Gerald Stanley; charges he improperly stored 7 guns

[Gilroy]

The section "Makes no distinction between Non-restricted, Restricted....."

Maybe you need to read what you post.

Read the complete section you posted.

Merely pointing out that Fox was on the right track your going to get in bother if your firing off a restricted weapon other than a range and not in your back 40.

[Snowwalker]

Merely pointing out that Fox was on the right track your going to get in bother if your firing off a restricted weapon other than a range and not in your back 40.

Ok. I'll take that a face value. Point out the rules for ranges, to round out the discussion.

[Gilroy]

Regardless whether it was self defense or an accident, the outcome was morally justified. The punk got what was coming to him? End of story!

Both parties are at fault.
You shall not murder.
You shall not steal.

[Bushmoose]

Both parties are at fault.
You shall not murder.
You shall not steal.

There was no murder? Mr. Stanley was found not guilty, right?

[canadaman30]

Both parties are at fault.
You shall not murder.
You shall not steal.

There might have been a murder if the land owner never had a gun for self defense. It better to read about a dead thief trying to rob someone, rather a dead innocent farmer shot and killed during a robbery. The farmer should be awarded for his bravery, but this is Canada where the victims become the criminals......

[welsh]

Given that there is no evidence whatsoever that anyone intended to murder Stanley, that's a stretch.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

[Gilroy]

There was no murder? Mr. Stanley was found not guilty, right?

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

[Gilroy]

There might have been a murder if the land owner never had a gun for self defense. It better to read about a dead thief trying to rob someone, rather a dead innocent farmer shot and killed during a robbery. The farmer should be awarded for his bravery, but this is Canada where the victims become the criminals......

Rewarded for his bravery, where was the act of bravery displayed?

I personally don,t buy the hang fire theory and think he mean to kill the victim (yes the dead guy).I also don,t believe it was any accident,the shot was to well placed.Mr Stanley did not explain why he felt the need to turn off the car engine,in fact its contrary to what he said was his intended purpose to fire a few shots and chase off the suspects.Two had already run off and the victim was trying to drive off,he should have let him drive off.

[Bushmoose]

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

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.

[dutchhunter]

Rewarded for his bravery, where was the act of bravery displayed?

I personally don,t buy the hang fire theory and think he mean to kill the victim (yes the dead guy).I also don,t believe it was any accident,the shot was to well placed.Mr Stanley did not explain why he felt the need to turn off the car engine,in fact its contrary to what he said was his intended purpose to fire a few shots and chase off the suspects.Two had already run off and the victim was trying to drive off,he should have let him drive off.

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