Exactly! I noted the same thing. The frustrating part is with almost every case where there's a mass shooting,people KNEW the shooter was severely troubled and/or mentally unbalanced,yet,they said nothing despite the fact we have laws on the books that law enforcement may use to remove firearms from the equation. What is the sense of having all these laws if nobody,especially,law enforcement who has access to ample data doesn't use them?Originally Posted by Gilroy
If a tree falls on your ex in the woods and nobody hears it,you should probably still get rid of your chainsaw. Just sayin'....
Just wanted to add that there has been cases where good citizens have reported “troubled” people but the police really can’t do anything until a law has been broken. Additionally, getting treatment for mental health issues can be very difficult. The worst part is that people with mental health issues don’t realize, or accept that they are ill. Many think that everyone else is nuts.
Last edited by Sam Menard; December 20th, 2022 at 03:57 PM.
A true sportsman counts his achievements in proportion to the effort involved and the fairness of the sport. - S. Pope
The minute police learn that a PAL/RPAL holder or an immediate family member has become ill with mental illness,there's provisions in The Firearms Act that give them the authority to remove firearms from the owner. It can be done the easy way by convincing the owner to move the firearms off the premises (in the case of an ill family member) or the hard way by immediately seizing them and dealing with the "i" dotting and "t" crossing later.
If a tree falls on your ex in the woods and nobody hears it,you should probably still get rid of your chainsaw. Just sayin'....
I would think (hope) that the police need solid information before they seize firearms. It’s a double-edge sword… they need tools to protect the population, however Section 8 of the Charter protects us from unreasonable search and seizure.
A true sportsman counts his achievements in proportion to the effort involved and the fairness of the sport. - S. Pope
Yeh you right and I noted the same concern right away, but by the second MSM report CBC they said it was a semi auto handgun and CTO reporter openly asked the Chief of Police if the owner was licensed and gun registered and he said he did not know. To date they have not confirmed if he was licensed.
There is something fishy about this as its a ten second check on CPIC to confirm both or not.
It's such a shame.
Only some hunting guns should be available to the public. What happens to the sport shooters who do not hunt guess they don't get a vote lol.
Sent from my SM-G975W using Tapatalk
The more important law and section is below and did this shooter fit into any of the section,s BUT even if he did an occurrence or incident report would need to have been generated to get the CPFO involved via a registry flag.
5 (1) A person is not eligible to hold a licence if it is desirable, in the interests of the safety of that or any other person, that the person not possess a firearm, a cross-bow, a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device, ammunition or prohibited ammunition.
Marginal note:Criteria
(2) In determining whether a person is eligible to hold a licence under subsection (1), a chief firearms officer or, on a reference under section 74, a provincial court judge shall have regard to whether the person
(a) has been convicted or discharged under section 730 of the Criminal Code of
(i) an offence in the commission of which violence against another person was used, threatened or attempted,
(ii) an offence under this Act or Part III of the Criminal Code,
(iii) an offence under section 264 of the Criminal Code (criminal harassment),
(iv) an offence relating to the contravention of subsection 5(1) or (2), 6(1) or (2) or 7(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, or
(v) an offence relating to the contravention of subsection 9(1) or (2), 10(1) or (2), 11(1) or (2), 12(1), (4), (5), (6) or (7), 13(1) or 14(1) of the Cannabis Act;
(b) has been treated for a mental illness, whether in a hospital, mental institute, psychiatric clinic or otherwise and whether or not the person was confined to such a hospital, institute or clinic, that was associated with violence or threatened or attempted violence on the part of the person against any person;
(c) has a history of behaviour that includes violence or threatened or attempted violence or threatening conduct on the part of the person against any person;
(d) is or was previously prohibited by an order — made in the interests of the safety and security of any person — from communicating with an identified person or from being at a specified place or within a specified distance of that place, and presently poses a threat or risk to the safety and security of any person;
(e) in respect of an offence in the commission of which violence was used, threatened or attempted against the person’s intimate partner or former intimate partner, was previously prohibited by a prohibition order from possessing any firearm, cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device or prohibited ammunition; or
(f) for any other reason, poses a risk of harm to any person.
The Police can only seize immediately if there are exigent circumstances 117.2 Criminal Code.
I'm sorry I took this thread off the rails. I know better.
A new thread on the condo incident should be starting up soon, or perhaps one of you could start up a new thread on the condo situation.
Let's get back to the original post here concerning the new federal gun laws please.
Last edited by Sharon; December 20th, 2022 at 07:07 PM. Reason: clarification
" We are more than our gender, skin color, class, sexuality or age; we are unlimited potential, and can not be defined by one label." quote A. Bartlett
That was the case in NS, that person was reported numerous times to the RCMP and so was his RCMP car and that he had a uniform.
"This is about unenforceable registration of weapons that violates the rights of people to own firearms."—Premier Ralph Klein (Alberta)Calgary Herald, 1998 October 9 (November 1, 1942 – March 29, 2013) OFAH Member
Twenty dollar bet (Charity of losers choice) that the gun was not registered or they will never tell us (limit 2 months) as Gilroy said it would take a few minutes to check.
Who wants to bet against me.
"This is about unenforceable registration of weapons that violates the rights of people to own firearms."—Premier Ralph Klein (Alberta)Calgary Herald, 1998 October 9 (November 1, 1942 – March 29, 2013) OFAH Member
Reply With Quote
