Stand your ground

[mexi cali]

SL, I have a lot to say about your last post and I hope you have the opportunity to read and respond should you choose but I am out of time.

[steven lloyd]

I may be a lot of thngs CA but naive is not one of them and if you re read my statement< I said that gun related crime involving firearms went down. While I respect and appreciate your input, I don't appreciate the unwarranted and misguided criticism.

Something to consider. The vast and majority cases of gun crime, including home invasions, hits and murder in Canada are related to gangs and our counterproductive drug laws. In the States, on the other hand, an impressive number of gun crimes (outnumbering cases of gun crime related to home invasions and hits and murder related to gangs and counterproductive drug laws) are due to the fact some clown with a gun decided the use of his gun was justified and he therefore used it knowing American laws would be quite lax in their expectation that he be able to really justify his shooting.

"I’m sorry Mrs. Martin, but Travon really had no business walking through that neighborhood with his hoodie pulled over his head given the fact he was - well, you know – black. While this was a very unfortunate event these things are bound to happen with our “Stand Your Ground” laws."

I know we need to review and revamp our justice system in Canada. There are many things that frustrate me (I work in the criminal justice system) and while there were some obvious problems with Harper’s “Get Tough On Crime” Agenda, there were admittedly some real good places to start real discussion (despite the fact a good deal was ill-conceived). Unfortunately we really seem to be floundering once again. The last thing we want to do is copy anything the States do.

All over America more and more academics, lawmakers and politicians are starting to clue just how misguided and destructive some of their social and judicial policies are – and we still have politicians up here wanting to repeat the exact same mistakes. Jurisdictions from around the country and the world are looking to BC’s model to protect communities and reduce recidivism and we still have important people too lazy to review what we are doing and instead copy the mistakes of the States.

[Glacier]

It would be interesting to compare crime rates in "concealed-carry" vs "open-carry" vs "no carry" states. Personally, i wish I could take my Tokarev out into the woods for target practice instead of always going to the range. Carry it around in public - no way.

[mexi cali]

Something to consider. The vast and majority cases of gun crime, including home invasions, hits and murder in Canada are related to gangs and our counterproductive drug laws. In the States, on the other hand, an impressive number of gun crimes (outnumbering cases of gun crime related to home invasions and hits and murder related to gangs and counterproductive drug laws) are due to the fact some clown with a gun decided the use of his gun was justified and he therefore used it knowing American laws would be quite lax in their expectation that he be able to really justify his shooting.

First, what are the impressive numbers of gun crimes to which you refer?

Second, It is unfair and presumptuous to assume that these impressive numbers of gun crimes are being committed by clowns. Some, absolutely but most would be a stretch of the imagination at best.

Happy to see you agree to the need for a revamp or restructure of our own justice system because that is the truth. A retooling of the gun laws in my opinion would need to be part of that. The young offenders act too needs to be cleaned up and modified to allow for the fact that young does not necessarily mean innocent or lacking the ability to comprehend seriousness. Double time credit for time served (unless that's already been dealt with. I thought that it was up for a change) needs to be eradicated. Less law enforcement time being spent on stopping grow ops. A realization that the war on drugs is a losing proposition under the current restrictions. Restrictions which all to often see charges being dismissed on technicalities and defense lawyers who defend the indefensible.

If some of this sounds to you like my feeling is that the guilty should have no rights, you would be correct. I am less interested in rehabilitation and recognizing rights of those who in my opinion have given up their rights by choosing to be criminal than I am in the ability and the right to protect my home and family. And the law does not by it's own actions see things that way.

In our haste to make sure that no ones rights are being ignored, the real victims are being steamrolled and neglected and ultimately dismissed by the system.

I get that it is the only system we have and that while it may be better than nothing, that doesn't negate the need to be able to understand that it is broken and that it is worthwhile and beneficial to address even just the glaring errors in an effort to right the course for those who the system was supposedly created to protect in the first place.

Sadly, because it is fallible, the criminals have been drawn into the protective net that was created in an effort to dole out justice which is why scumbags like Jarod Bacon was able to complain that his rights were being violated while in prison because he couldn't get a television or some such BS. I hope I got the right Bacon but regardless, it really wouldn't matter.

I would not lose one nights sleep if I were to mortally wound an intruder who i found out later had a hard childhood or suffered from FAS or any excuse the world seems to be able to create to spin the wheel in favor of the criminal versus the victim. The choice to break the law is just that, a choice.

If I seem harsh, so be it.

[steven lloyd]

I’m not really concerned about your feelings toward the guilty, and I’m not going to make any excuses for them or try to defend them either. There is a difference, however, between making excuses for people’s behaviour and trying to understand their behaviour. The latter helps you to work with them to become accountable for themselves and for making change while the former (like blaming) does nothing to change anything. While protecting communities is always our primary concern, we cannot afford to ignore the larger picture because ultimately adequately protecting communities involves working toward the reduction of recidivism and that involves addressing individual, social and systemic conditions.

I can appreciate your sentiment of not losing a night’s sleep as a consequence of mortally wounding an intruder in your home, but despite a rather simplistic understanding of choice, I would hope you might at least pause to reflect if you later discovered he was unarmed, intellectually delayed and was, in fact, trying to escape a gang of bullies and just went for the first door he could reach in time to escape. Ah yes, the things that can happen when you have a loaded gun in your hand, like to make quick judgements and the adrenaline is pumping.

You are absolutely entitled to your perceptions and opinions, as I am mine (which I’ve based on many years of education, training, research and experience specific to the issue) – and while I have already acknowledged there is much room for improvement, I am relieved that our current laws for now read as they do and that we never give people the excuse to start shooting at each other with bare cause. Our legal system may not be perfect and we may have a lot of work to do to make it work better, but I’ll still support decisions of guilt and innocence being made by Judges in Courtrooms over people with guns who are more than willing to start shooting at people. I can see you are more concerned with justifying that approach so I’ll leave you at that.

[steven lloyd]

Personally, I wish I could take my Tokarev out into the woods for target practice instead of always going to the range.

I had to google that – pretty cool Glacier. I always wanted to keep the F9 assault rifle (old school) I had while serving in the CAF. What the hell I’d do with it today I have no idea (other than wait and be prepared for the apocalypse that would result from us giving everyone the excuse to start shooting each other I suppose).

[occasional thoughts]

I've discharged a firearm exactly once in my whole life, almost 50 years ago, into the air as I recollect, in rural Cloverdale (Surrey) while out walking (in the bush) with a cousin. I remember the recoil hurt my shoulder, but otherwise it provided no particular thrill. I've lived without firearms ever since without any particular loss as I see it, although I've developed a wish that I was carrying a rifle when I'm out hiking in bear country in season. I don't like to see wildlife put down, but on a clear choice between it and me, I'll pick me if at all possible.

Stand Your Ground means nothing. All bullies stand their grounds by definition, while their victims don't. A lot of crime and other malfeasance in our society is based on one set of our population aggressing against another set of people who are timid/afraid/retiring/frightened. Hitler stood his ground against Chamberlain, et al. The term (stand your ground) is meaningless without a value context and a careful analysis. It is the use of deadly force and the possibility of profiling based on race and whether there was a valid ground to be standing for that applies here.

What happened in Florida is tragic, and ironic in that both victim and perpetrator were "people of colour". In other parts of the U.S. it might the perpetrator (English father, Peruvian mother) who got knocked off under similar circumstances.

[Captain Awesome]

Whatever happened to the whole trial?

[mexi cali]

Stand Your Ground means nothing.

Actually, in the context of the country of origin, it means a lot. In the US, the law protects your right to stand your ground and protect yourself and property by whatever means necessary whereas in Canada, the law would much rather you retreat.

Deadly force meted out by civilians in the act of defending life and limb is punishable by law in Canada. The system will break you down in order to ensure that NO citizen can use a firearm in self defense.

It is extraordinary the lengths the system will go to prove guilt. If they can't get you on unjustifiable self defense or improper use of deadly force, they will charge you with improper storage or discharging a firearm illegally.

The law does not want citizens to be able to arm themselves. Period.

Again, I am all for gun ownership and all for protecting what is mine with deadly force. If you enter my home illegally and uninvited with the intent to steal from me, you better be prepared to die. That is an occupational hazard.

[Captain Awesome]

Again, I am all for gun ownership and all for protecting what is mine with deadly force. If you enter my home illegally and uninvited with the intent to steal from me, you better be prepared to die.

...and if you kill somebody over your plasma, you will end up in jail.

And it would be right.

[mexi cali]

Problem is Cap, I have no idea what his intention is and I'm not about to ask for an agenda and you are right, that is the problem.

[steven lloyd]

Problem is Cap, I have no idea what his intention is and I'm not about to ask ...

And unless he was actually pointing a gun at you that is why you would be prosecuted under the Criminal Code.

[mexi cali]

Seriously? You would give him a pass just because all he had was a knife? Or a baseball bat? Because neither of those weapons would do you any harm. No sir. He was just funnin. So I let him go and then the lights went out.

Like I said, I am not going to stop to ask for a copy of the agenda. If you are in my house and I didn't ask you to be, prepare to meet whichever maker you believe in.

[Captain Awesome]

Like I said, I am not going to stop to ask for a copy of the agenda. If you are in my house and I didn't ask you to be, prepare to meet whichever maker you believe in.

Hope you enjoy jail. Just remember - "Jesus loves you" has a different meaning in jail as opposed on the outside.

[mexi cali]

Hope no one ever threatens anything you own or anyone you love. I can't fathom a stance that allows room for negotiation with intruders.

I would ask you though, why do you seem to be sympathetic toward the bad guy in your statements regarding my own stance? I do get that in an instance where I kill an intruder that I will have to fight to prove just cause. That is my problem.