Recent content by IKnowNothing

Further to, a much more recent example - R v. Bilodeau. Father and teen son pursuing suspected thieves, contact adult son to come help and bring gun "just in case". They claim the intent of possession to use the gun only if they needed to for self defence, but as per Kerr: [27]...

To be fair- shallow belligerent PP did do that. This version likely would have won. If he commits, sticks to it, and expands the approach to committee and legislative proposals will be nothing but good for Canadian politics.

They do - in fact I actually mentioned Sulland up thread : " R v Macdonald 2014 and R v Kerr 2004 and how they narrowed the Sulland precedent" Sulland did set the precedent you mention - in 1982 at the BC Court of Appeals. But... Kerr, in 2004 at the Supreme Court, took the precedent from...

Except absent a clear and imminent threat of actual harm to be stopped, there's no self defence to be argued- it's just a plan to potentially shoot someone. The quoted passages were quite clear.

I suspect that's because you stopped reading too early - the literal next line (emphasis mine) "Where an accused is found to have possessed a weapon for a defensive purpose, it is only where the attack is completely inescapable that possession of a weapon to thwart the attack is not possession...

@Jarnhamar @Eaglelord17 I'd encourage you to read the decisions in R v Macdonald 2014 and R v Kerr 2004 and how they narrowed the Sulland precedent Absent an immediate and unavoidable threat, possession of a weapon intended for potential use on a human is likely a breach of S.88. The way...

Respectfully, it seems you don't understand what I'm discussing and can't get passed inserting your opinions on what should be in place of what is. The status quo is that you can be completely justified in your use of a weapon (firearm otherwise) in self defense, and acquitted on those charges-...

Cottage is certainly the dominant term in SW Ontario- but cabin is still used. Generally- the cottage is where you vacation to, the cabin is the warmup / party shack on the back 40.

Cabin - rustic, no utilities, often no insulation Cottage - fully functioning vacation home, 3 or 4 season Chalet - a cottage but pretentious

This is the exact double sword we're considering- negotiating an easement that allows continued agricultural and recreational use (creating a list of allowable future structures, total square footage etc to those uses) while while restricting the land against future development or extractives...

Yup- as it speaks directly to intended use. I thought about that before posting about the Byrna- but realistically if push comes to shove and it's relevant (an activist Crown/ Judge wants to push Sec 88) I'm going to be hooped. Hard to justify why 7 firearms for recreational purposes and all...

Another thing I've been dancing with the idea of is conservation easements + registering a management plan. Massive tax advantages

This very much a case of the legal landscape as you think it should be running up against the legal landscape as it it. Listing home defense as your reason to apply for an NR PAL is one of the best ways to make sure that you're denied. There's a whole rats nest of intermingled precedent- R v...

Cool. I'm envious. With the price of land in southern Ontario I've been looking at cheaper bushlots that have zoning blocks preventing permitting buildings (a fraction of the price) so I've done a decent amount of research and penciling on what can be done above board but beneath regulatory...

The Catch-22 in the whole thing. You and I disagree on the reasonableness/ desirability of true US castle doctrine - but I think there's a massive opportunity for a well intentioned political push to legislate away the "loopholes" that judicial activists use to go after home owners (PAL holders...