun is not necessary bad.. one cannot equate the two...

 

[desy]

Well by law in Canada owning a 'restricted firearm' unlawfully is bad, not all firearms are restricted and shouldn't face the same penalty. Its a cultural difference that as a Canadian you have long accepted for decades.
The debate is over on that one

 

[Flyback]

Originally posted by: desy
Well by law in Canada owning a 'restricted firearm' unlawfully is bad, not all firearms are restricted and shouldn't face the same penalty. Its a cultural difference that as a Canadian you have long accepted for decades.
The debate is over on that one

The Liberals want to ban handguns -completely- though. That goes beyond what Canadians have accepted for decades. Assuming you care (given you have a restricted permit) you should check out the PDF I linked above

 

[Kntx]

Originally posted by: Flyback

Originally posted by: Kntx
People problem. Specifically people who carry guns in cities.

The point is, the fellow in the article referenced by the OP had an unregistered, restricted firearm in his gym bag.

You want to own a gun? Follow the rules. No slipups.

Do the crime, do the time.

No one is disputing that the individual broke the law. He did, and should therefore face penalty.

The concern most rational people--those who don't have an unreasonable fear of guns have--is that the call to jail him for 3-4 years is simply out of line, even after having reported that he is a model student.

A gun in the bag does not equate this guy with the Boxing Day shootout and it is simply absurd to think that because he is a black male with a gun that he intended to do such. Why else would you reference the Boxing Day article, if that wasn't the angle you intended to play?

People need to get over their fear of guns.

Of course he should face punishment! But 3-4 years? That is outright stupidity. You get less for manslaughter in Canada if you're a youth. Guns are vilified beyond need.

As anyone who lives in Toronto can attest, the area where York University (his school) is located is one of the worst areas in Canada. Jane-Weston, Jane-Finch.. that whole corridor... there are shootings there almost every weekend in the summer. Add to that the assaults that happen on campus... it could have been for self-defense, and, given that he is reported a model student I wouldn't assume that it was gang-related.

The article said "model student" not model student. He's already on probation for previous weapons offences.

 

[Flyback]

Originally posted by: Kntx

Originally posted by: Flyback

Originally posted by: Kntx
People problem. Specifically people who carry guns in cities.

The point is, the fellow in the article referenced by the OP had an unregistered, restricted firearm in his gym bag.

You want to own a gun? Follow the rules. No slipups.

Do the crime, do the time.

No one is disputing that the individual broke the law. He did, and should therefore face penalty.

The concern most rational people--those who don't have an unreasonable fear of guns have--is that the call to jail him for 3-4 years is simply out of line, even after having reported that he is a model student.

A gun in the bag does not equate this guy with the Boxing Day shootout and it is simply absurd to think that because he is a black male with a gun that he intended to do such. Why else would you reference the Boxing Day article, if that wasn't the angle you intended to play?

People need to get over their fear of guns.

Of course he should face punishment! But 3-4 years? That is outright stupidity. You get less for manslaughter in Canada if you're a youth. Guns are vilified beyond need.

As anyone who lives in Toronto can attest, the area where York University (his school) is located is one of the worst areas in Canada. Jane-Weston, Jane-Finch.. that whole corridor... there are shootings there almost every weekend in the summer. Add to that the assaults that happen on campus... it could have been for self-defense, and, given that he is reported a model student I wouldn't assume that it was gang-related.

The article said "model student" not model student. He's already on probation for previous weapons offences.

Where does it say that he is already on probation for previous weapons offences? I don't see it in the article. Was it in another article somewhere? Reference? It could change the story depending on his record. The way the original article that I linked -- it made me believe that it was a first time offense.

And of course model student is in quotes. How would the reporters know? They are going on the basis of the written statements from 12 people including former teachers and employees. They are stating what others have claimed--it isn't their opinion nor place to do so.

 

[sandorski]

Everyone needs a gun like everyone needs a nuke.

 

[CanOWorms]

Don't dare question the authority of the Queen.

 

[Kntx]

However, he still faces a weapons offence in Peel Region. He was arrested on that charge in March 2006, while on bail for these charges.

 

[Flyback]

Originally posted by: Kntx

However, he still faces a weapons offence in Peel Region. He was arrested on that charge in March 2006, while on bail for these charges.

It's official: I'm blind

It doesn't elaborate too much on that offense, unfortunately. That could change things.

 

[desy]

Yep the first conviction should have been enough. He's flaunting the law. . .
And yes I care which is why the Conservatives need a majority to undo all the Liberal magic that created this mess in the first place but I suspect they will come down harder on restricted firearms as well. You have to remeber it was a Conservative government that restricted handguns in the first place.
But like I said they should make it hard, its why I got the restricted even though I don't own any restricted, so I can be grandfathered in. . .

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: desy
Yep the first conviction should have been enough. He's flaunting the law. . .
And yes I care which is why the Conservatives need a majority to undo all the Liberal magic that created this mess in the first place but I suspect they will come down harder on restricted firearms as well. You have to remeber it was a Conservative government that restricted handguns in the first place.
But like I said they should make it hard, its why I got the restricted even though I don't own any restricted, so I can be grandfathered in. . .

The Conservatives need a majority like I need a root canal. They can't seem to keep a promise or 'be the party of accountability' to save their life.

It's just more of the same old crap.

 

[ElDonAntonio]

I'm totally in favor of banning semi-automatic guns. I don't see any need for anyone except law enformcement to carry one around. Guns for hunting, fine. Fire shooting clubs with special licenses, fine. But really no reason to have any other types out there.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: desy
Yep the first conviction should have been enough. He's flaunting the law. . .
And yes I care which is why the Conservatives need a majority to undo all the Liberal magic that created this mess in the first place but I suspect they will come down harder on restricted firearms as well. You have to remeber it was a Conservative government that restricted handguns in the first place.
But like I said they should make it hard, its why I got the restricted even though I don't own any restricted, so I can be grandfathered in. . .

The Conservatives need a majority like I need a root canal. They can't seem to keep a promise or 'be the party of accountability' to save their life.

It's just more of the same old crap.

I wonder what the Conservatives will do when they run out of Liberal policies to resurrect?

 

[desy]

Tory Blue coming to youuuu!