The jury is to be comprised of our ‘peers’, yes, but they are also expected to return a legally defensible verdict. The instruction to the jury of how to apply the law is absolutely essentially for the system to function properly. They aren’t legal experts and proper jury instruction by the judge don’t turn them into that, but it does equip them to properly and knowledgeably apply the law pertaining to the case- to make sure that the law is applied the way Parliament intended. This is what both the Ontario Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court or Canada sided with.
The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
- Thread starter Jarnhamar
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 30,608
- Points
- 1,260
Neither the OCOA or the SCC appear to have looked at the intent of both the amendments to the law, and the purpose to appeals.
-- one is only supposed to overturn a lower court IF a rule of law was violated that would cause a miscarriage of justice.
- the problem is both of those Courts are looking at Paragraph 34(2)(c) in a vacuum - and not what the entire purpose of it was.
Which was part of the streamlining process for the removal of the unlawful assault portion.
What they are doing in this case is effectively undoing the law by choosing to reimagine the reasonings behind the changes.
34(2)(c) the person's role in the incident;
This factor in part serves to bring into play considerations surrounding the accused's own role in instigating or escalating the incident. Under the old law, the distinction between section 34 and 35 was based on the defender's role in commencing the incident, creating higher thresholds for accessing the defence where the accused was the provoker of the incident, as opposed to an innocent victim. As the new law contains only one defence that does not distinguish between conflicts commenced by the accused and those commenced by the victim, this paragraph signals that, where the facts suggest the accused played a role in bringing the conflict about, that fact should be taken into account in deliberations about whether his or her ultimate response was reasonable in the circumstances.The problem is that the OCOA and SCC are using that to change the narrative.
Investigating on ones property isn't instigating - and neither is bringing a firearm on ones own property.
There is a big difference in this case - and the Courts are not following any of the guidance in them.
- Reaction score
- 30,608
- Points
- 1,260
More food for thought before I grab lunch.
Self Defense is an Affirmative Defense - meaning you use it at trial not before.
In this way it is similar to HR 218 down here - the LEOSA (Law Enforcement Safety Officers Act). Which allows non Federal LE to carry country wide - as well as retired members. I carried all over the US, and generally it wasn't an issue - it could have been, as in theory I could have been arrested for carrying a gun in a state I did not have a carry permit for - I would then have needed to claim that at Trail as my defense.
Most LEO - or at least the District Attorney's would kick those out well before trial - because upon seeing the facts, they where not going to get a conviction.
The same happens for Self Defense - clearly the Crown believed there was a case, or it would have been dropped upon review by the Crown Prosecutors Office - they attempted to make one, and Khill was acquitted.
The OCOA missed the entire point of the 2012 changes to the Self Defence Law in Canada.
Self Defense is an Affirmative Defense - meaning you use it at trial not before.
In this way it is similar to HR 218 down here - the LEOSA (Law Enforcement Safety Officers Act). Which allows non Federal LE to carry country wide - as well as retired members. I carried all over the US, and generally it wasn't an issue - it could have been, as in theory I could have been arrested for carrying a gun in a state I did not have a carry permit for - I would then have needed to claim that at Trail as my defense.
Most LEO - or at least the District Attorney's would kick those out well before trial - because upon seeing the facts, they where not going to get a conviction.
The same happens for Self Defense - clearly the Crown believed there was a case, or it would have been dropped upon review by the Crown Prosecutors Office - they attempted to make one, and Khill was acquitted.
The OCOA missed the entire point of the 2012 changes to the Self Defence Law in Canada.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 19,814
- Points
- 1,260
Affidavits and guns, as firearm ban still stuck in court
A flood of affidavits from gun experts and sport shooters has risen to the forefront in the Federal Court battle over the Liberal gun ban, after the presiding judge in a 16-month legal battle laid out deadlines to a possible finish line next spring.
More at link:
Affidavits and guns, as firearm ban still stuck in court
A flood of affidavits from gun experts and sport shooters has risen to the forefront in the Federal Court battle […]
ipolitics.ca
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 19,814
- Points
- 1,260
Clearly, we need to start building AR-style rifles with wooden stocks. Less "scary" looking....
- Reaction score
- 30,608
- Points
- 1,260
That is asinine - but it clearly shows the Liberals are coming for all guns in Canada.
- Reaction score
- 18,448
- Points
- 1,160
The only reason they didn't ban them all at once, is they want to milk the vote cow for as long as possible.
- Reaction score
- 30,608
- Points
- 1,260
Boiling Frog - turn the heat up gradually so it cooks in ignorance - as opposed to it jumping out of the boiling pot if dropped right in.
- Reaction score
- 18,448
- Points
- 1,160
nah for the most part this frog knows it's being cooked, even the Fudds are getting it for a change.
- Reaction score
- 4,068
- Points
- 1,040
If they ban all at once they lose their wedge issue.
Politicians tend to be fairly simple, they act towards whatever issues they think will get them elected, and don't get rid or solve those issues because how would they get elected again.
Firearms weren't a Liberal agenda for two decades until recently with polls indicating firearms owners basically won't vote Liberal, therefore they have no reason to appease them.
The smartest thing firearms owners could do at the moment is all join the Liberal party and vote to change their party policy on firearms. If you convinced even 1/5 of firearms owners to do it, every political party in Canada would have a pro-firearms stance. But unfortunately I think that is just a pipe dream. That is how you bring about effective change for us, but it has to be a collective acting on it. Otherwise it basically looks like it will be a slow decay until someone finally bans them all.
Politicians tend to be fairly simple, they act towards whatever issues they think will get them elected, and don't get rid or solve those issues because how would they get elected again.
Firearms weren't a Liberal agenda for two decades until recently with polls indicating firearms owners basically won't vote Liberal, therefore they have no reason to appease them.
The smartest thing firearms owners could do at the moment is all join the Liberal party and vote to change their party policy on firearms. If you convinced even 1/5 of firearms owners to do it, every political party in Canada would have a pro-firearms stance. But unfortunately I think that is just a pipe dream. That is how you bring about effective change for us, but it has to be a collective acting on it. Otherwise it basically looks like it will be a slow decay until someone finally bans them all.
- Reaction score
- 18,448
- Points
- 1,160
While the idea might work, the problem is the Liberal Party machine is adept to nullifying anything it does not like from the unwashed masses, so regardless of what the result of the vote, they will sideline it if they don't like the result.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 22,651
- Points
- 1,260
As others have more eloquently said, this "Liberal" Party is not the Liberal Party of the past. Its aggressive and elitist. And I don't think for one minute our current PM has the brains to put this all together.
But as a past PM said IIRC "the Liberal party is just a means to an end".
But as a past PM said IIRC "the Liberal party is just a means to an end".
- Reaction score
- 12,914
- Points
- 1,160
Gotta love this guy. He puts a round into someone killing them due to him pointing a gun at someone and pulling the trigger for some reason, after series of failures leading up to that point, in an environment allegedly full of safety concerns and violations. His answer is to have police on set to monitor safety.
Alec Baldwin calls for police to be on sets with guns
- Reaction score
- 9,051
- Points
- 1,160
He keeps trying to get out ahead of it before the lawsuits start. His lawyer has told him a number of times to STFU, but being the typical liberal socialist, he just doesn't get it.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 22,651
- Points
- 1,260
No one said actors are smart.
Haggis
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,400
- Points
- 1,140
Sigh....
This podcast from Slamfire Radio features a Canadian movie armourer describing, in excruciating detail, the steps that he follows and what Baldwin's crew should've followed.
In short, after listening to this, any sane person would say the police on Baldwin's set should be arresting a few folks for criminal negligence causing death.
Haggis
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,400
- Points
- 1,140
It's been fascinating to watch the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security (SECU) hearings on illegal guns, gun smuggling and gang violence. The statements today (Feb 08) of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, Toronto and Edmonton Police Services all completely undermine and destroy the Liberal's assertions that domestic guns are the major threat to Canadian safety.
Media and government figures from 2018 showed that only about half of all crime guns are successfully traced. The Deputy Chief of the TPS stated that of those that are successfully traced, 86% were sourced from the US.
Media and government figures from 2018 showed that only about half of all crime guns are successfully traced. The Deputy Chief of the TPS stated that of those that are successfully traced, 86% were sourced from the US.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 19,814
- Points
- 1,260
None of this matters to the shivering quivering liberals. Guns are bad*.
*Unless they are used to quell dissenting thoughts, movements, individuals or groups that's do not align with the Liberal Party of Canada.
- Reaction score
- 18,448
- Points
- 1,160
is there a link to it, can't find anything on their website?
Similar threads
