Topic: The Great Gun Control Debate

[Foxhound]

Two articles on the same story from the National Post.

‘No choice’: Homeowner had to arm himself after firebomb attack, gun trial hears

WELLAND • Ian Thomson was jolted awake at 6:37 a.m. by the sound of explosions; outside his secluded farmhouse, three masked men were hurling fire bombs at his house while one bellowed: “Are you ready to die?”
 
Mr. Thomson was not.
 
A former firearms instructor, he instead called out a warning, took one of his several pistols, marched outside in his underwear and fired one shot into the ground and two into the trees in the direction of the men, who scurried away.

And...

Ian Thomson case shows how the Crown feels about self-defence

On Monday, Port Colborne, Ont. resident Ian Thomson went on trial on two charges of unsafe storage of a firearm, relating to a well-publicized self-defence incident. In 2010, in the early morning hours of Aug. 22, Mr. Thomson was at home when three masked men, shouting death threats, attacked his house with firebombs, hurling them at the house and through his windows, injuring one of Mr. Thomson’s pet dogs. Mr. Thomson, a trained firearms instructor, armed himself with a properly registered .38-calibre firearm and fired three warning shots, driving off the attackers without causing injury to any.

More at links.

[Kat Stevens]

He should also be charged with improper control of a firearm... Three rounds, no hits?  Shameful.

[GAP]

Watch the video clip.............and we're not supposed to protect ourselves? really............

Court adjourns homeowner’s self-defence trial to clarify confusing gun control law
Adrian Humphreys  Jan 31, 2012
Article Link
 
WELLAND, Ont. — Canada’s laws on the storage and handling of guns and ammunition are so complicated that a veteran judge needed to adjourn court to allow two experienced lawyers more time for legal arguments and a search of case law to help parse and dissect them.

It was a dud of an ending after two scheduled days of trial in the case of Ian Thomson, a 54-year-old Port Colborne man who fired three shots from a legally owned gun to scare off three masked men who were firebombing his secluded farmhouse while one threatened: “Are you ready to die?”

The most serious charges against Mr. Thomson — dangerous use of a firearm and pointing a firearm — were dropped by prosecutors before trial. He pleaded not guilty to two charges of careless storage of a firearm.

The shocking nature of the attack on Mr. Thomson’s home, which was caught on video by surveillance cameras, and the fact that Mr. Thomson is a former firearms instructor, sparked a national debate over the right of Canadians to defend themselves and the government’s attitude toward gun ownership.

Tuesday, scheduled to be the last day of the trial, started with assistant Crown attorney Robert Mahler attacking Mr. Thomson’s credibility.

He said Mr. Thomson concocted an improbable sequence of events to explain away the likelihood that he had kept loaded handguns ready in his bedside table because he was involved in a neighbour dispute that was boiling over, and not, as he maintains, locked away in a safe.

“This story you’ve given, this sequence you’ve given simply couldn’t be done,” said Mr. Mahler.

“That’s what happened,” replied Mr. Thomson.

“If those guns were in my bedside table,” Mr. Thomson said, he would not have needed to run out the front door to shoot, once the firebombs started landing on his house. “I would have used that gun right there, through the bedroom window. I wouldn’t have hesitated… when I noticed a masked assassin outside my house.”

Mr. Mahler said Mr. Thomson was “less than forthcoming” and “secretive” when police arrived, trying to hide the fact he had frightened off his attackers by firing a gun.

Mr. Mahler suggested Mr. Thomson even picked up the spent shell casings from his porch after he fired his gun and took them inside to hide them in his bedside table.

Seeming confused, Mr. Thomson said he didn’t understand.

“Didn’t they fall to the ground?” Mr. Mahler asked, apparently thinking shell casings from a .38-calibre revolver were ejected from the gun with each shot, similar to casings that spit out of a semi-automatic handgun, as is typically seen on TV.

“No,” said Mr. Thomson as the crowd of gun advocates watching from the public gallery chuckled and guffawed at Mr. Mahler’s mistake.

Spent shells from a .38 remain in the gun’s cylinder until it is opened and they are removed. Mr. Thomson took the casings out at the same time he opened the gun to reload it, which was at the bedside table, where the casings were when police arrived, he said.
More on link

[Hatchet Man]

All I can say is wow. What an epic failure on the part of the legal system.  But not surprising.  Go post this article on the Blueline.ca forum and voice your opinion in support of this guy, and watch how quickly you get flamed by the members who say they are cops. 

[Loachman]

This

“Didn’t they fall to the ground?” Mr. Mahler asked, apparently thinking shell casings from a .38-calibre revolver were ejected from the gun with each shot, similar to casings that spit out of a semi-automatic handgun, as is typically seen on TV.

“No,” said Mr. Thomson as the crowd of gun advocates watching from the public gallery chuckled and guffawed at Mr. Mahler’s mistake.

is pure gold, and should rate an immediate acquittal, followed by an apology from the Crown Numpty.

[ObedientiaZelum]

This is why I now have a "live" Katana beside my bed for home defense and not a firearm.

Our firearm laws are very idiotic.

I used to support registering all firearms, whats the big deal I thought?
Now I see the government decide that X gun "looks" bad so they hop on the registry system to see who owns said offending guns then send them letters ordering them to turn them in or dispose of them or whatever?  Thats total crap.

[Loachman]

That is the only function that firearms registries perform.

[Colin P]

Thomson needs your help. Contibutions to his legal defense fund can be made via "Ed Burlew In Trust" at his office in Thornhill. 16 John St, Thornhill, ON, L3T1X8.
You can make a contribution on credit card by calling the office at (905) 882-2422

[ObedientiaZelum]

I'm becoming really disappointed with our police services.

My father taught firearms safety and hunting courses for a long time.  He was a corrections officer his whole life, no charges and never in trouble with the police. Very law and order type guy (philosophy, not the show..). He's a pretty good guy.

Recently a family friend had his firearms removed. After going to court and a bunch of crap my father was given the responsibility of taking his friends confiscated firearms and selling them (to someone totally unaffiliated with the friend) and giving the friend the money.

The amount of crap my fathers had to go through to get these firearms back is staggering. And it wasn't like he was trying to get it on a whim, he had a court ordered document saying he was to take the guns back off the police.

The police have been nothing but dick heads blowing off appointments to meet him not returning his phone calls canceling last minute meetings and giving him the run around making him play phone tag.
The police seemed to have did everything in their power to jerk him around and it was pretty obvious that their intention was for him to say screw it and just leave the guns with the police.
The guns weren't being returned to the friend, they were being sold so it's not a case of the police just trying to protect the community or some line like that.

Interestingly enough when my father finally got a hold of someone to help (we're talking 6+ months later) she confirmed that the firearms, which the court ordered to be returned) were scheduled for destruction.

oops

If my father wouldn't have been persistent then thousands of dollars worth of firearms would have been destroyed- I'm pretty confident the police wouldn't have cowboyed up and paid for their mistake either.  A bunch of 2 hour trips and over half a year of phone tag later the firearms were finally returned. Without the crossbows. Because they needed a different letter for those, which took more time and another 2 hour trip.  Plus the gun safe which the police decided to take and destroy the locks on it to get the firearms even though the friend gave them the key apparently.

Having a few buddies as police officers (and having been done a solid favor by some local cops once too) I'm very pro-law enforcement but all these things that keep popping up make me really wonder why the police (not all obviously)  seem to have such a hard on for being anti-firearms.

It's been mentioned a few times here that we're innocent until proven guilty- I hate saying it but that's something that needs to be reinforced during police college.

[fraserdw]

Interesting story, what province, RCMP or Other Police?  It seems that Ontario, Quebec and RCM Police forces have made Gun Control a personal crusade.  Even the local line RCMP cops talk to you here, one on one, outside work, talk about gun owners like gun owners were demons.  Yet they seem to have nothing but sympathy for wayward drug pushers and the poor B&Eers around here.  I find it incredible how 15 years of Socialist proproganda in this country has made into many police into tools of political action rather than criminial protection.  When I was out West the county mounties were very much on the side of the gun owner but the Federal mounties seem to have made it religious crusade.

[ballz]

Today during questions period, on the topic of being allowed to fire WARNING shots to protect your person/property.

Bob Rae:
"Does he (Minister of Justice Rob Nicholson) not understand the danger of promoting vigilante justice in our society?"

Rob Nicholson, Minister of Justice:
"If somebody is coming onto your property setting fire to your car, breaking into your house, or attacking your family, Mr. Speaker, those are the bad guys, Mr. Speaker, why can't the Liberal party ever figure that out? How come they can't figure out who the real victims are and stand up for them for a change?"

Is the pendulum finally starting to swing the other way?

PS. "Vigilante justice" Seriously?

[Brad Sallows]

Perhaps too many police officers are being recruited after too many years of post-secondary drifting instead of straight out of high school.

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Perhaps too many police officers are being recruited after too many years of post-secondary drifting instead of straight out of high school.

Perhaps too many people aren't smart enough to know that police officers don't make any rules?

[Brad Sallows]

If there was a time when police had no difficulty making the traditional distinction between the three classes of people - other police, citizens, and azzholes - and also had no difficulty relegating azzholes to the lowest tier and assuming citizens were entitled to as much liberty in their affairs as possible, and that time has passed, then I surmise too much of what passes for life experience and values development before candidates enter the respective academies has had an adverse influence.  I refer to fraswerdw's post; that is my point.  The fact that rules dictate what must precede academy is almost beside the point.  For those who think it is a direct reflection on police officers, it is not - it is a reflection on how we develop them.

A person who thinks he directly or indirectly (through government) needs to know details about his basically law-abiding neighbours' firearms is deficient in values.  A person who thinks he needs to deny firearms is very deficient in values.  Public safety arguments are excuses, not reasons.  The public has generally been very safe from basically law-abiding firearms owners for centuries.

I trust the basic character of a firearms owner more than I trust the basic character of someone who adamantly wishes to take firearms away or who deprecates people who possess and enjoy firearms.  I do not respect people whose belief systems encourage them to control others.

[Jed]

I trust the basic character of a firearms owner more than I trust the basic character of someone who adamantly wishes to take firearms away or who deprecates people who possess and enjoy firearms.  I do not respect people whose belief systems encourage them to control others.

Well said. I support our LEOs more than most, but I don't appreciate the current trend of newly minted LEOs who miss this critical point.

[Loachman]

I have/have had many friends who were or are police officers. I have flown as a pilot on two police helicopter trials. I have participated in many joint military/police ops and training activities. I used to shoot a lot on a police range, and police often shoot on ours. I, too, am a police supporter.

I do not trust "The Police" one bit, however, thanks to this legislation, the actions of the vast majority of police chiefs and police associations in supporting it, and the actions of many police officers who have wantonly abused many honest citizens who own firearms - and kids with capguns and water pistols.

Any contact with a previously-unknown or not-very-well-known police officer, even in professional and social settings, proceeds from a position of regrettable caution and mistrust.

I wish that that was not so. It should not be.

[ballz]

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/13/judge-rejects-outrageous-unconstitutional-mandatory-gun-sentence/

Kind of a big deal... Kudos to the judge.

[ballz]

Gun registry bill up for final vote by MPs

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/02/15/pol-gun-registry.html?cmp=rss

The bill to end the long-gun registry will be voted on by MPs for the final time Wednesday, and with the Conservative majority in the House of Commons, Bill C-19 will then be sent to the Senate for a final seal of approval.

The controversial bill will be debated for the last time later in the afternoon after question period, and then MPs will vote on whether to scrap the registry at 5:45 p.m. ET.

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews is holding a morning news conference in Ottawa to mark the occasion. He will be joined by Conservative MPs Maxime Bernier and Candice Hoeppner, who tried in previous Parliaments to abolish the registry with a private member's bill.

They will be asking MPs to support the bill at Wednesday evening's vote. The same trio of MPs held a news conference in October at a farm near Ottawa after C-19 was introduced.

Opposition MPs and critics were surprised to learn when the bill was introduced that it not only puts an end to the requirement to register non-restricted and non-prohibited firearms, but it provides for the destruction of the records currently held in the database.

The government argues that the registry is a waste of money and ineffective at improving public safety, while proponents say it is a valuable tool for police and should be maintained.

Okay, someone clarify the bold before I get too excited? Do you think it's a firearms-illiterate writer trying to say that the restricted class of firearms will no longer need to be registered as well? Or am I dreaming?

[cypres78]

Gun registry bill up for final vote by MPs

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/02/15/pol-gun-registry.html?cmp=rss

Okay, someone clarify the bold before I get too excited? Do you think it's a firearms-illiterate writer trying to say that the restricted class of firearms will no longer need to be registered as well? Or am I dreaming?

Think you dreaming judging by CBCs historical stellar accuracy record.

[Jimmy_D]

Its ok I am dreaming with you. Some dreams do come true, but one can only hope.

[ballz]

Yes, dreaming.

http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/259440/c-19-act-to-amend-criminal-code-and-firearms-act.pdf

First funkin sentence of the report

"Summary

This enactment amends the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act to remove the requirement to register firearms that are neither prohibited nor restricted..."

Pretty clear and concise, how is that even possible to screw up?

[cypres78]

Pretty clear and concise, how is that even possible to screw up?

CBC can and will always find away.

[Jimmy_D]

Tory bill to kill gun registry passes House of Commons vote



OTTAWA — The Harper government’s controversial bill to end the long-gun registry has passed the House of Commons, marking the end of a long political battle over one of the most controversial law enforcement measures in recent memory.

The bill passed easily, by a margin of 159 to 130, as the Conservatives used their majority in the House secure passage of the bill, which now goes to the Senate where the Conservatives also have a majority. The Senate hearings are expected to take several weeks before the bill is passed into law.


More at Link:
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/15/long-gun-registry-abolished/

[Technoviking]

The word "contraversial" wasn't used enough in that...

[Larry Strong]

And 2 NDP members sided with the Conservatives.....I would love to be a fly on the wall when they are taken to task..........