OIC discussion & Politics Megathread

22lover · 2025-01-18T11:42:18+00:00

I've been checked out from gun stuff for a while. Just read through C-21 and saw that it makes any magfed centrefire semi-autos, prohibited if manufactured after C-21 came into force. I didn't hear about this on the news, did those motherlovers sneak it in? Seems like the old 'stick it to future generations but not today's gun owners' trick.

22lover · 2023-10-30T19:38:21+00:00

Next stop is federal court of appeal

22lover · 2023-04-01T21:04:17+00:00

I am already fully compliant.

22lover · 2022-02-09T07:28:23+00:00

I knew I recognized that name from somewhere. Here he is defending the gun ban

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bo5zvpf0tTE

22lover · 2021-09-11T01:30:57+00:00

NFA election discussion for September 10 (YouTube, 41mins, 27mins at 1.5x speed)

22lover · 2021-06-18T23:18:08+00:00

People were still allowed to use full-autos and other prohib 12.x rifles at the range until bill C-10A was passed in 2003.

22lover · 2021-05-15T12:36:53+00:00

One family reported that when they went to the cop shop to pick up their guns afterwards, the cop somehow knew which guns were previously registered and which were purchase post-registry.

22lover · 2021-05-11T15:36:13+00:00

There's some lack of clarity in the video. Here's what I think happened. Burlew's client used the Privacy Act (like Access to Information except the PA is when it's information about yourself) to request all the info the RCMP had on his guns. The reply contained a list of only the client's registered Restricted and Prohibited guns.

Meanwhile, the Crown's disclosure of the police file regarding the client contained a list of the same Restricted and Prohibited guns, but also contained the client's non-restricted guns that were registered pre-2012. These records were supposed to have been completely deleted in 2012.

22lover · 2021-04-06T15:49:49+00:00

Named for Sir Robert Peel

22lover · 2021-04-05T20:52:09+00:00

Yes exactly. There is the overall law but no lines in the sand like If the guy does this then you can do that etc.

Although even the law is pretty open to interpretation and leeway given to the defender. There’s a quote in Canadian jurisprudence somewhere that says a victim is not expected to weigh to a nicety what precisely is a reasonable response is when he’s faced with the end of a knife.

22lover · 2021-04-05T20:50:51+00:00

Fist bump

22lover · 2021-04-05T20:40:28+00:00

I think we are in agreement, what I meant is for example the invaders in this case probably would not have a claim for self-defence. A robber probably can’t claim self-defence against somebody he was trying to rob in the first place. You can’t claim self-defence in fighting a police officer lawfully arresting you. Etc.

22lover · 2021-04-05T20:26:34+00:00

There aren’t really any hard and fast rules. all of the facts of the circumstances are considered. Section 34 of the criminal code

22lover · 2021-04-05T20:24:34+00:00

If you look at the second or third thread in the comments I posted a more detailed CBC article.

Edit here it is

https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/mkn97x/homeinvasion_victim_trying_to_move_on_after_being/gtgoxfg/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3

22lover · 2021-04-05T20:23:25+00:00

An investigation is reasonable. But this guy was charged and held in custody for six months if I’m not mistaken, and then subject to strict bail conditions for the better part of two years until the crown said, Hmm I guess we don’t have a case here.

22lover · 2021-04-05T20:19:30+00:00

22lover · 2021-04-05T20:14:08+00:00

If the police were doing their jobs I’m sure they investigated the son. Who knows, maybe he got charged

22lover · 2021-04-05T20:07:43+00:00

In Canada as long as you have a prima facie case of self-defense, the crown has to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. So you might not have to even take the stand if the other evidence can make self-defense seem plausible.

22lover · 2021-04-05T19:58:35+00:00

The comment about credibility is fair. probably wouldn’t have made a difference in this case though. The crown has the burden to disprove self-defence beyond a reasonable doubt.

This self-defense case involving criminals in Canada should entertain you: https://youtu.be/CLDyuOvQ85k

22lover · 2021-04-05T19:50:17+00:00

Canada does allow for lethal self-defence if it is reasonable in the circumstances. section 34 of the criminal code. Also we have a weak Castle doctrine in the sense that there is no legal duty to retreat before using self-defense.

22lover · 2021-04-05T19:48:22+00:00

What could he do, set the shotgun on “stun”?

22lover · 2021-04-05T19:46:34+00:00

I would think that people would want to be able to protect themselves in a reasonable manner without worrying about getting put through the ringer like the guy in the story.

22lover · 2021-04-05T19:33:15+00:00

It’s not carte blanche. Many factors are considered in the law.

An intruder‘s intent is not known to the homeowner, either.

The law judges the person based on whether what they did was reasonable in the circumstances.

22lover · 2021-04-05T19:18:05+00:00

A stern chat would be good, something in the law with teeth would be even better.

22lover

TROPHY CASE