Sign in to follow this  
Malcolm

Shootings and Knifings

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Malcolm said:

Poorly stated but the need was there many years ago in some states (Texas being one) but there is no doubt, at least based on what we see in the media that there does appear to be an increased fear in other areas of the US.

I believe the term should be "Perceived need".  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, DEFCON said:

Well ... I was authorized to carry one and use it; how about you?

Congratulations.  I have never had a need or perceived need to carry one nor a desire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Malcolm; while it's true that Texans have always loved their guns, like a slow insidious wave, whatever it is that is fueling their perceived need to be armed has spread across the land. If America ever hopes to restore the Country to a safer calmer state they're going to have to be willing to identify the source of negative stimulus, prepared to openly discuss concepts of reform and then institute their resolutions.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good for Granny. By being able to defend herself she didn't become a victim. Now, if only there was an an effective deterrent against home invasions that would make home defense strategies such as the one this lady was forced utilize largely redundant.

More cops isn't an instant answer either; politicians use that ploy to make it look like they're getting tough on crime to appease the public concern when they well know it's a hollow gesture.

 

     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A significant change in law would be required to allow for civil home defence.  You are liable for ANY injury that takes place on your property whether the person was trespassing or not.  There are several cases of people being imprisoned for "defending their property"  The lightest sentence is reckless discharge of a firearm.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, boestar said:

A significant change in law would be required to allow for civil home defence.  You are liable for ANY injury that takes place on your property whether the person was trespassing or not.  There are several cases of people being imprisoned for "defending their property"  The lightest sentence is reckless discharge of a firearm.

 

Excuse me?? Where did you come up with that? It's simply not true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate to report this but.....a recent US news story. Stare trooper stops at the scene of a rollover. Is assaulted by a male and shot twice and is being beaten. Passing motorist stops. Demands assailant ceases. Is ignored. Passing motorist returns to vehicle and retrieves firearm from vehicle glovebox. Returns to scene and repeats demand to assailant to stand off. Assailant does not and is shot. Passing motorist praised by all and sundry...especially police who praise him as a hero...for saving trooper's life.

That's the side of the coin that suggests private possession of firearms can deter crime or conti uation of a criminal offence.

Damn! Nothing is easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, UpperDeck said:

Excuse me?? Where did you come up with that? It's simply not true.

Really?  2 recent cases one in New Brunswick and I forget where the other was.  Both people defending their property with "deadly Force" although their lives were not in imminent danger.  Both were charged.  The first with reckless discharge of a firearm and the other with (I believe) manslaughter.

Canada has no "stand your ground" laws like the US.  If a criminal breaks into your house and you hit him with a Louiville slugger YOU can be charged with assault and the criminal will walk or maybe get a B&E Charge.  That's what we have to deal with.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all, I see the gun thing is still alive and well on the forum. Here is a Youtube video that provides a bit of context and texture on Canadian gun ownership. It’s not 100%, but it serves as a short primer for those completely unfamiliar with the subject. Caution, bit of bad language in a few spots.

 

Clearly, the use of deadly force in responding to petty property crimes, is and should be illegal. It’s a bunch of other things too like stupid and immoral. Clear cases of self defence tend to be, well… clear. In clear cases of self defence, where deadly force is justified, is the choice of weapon the main issue? You can’t (and shouldn’t) be killing trespassers and petty thieves with a golf club either.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, boestar said:

Really?  2 recent cases one in New Brunswick and I forget where the other was.  Both people defending their property with "deadly Force" although their lives were not in imminent danger.  Both were charged.  The first with reckless discharge of a firearm and the other with (I believe) manslaughter.

Canada has no "stand your ground" laws like the US.  If a criminal breaks into your house and you hit him with a Louiville slugger YOU can be charged with assault and the criminal will walk or maybe get a B&E Charge.  That's what we have to deal with.

 

Boestar...

That is not what you said in the post to which I responded. Your first reference was to civil liability for any injury suffered on your property even by a trespasser. That is not true. One cannot "trap" a trespasser but as a general rule, the duty of care owed to a trespasser is different than the duty owed to an invitee.

You then suggested that one will be held criminally responsible for the use of a weapon. Again, that is not accurate but you modified that in your next post. Any use of force in self-defence must be measured and proportionate. If you believe that your life is in imminent danger you can respond with deadly force. You cannot shoot a fleeing burglar in the back. You can however use that Louisville slugger presuming you don't rain a flurry of blows to his head when he's down. I wouldn't hesitate to swing for the fences with the blow aimed for the less vital parts of the body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you stop these incidents when you have numbers climbing like this?

http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/12/news/tsa-guns-airport-checkpoints/index.html

Airport security screeners confiscated a record number of guns in carry-on bags last year, and most of them were loaded.

The Transportation Security Administration said it discovered 3,391 guns in carry-ons at checkpoints in 2016, a 28% increase from the year before. That works out to about nine every day.

 

The TSA said 83% of the guns were loaded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now an event that will bolster those who support unlimited gun carry.

 

Quote
By: Staff The Associated Press Published on Mon Jan 23 2017

SAN ANTONIO — Two suspects are in custody Monday after a robbery in a San Antonio shopping mall ended in a shooting that left one man dead and several other people injured, police said.

Police Chief William McManus said the two suspects robbed a jewelry store at the Rolling Oaks Mall on Sunday afternoon. After the two men fled the store, a man described by McManus as a "good Samaritan" tried to stop them.

One of the robbers fatally shot the man, McManus said. A second individual, who was carrying a licensed concealed handgun, then shot and wounded one robber.

The second suspect, who initially fled the scene, was apprehended Sunday night after a car crash in nearby Converse, police said in a statement early Monday. Two weapons were recovered from the suspect.

McManus called the fatal shooting "absolutely senseless." The victim's name was not immediately released by authorities.

The second robber fired his weapon as he fled the mall, injuring a man and a woman. They, along with the wounded robber, were taken to a hospital, said San Antonio Fire Chief Charles Hood.

Two other people — a woman who complained of chest pains and a pregnant woman who had labour pains — were also taken to hospitals, Hood said.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This incident provides a pretty good demonstration of the consequences that flow when a society is fearful and armed; we're returning to the style of the wild wild west.

So what should be done to reduce and eventually eliminate the not so unreasonable, or completely irrational logic driving the public's need to gun-up?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, DEFCON said:

This incident provides a pretty good demonstration of the consequences that flow when a society is fearful and armed; we're returning to the style of the wild wild west.

So what should be done to reduce and eventually eliminate the not so unreasonable, or completely irrational logic driving the public's need to gun-up?

 

 

Defcon, unless you are living the the US, "WE" are not returning to the style of the "wild wild west"{ , which by the way  did not happen in Canada.  We do however need to be vigilant for any "Border" drift.

 

Quote

 

Canada's "Wild West" was very different from the American. Partially this was a matter of geography: to a Canadian of the era, the "West" meant anything west of Lake Ontario. Between the lakeshore and Victoria, British Columbia was a vast expanse of territory that was still almost entirely tribal, only intermittently punctuated by white fur traders missionaries. Until 1870 most of the western prairies was owned by the Hudson's Bay Company, and their policy was heavily against settlers. Even bridges were discouraged; making traveling too easy might lead to immigration!

You can count the number of exciting stories of those days on your fingers; there just wasn't the population. Occasionally there was some interestingness, particularly in the form of American liquor smugglers crossing the border (a border that was, at the time, more theoretical than practical). These smugglers built pretty serious fortifications to protect themselves from the limited arm of the law, as well as vengeful native. Fort Whoop-Up, near today's Lethbridge, was the most famous of these. The Northwest Mounted Police (today's Royal Canadian Mounted Police) were formed largely to prevent this sort of whiskey peddling and to enforce that almost-theoretical sovereignty on the prairies.

As /u/jcaseys34 mentions, though, there were gold rushes. The story of the Yukon Gold Rush is an interesting one, but in actual Canadian territory there were almost no instances of Wild West-style gunplay and vigilantism. Most of the criminal offenses were either government corruption or tolerated by the authorities in a sort of "miners will be miners" spirit; Sam Steele of the RCMP was a very practical sort of policeman in this spirit. There was still a very Protestant ethic covering the whole community, though: stories of prostitution being quietly permitted but nobody could work on Sundays, that kind of thing.

The Fraser Canyon and Cariboo Gold Rushes, on the interior of British Columbia, was a bit more rough-and-ready and had more of what you might call the "frontier spirit". There was also an element of national sovereignty involved there, too, as both (particularly the Fraser) drew large numbers of Americans into what was only very, very tenuously British land. Law enforcement resources were thin or non-existent. But when he could, Governor James Douglas held a firm hand and any sort of "wildness" was relatively short-lived. The population of those gold rush towns dissolved once the rushes themselves were over, and the opening of the Canadian Pacific Railway in 1886 ended the whole era: from then on Canadian civilization would develop in leaps and bounds, spreading out from that railway and the two other lines eventually driven across the prairies.

In general, though, the Wild West era in Canada was anything but wild over a very, very broad "west".

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Malcolm

We are talking about an incident that happened in the US aren't we? I guess my writing from the perspective of a Westerner must have clouded the issues?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a Canadian living in Canada.

WE is not Trump

WE is not Hilary

WE is not gun massacres

WE is not Hollywood

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DEFCON said:

Malcolm

We are talking about an incident that happened in the US aren't we? I guess my writing from the perspective of a Westerner must have clouded the issues?

It was your use of the term "we". As Canadians, there is no "we" in the equation and with any luck there will never be!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here they go again:

 

January 22, 2018 8:15 am   Updated: January 22, 2018 10:02 am   
 
Student arrested after Texas high school shooting injures 1

       By Adam Frisk       i


A 16-year-old male student was arrested after opening fire in a Texas high school Monday morning, injuring at least one person.

Ellis County Sheriff’s Office responded to a call of an active shooter at Italy High School at around 8 a.m. local time.

Today

January 23, 2018 8:01 am
Updated: January 23, 2018 9:58 am

At least 1 dead, multiple injured in Kentucky high school shooting

frisk-mug.jpg?quality=60&strip=all&w=55& By Adam Frisk National Online Journalist, Breaking News  Global News

WATCH LIVE: WPSD is covering reports of a shooting at Marshall County High School in Kentucky.

 

At least one person is dead and multiple others injured after a shooter opened fire inside a Kentucky high school Tuesday morning.

Officers with the Marshall County Sheriff’s Department were responding to the call of a shooting at Marshall County High School in Benton around 9 a.m. ET.

The sheriff’s department said several students were injured and a suspect is in custody.

According to CBS News at least five students were shot and officers are still searching the southwestern high school.

At least 1 dead, person in custody after Kentucky high school shooting

Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin confirmed that at least one person was dead and “multiple others wounded” as a result of the incident.

“Much yet unknown…Please do not speculate or spread hearsay…Let’s let the first responders do their job and be grateful that they are there to do it for us…” the governor said on social media.

READ MORE: Student arrested after Texas high school shooting injures 1

Bevin later issued a statement calling the shooting a “tremendous tragedy and speaks to the heartbreak present in our communities.”

“It is unbelievable that this would happen in a small, close-knit community like Marshall County,” the governor said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and yet another.

February 14, 2018 4:50 pm
Updated: February 14, 2018 4:52 pm

Florida high school shooting: what we know about alleged shooter Nicolas Cruz

By Kevin Nielsen National Online Journalist, Breaking News  Global News
2018-02-14T23-30-09.567Z--1280x720.jpg?w=670&quality=70&strip=all

WATCH ABOVE: At least 17 confirmed fatalities in Florida school shooting

There have been 18 shootings at U.S. schools in 2018, according to gun control group Everytown for Gun Safety

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this