Gerald Stanley; charges he improperly stored 7 guns

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dutchhunter

He said very plainly he though his wife had been run over by the car and was trapped under it .that's why he panicked and tried to turn off the car

---

"I feared for my wife's life" is all the justification needed to use deadly force. Never mind the "accidental" shooting,he could have popped the driver,outright.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

"I feared for my wife's life" is all the justification needed to use deadly force. Never mind the "accidental" shooting,he could have popped the driver,outright.

---

Except that he did not use this defence.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

So police can do it lawfully
Soldiers (like me), can do it lawfully

But Citizens..do not

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

'Murder is the unlawful killing of another human without justification or valid excuse, especially the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought.'

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. With all the political interference into court matters, I wonder if Mr. Stanley will have the 'book' thrown at him, with maximum sentencing or will he able to plead them out.

This whole affair is a good catalyst to get 'Castle Doctrine' enacted here..





http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskat...guns-1.4538790

---

How do you charge an individual for improper storage of a firearm in a remote or isolate circumstance when any or all of his firearm might be the needed for predator control? When livestock are threaten you don't have the time to fiddle with security locks and search to come up with the right ammunition, as would be the case if you own a number of firearms. Whatever firearm you happen to lay hands on has to be ready to do the job.

You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
-Gun Nut

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

Except that he did not use this defence.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

---

That's a very good question, isn't it? Why the he** not? Instead of a trumped up trial,it would have generated a Coroner's Inquest which would have answered far more questions than create more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

That's a very good question, isn't it? Why the he** not? Instead of a trumped up trial,it would have generated a Coroner's Inquest which would have answered far more questions than create more.

---

Because he would then have to explain how he arrived at that belief given that not one person, Gerald Stanley included, reported seeing Mrs. Stanley anywhere near the truck.

The story that he believed his wife had been hit by the truck was used to argue for lawful excuse for negligence. A moment of unfounded panic.

You can't use a moment of unfounded panic as the basis of a self defence claim.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushmoose

Gilly, are the nurse's letting you play on the computer again? Thank you for the explanation of the word "murder". Gerald Stanley was found not guilty of murder. That means, in my layman's thinking, there was nothing unlawful about what he did? yes? No? There was no "murder", no man slaughter, no crime!

Now go get your bedtime snack before the attendant locks up the fridge for the night.

---

I Like That, Very Good! :) :goodstuff::goodstuff::goodstuff:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushmoose

Gilly, are the nurse's letting you play on the computer again? Thank you for the explanation of the word "murder". Gerald Stanley was found not guilty of murder. That means, in my layman's thinking, there was nothing unlawful about what he did? yes? No? There was no "murder", no man slaughter, no crime!

Now go get your bedtime snack before the attendant locks up the fridge for the night.

---

You better hope I never escape from here LOL.

No buddy in IMHO Mr Stanley did commit murder,his woes are far from over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

You better hope I never escape from here LOL.

No buddy in IMHO Mr Stanley did commit murder,his woes are far from over.

---

A jury says he did not commit murder. As a former police officer, I would think you would honour that decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

You better hope I never escape from here LOL.

No buddy in IMHO Mr Stanley did commit murder,his woes are far from over.

---

Murder has to be culpable. Apparently the jury didn’t find him culpable.