Police Folk Allegedly Behaving Badly

[Halifax Tar]

We've reached a point where firearms have become such a social pariah, and are so rarely encountered by the average person, that many people, including many (perhaps most) law enforcement officers, have only a limited understanding of them. That lack of familiarity often leads to exaggerated fears, suspicion of responsible owners, and difficulty distinguishing toys or replicas from actual firearms.

 

[Haggis]

We've reached a point where firearms have become such a social pariah, and are so rarely encountered by the average person, that many people, including many (perhaps most) law enforcement officers, have only a limited understanding of them. That lack of familiarity often leads to exaggerated fears, suspicion of responsible owners, and difficulty distinguishing toys or replicas from actual firearms.

There have been numerous cases of real firearms being disguised as toys and toys modified to look more real by removing anything that could identify them as toys, such as the bright orange barrel tips. This image is from the Winnipeg Police.

Plus, Hollywood has not done us LEOs any favours by portraying the lowly 9mm as a hand cannon that blows the victim back 3 metres with every impact. Most LEOs have never shot anything but paper and are unaware of the terminal ballistics on a soft target.

 

[mariomike]

There have been numerous cases of real firearms being disguised as toys and toys modified to look more real by removing anything that could identify them as toys, such as the bright orange barrel tips.

There was a bank bandit in Toronto used to carry his FN C1 in a guitar case.

The barrel stuck out of a little hole. So, he painted it , the barrel , pink. So, as not to give the wrong impression on bank jobs.

 

[Booter]

There have been numerous cases of real firearms being disguised as toys and toys modified to look more real by removing anything that could identify them as toys, such as the bright orange barrel tips. This image is from the Winnipeg Police.

Plus, Hollywood has not done us LEOs any favours by portraying the lowly 9mm as a hand cannon that blows the victim back 3 metres with every impact. Most LEOs have never shot anything but paper and are unaware of the terminal ballistics on a soft target.

View attachment 102969

Doubly so now with 3D printing.

 

[Halifax Tar]

There have been numerous cases of real firearms being disguised as toys and toys modified to look more real by removing anything that could identify them as toys, such as the bright orange barrel tips. This image is from the Winnipeg Police.

Plus, Hollywood has not done us LEOs any favours by portraying the lowly 9mm as a hand cannon that blows the victim back 3 metres with every impact. Most LEOs have never shot anything but paper and are unaware of the terminal ballistics on a soft target.

View attachment 102969

Fortnight is a terrible drug.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Agreed. My internt was to illustrate that not all GSW are the results of a criminal assault. Some are an "own goal". It's hunting season, after all.,

Attempted suicide. Hold him for 72 hours.

 

[lenaitch]

Attempted suicide. Hold him for 72 hours.

Again - pretty much an urban myth. In Ontario, the various non-voluntary authorities under the Mental Health Act (physician, JP, police) are for assessment/examination and have specific conditions that must be met before they can be exercised. The only time the '72 hour rule' come up is where the person in charge of the psychiatric facility must release a person unless the examining physician has already released or admitted them. It is a maximum, not block period, and has nothing to do with law enforcement.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Attempted suicide. Hold him for 72 hours.

We had that happen a few times in Belfast.

The police arranged for the 'targeted victim' to be held in 'protective custody' in hospital 'for his own safety' while enquiries were made.

Worked every time, apparently

 

[Eaglelord17]

We've reached a point where firearms have become such a social pariah, and are so rarely encountered by the average person, that many people, including many (perhaps most) law enforcement officers, have only a limited understanding of them. That lack of familiarity often leads to exaggerated fears, suspicion of responsible owners, and difficulty distinguishing toys or replicas from actual firearms.

Alternatively there is very limited reasons to possess a firearm in a urban environment. Obviously time of year should be considered (Halloween) and location/event (I could see cosplayers, etc. having something along those lines), but overall there is a ton of reasonable suspicion on anyone in public with a firearm replica or not. It has to be taken seriously.

I have been harassed well doing legal activities with firearms by ignorant cops. I don’t see this as that type of case.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Alternatively there is very limited reasons to possess a firearm in a urban environment. Obviously time of year should be considered (Halloween) and location/event (I could see cosplayers, etc. having something along those lines), but overall there is a ton of reasonable suspicion on anyone in public with a firearm replica or not. It has to be taken seriously.

I have been harassed well doing legal activities with firearms by ignorant cops. I don’t see this as that type of case.

There are no more valid reasons for a rural resident to own a firearm than there are for someone living in an urban area.

Both can hunt.
Both can participate in sport shooting.
Both can have legitimate concerns about home defence.
Both can be collectors.
Both can require a firearms licence for professional purposes.

You might have an argument when it comes to varmint and pest control, but even then I have friends in urban areas who regularly hunt coyotes and help farmers manage nuisance wildlife.

I would be willing to bet that, in absolute numbers, there are more licensed firearms owners and more firearms in urban areas than in rural areas simply because of the difference in population.

Personally, I go to great lengths to keep my firearms ownership private, including from law enforcement. As a rule, I do not invite police into my home. They are welcome to speak with me through a screen door or window, or I will meet them outside on the sidewalk or roadway. Even when I am the one requesting assistance, I prefer to keep interactions outside my dwelling.

That said, I assume they likely have access to systems indicating that I hold a PAL or RPAL.

 

[Eaglelord17]

There are no more valid reasons for a rural resident to own a firearm than there are for someone living in an urban area.

Both can hunt.
Both can participate in sport shooting.
Both can have legitimate concerns about home defence.
Both can be collectors.
Both can require a firearms licence for professional purposes.

You might have an argument when it comes to varmint and pest control, but even then I have friends in urban areas who regularly hunt coyotes and help farmers manage nuisance wildlife.

I would be willing to bet that, in absolute numbers, there are more licensed firearms owners and more firearms in urban areas than in rural areas simply because of the difference in population.

Personally, I go to great lengths to keep my firearms ownership private, including from law enforcement. As a rule, I do not invite police into my home. They are welcome to speak with me through a screen door or window, or I will meet them outside on the sidewalk or roadway. Even when I am the one requesting assistance, I prefer to keep interactions outside my dwelling.

That said, I assume they likely have access to systems indicating that I hold a PAL or RPAL.

I am not arguing that there is less valid ownership in urban or rural areas.

My argument is that there is very few reasons to have a firearm in public in a urban environment.

Going into or out of a gunshow/shop/smith. Buying/selling/lending/showing a other owner (even then that is mainly transporting it to a private residence).

Bringing it with you to go do a legal activity (hunting, range, etc.) which is generally accomplished by vehicle.

There isn’t a walking around in public because you feel like it excuse unlike the States. Therefore anytime someone is there is a much higher odds of it being someone doing something illegal with it.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Again - pretty much an urban myth. In Ontario, the various non-voluntary authorities under the Mental Health Act (physician, JP, police) are for assessment/examination and have specific conditions that must be met before they can be exercised. The only time the '72 hour rule' come up is where the person in charge of the psychiatric facility must release a person unless the examining physician has already released or admitted them. It is a maximum, not block period, and has nothing to do with law enforcement.

Humm
Hold them for long enough for the police ask them questions.

 

[Booter]

Humm
Hold them for long enough for the police ask them questions.

What valuable questions are you asking someone that you ve decided to hold for mental health reasons that you’ll articulate using for any investigative value?

 

[lenaitch]

Humm
Hold them for long enough for the police ask them questions.

I'm not sure who you are referring to. If you mean the hospital medical staff, unless the person met the requirements in the Act,** I doubt many would put their licence on the line to assist the police. Even if they did, if it was later determined that the grounds were faulty or the detention was a sham, any evidence that fell from the detention might well be ruled inadmissible.

**
(Mental Health Act, Ontario)

15 (1) Where a physician examines a person and has reasonable cause to believe that the person,

(a) has threatened or attempted or is threatening or attempting to cause bodily harm to himself or herself;

(b) has behaved or is behaving violently towards another person or has caused or is causing another person to fear bodily harm from him or her; or

(c) has shown or is showing a lack of competence to care for himself or herself,

and if in addition the physician is of the opinion that the person is apparently suffering from mental disorder of a nature or quality that likely will result in,

(d) serious bodily harm to the person;

(e) serious bodily harm to another person; or

(f) serious physical impairment of the person,

the physician may make application in the prescribed form for a psychiatric assessment of the person. R.S.O. 1990, c. M.7, s. 15 (1); 2000, c. 9, s. 3 (1).

 

[Jarnhamar]

What valuable questions are you asking someone that you ve decided to hold for mental health reasons that you’ll articulate using for any investigative value?

Well, maybe not hold them for mental health. But since it's Ontario and the nurses have to call the police I'd say:

Where'd you get the gun shots pal? You don't remember? I can go fuck myself? Okay thanks. I'll just get your name from the nurse IAW the Mandatory Gunshot Wounds Reporting Act, 2005, s. 2(1) and take note of your description.