The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[Kat Stevens]

I bet that’s a kicky little goat.

 

[Baz]

Some of N.S. gunman's weapons came from U.S., police say

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/investigation-firearms-ns-shooting-1.5544180

 

[McG]

Assault rifles aren’t really a thing so you can call anything an assault rifle by adding all sorts of parts.

Actually, assault rifles are a thing.  Assault rifles are fully automatic capable rifles which fire a sub-powered rifle ammunition.  Assault rifles are already prohibited weapons in Canada.
By contrast, "assault-style rifle" and "assault weapon" are meaningless terms.

 

[MilEME09]

Actually, assault rifles are a thing.  Assault rifles are fully automatic capable rifles which fire a sub-powered rifle ammunition.  Assault rifles are already prohibited weapons in Canada.
By contrast, "assault-style rifle" and "assault weapon" are meaningless terms.

Do you have that definition from a book? Even at RCEME School, our books still would call that a semi-automatic firearm, as does the RCMP.

 

[McG]

Actually, assault rifles are a thing.  Assault rifles are fully automatic capable rifles which fire a sub-powered rifle ammunition.  Assault rifles are already prohibited weapons in Canada.
By contrast, "assault-style rifle" and "assault weapon" are meaningless terms.

Do you have that definition from a book? Even at RCEME School, our books still would call that a semi-automatic firearm, as does the RCMP.

Why would the RCEME school refer to a fully automatic capable rifle as a semi-automatic firearm?
As for a reference that defines assault rifles as being fully automatic capable, check any number of books by Ian Hogg to include:

• https://www.amazon.com/Story-Gun-Ian-V-Hogg/dp/031214895X/
• https://www.amazon.com/Janes-Guns-Recognition-Guide-4e/dp/0007183283

 

[MilEME09]

Do you have that definition from a book? Even at RCEME School, our books still would call that a semi-automatic firearm, as does the RCMP.
Why would the RCEME school refer to a fully automatic capable rifle as a semi-automatic firearm?
As for a reference that defines assault rifles as being fully automatic capable, check any number of books by Ian Hogg to include: https://www.amazon.com/Story-Gun-Ian-V-Hogg/dp/031214895X/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=

After rechecking my available resources, I am mistaken, C7 is an automatic rifle, While assault rifle makes sense for a fully automatic rifle, it describes a physical action, not a mechanism of the weapon which is why i do not like that term.

 

[suffolkowner]

Not to dig up old wounds, but I believe the terminology is derived from the US military to differentiate between battle rifles/full powered cartridges and assault rifles/intermediate powered cartridges. Outside of that there is probably no relevance

 

[McG]

Not to dig up old wounds, but I believe the terminology is derived from the US military to differentiate between battle rifles/full powered cartridges and assault rifles/intermediate powered cartridges. Outside of that there is probably no relevance

No.  The terminology does draw on the distinction between full powered cartridges and intermediate powered, because it is that distinction that makes the assault rifle capable of controlled automatic fire.  But it is not derived from US military terminology.  Ian Hogg is a British historian, and he links the term back to the original assault rifle - the Sturmgewehr 44.

 

[suffolkowner]

No.  The terminology does draw on the distinction between full powered cartridges and intermediate powered, because it is that distinction that makes the assault rifle capable of controlled automatic fire.  But it is not derived from US military terminology.  Ian Hogg is a British historian, and he links the term back to the original assault rifle - the Sturmgewehr 44.

So maybe an assault rifle ban will leave my non automatic battle rifles alone, lol

 

[dangerboy]

So I have an older CAF pam, which is no longer available B-GL-317-025/JK-001 Weapons Volume 25 Small Arms Vocabulary and it defines Assault Rifle as “Light, short-barrelled, selective-fire rifle utilizing an intermediate-powered cartridge".

 

[Jarnhamar]

Two men face charges after police respond to weapons complaint in Dartmouth, N.S.

HALIFAX -- Two men have been arrested and are facing charges after Halifax Regional Police responded to a weapons complaint in Dartmouth, N.S. Friday afternoon.

Police received a report at 3:14 p.m. that two men had been passing a firearm back and forth in the parking lot of the Canadian Tire in Dartmouth Crossing.

Police believe the men took the airsoft weapon to the parking lot and passed it back and forth, then entered the Canadian Tire store to purchase airsoft ammunition and a Co2 canister.

The men are facing charges of possession of a weapon dangerous to the public peace.

https://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/two-men-face-charges-after-police-respond-to-weapons-complaint-in-dartmouth-n-s-1.4910892

Overkill?

 

[ballz]

Two men face charges after police respond to weapons complaint in Dartmouth, N.S.
https://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/two-men-face-charges-after-police-respond-to-weapons-complaint-in-dartmouth-n-s-1.4910892

Overkill?

The usual oppression of Canada's 2nd-class citizens....

 

[Infanteer]

The two are tone deaf maybe, but I can't figure out how an airsoft rifle could be considered a weapon dangerous to the public peace.

 

[my72jeep]

The two are tone deaf maybe, but I can't figure out how an airsoft rifle could be considered a weapon dangerous to the public peace.

It’s catch all charge just like unsafe storage. Yahoos with look alike guns could start a panic. It will most likely stick do to the current climate in Nova Scotia.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

The two are tone deaf maybe, but I can't figure out how an airsoft rifle could be considered a weapon dangerous to the public peace.

Section 88 of the Criminal Code states: "Every person commits an offence who carries or possesses a weapon, an imitation of a weapon, a prohibited device or any ammunition or prohibited ammunition for a purpose dangerous to the public peace or for the purpose of committing an offence."

So an air soft gun can certainly qualify as an imitation of a weapon, especially to the uneducated eye.

However, you may have noted that either the journalist because he wanted to edit his piece, or the cops because they wanted to make a point outside the purview of the law as drafted, left out the word "purpose" from the accusation. This actually requires evidence of an intent to use the imitation weapon for a dangerous purpose to public peace. That intent will be hard to prove, as merely showing up somewhere with a weapon for a legal purpose yet causing concern in some citizens is not sufficient evidence of intent.

In short, the mere effect caused in some citizens is not proof of intent in and of itself.

I suspect that the charges will be dropped quietly once a defence attorney gets involved.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Section 88 of the Criminal Code states: "Every person commits an offence who carries or possesses a weapon, an imitation of a weapon, a prohibited device or any ammunition or prohibited ammunition for a purpose dangerous to the public peace or for the purpose of committing an offence."

So an air soft gun can certainly qualify as an imitation of a weapon, especially to the uneducated eye.

However, you may have noted that either the journalist because he wanted to edit his piece, or the cops because they wanted to make a point outside the purview of the law as drafted, left out the word "purpose" from the accusation. This actually requires evidence of an intent to use the imitation weapon for a dangerous purpose to public peace. That intent will be hard to prove, as merely showing up somewhere with a weapon for a legal purpose yet causing concern in some citizens is not sufficient evidence of intent.

In short, the mere effect caused in some citizens is not proof of intent in and of itself.

I suspect that the charges will be dropped quietly once a defence attorney gets involved.

Any competent defense lawyer should be able to shred this one, but not before costing these two a pretty hefty sum.

 

[Haggis]

Any competent defense lawyer should be able to shred this one, but not before costing these two a pretty hefty sum.

Which is punishment enough and will encourage other Airsofters to be more discreet.  Mission accomplished.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Any competent defense lawyer should be able to shred this one, but not before costing these two a pretty hefty sum.

Thousands each for a retainer alone.

Before the pandemic hit we were complaining about an over burdened justice system.
During the pandemic we started releasing prisoners due to Covid fears
[ Judges release growing number accused of violent crimes due to COVID-19 fears
https://globalnews.ca/news/6788223/coronavirus-prisons-inmates-released/ ]
So we charge a couple of tone deaf guys with weapon charges.


Interesting comment in the above story

One is the accused getaway driver for a recent Toronto murder attempt. Another allegedly pistol-whipped and Tasered two in Ottawa over a drug debt. A third was allegedly involved in a Toronto strip mall shooting.

Great people to let out of jail.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Any competent defense lawyer should be able to shred this one, but not before costing these two a pretty hefty sum.

This is a specific internet offence. High bar.
Theoretically they can’t be found guilty to a crime that doesn’t fit the facts. So there’s that ...

 

[Eaglelord17]

Any competent defense lawyer should be able to shred this one, but not before costing these two a pretty hefty sum.

They should sue the cops who charged them. It is malicious prosecution, and harassment to law abiding citizens who have committed no illegal act. Not the best choice at the moment, however they did not commit a crime. Hell you can walk into that store and buy one yourself if you want to with no restrictions whatsoever. Once the cops knew it was a airsoft gun and they had not done anything wrong they should have been let go. The cops also knew this didn't qualify for the charges as to quote the article "Investigators don’t believe there was ever a threat to public safety".

These cops let their egos get before their jobs and it is disgraceful.