Tragedy in Vaughan

[bellerivercrossbowhunter]

He had a restraining order against him. That should have been an automatic revocation of his right to own and possess a firearm. If that didn't happen, then that is part of the problem.

[gbk]

How can you possibly condone the murder of anyone ??

Sorry all-i was not to offend anyone, especially not the poor innocents-i meant CONDEMN....my bad.
ESL(no ,actually ETL....English as Third Language )

Good catch Canthitathing-thank you for it.

[gbk]

I think he meant, "condemn."

Yes,thank You KC

[Gilroy]

They interviewed a neighbour and he said he was aware he had a PAL but not aware he had a gun

What I heard on the news from a couple of neighbours is that they knew he had a "gun permit" what exactly that meant to them is unknown.

I suspect what you are saying a PAL is what they are implying.

But that to me brings up the big question why did the Police not dig into this a little more when they spoke with him on several occasions.

If the police had a quick look at his Facebook page alarm bells should have gone off right away?

[Gilroy]

He had a restraining order against him. That should have been an automatic revocation of his right to own and possess a firearm. If that didn't happen, then that is part of the problem.

I think this restraining order was part of a civil court hearing procedure and nothing of a criminal case where it would have been a Peace Bond (sureties to keep the peace).

This guy fell through the cracks but should have been flagged by his 264 Facebook friends as a man who needed help.

Instead of getting help he hired a law firm and in the conversation with his female lawyer she actually seems to encourage his irrational thinking and the fact he was a victim which strengthened his resolve to sort the matter out himself.

His gun and license assuming he had both could not have been taken from him as nobody had alleged he was a danger to himself or others, if they had alleged that they seem to to have reported it to the police.

[Badenoch]

The interview had the neighbour saying the gunman claimed to have had an "FAC." It is entirely possible the neighbour was lying or the "FAC" had lapsed. It is also possible the killer acquired a legal handgun many years ago but did not re-register it as was required in 2000 which would mean he wasn't a legal owner.

For those of us old enough to recall the green registration slips, the old system was a complete disaster. Even though I had the right paper work the RCMP had no record of any of mine. It is quite possible Villa had a once-registered handgun and the police had no idea.

[fishfood]

The gun deaths have only gone up since the liberals took charge. Years prior it would fluctuate up and down a bit, but a steady rise from 2015 .

Sent from my SM-G975W using Tapatalk

[delmer]

Two questions. Was the pistol legally registered, or was it obtained illegally? Did the shooter have a valid firearms license for a restricted gun, and if so, why was it not revoked given all the red flags leading up to this tragedy?

[ninepointer]

It would not surprise me if the killer had a PAL or used to hold an FAC. In one of the video rants he posted there is a buck mount on the wall of his condo.

I suspect that he did not have an RPAL. Because if he did, I'm sure it would have already been all over the news (mass shooting by a licensed handgun owner).

[bdog]

I feel for the families that lost lives, its obvious our gun control in this country does not work, if he obtained that gun legally, all firearms rights should have been taken away first time it was proven he was threating people, he was known to police for doing so, secondly, we should be able to shoot back!