Colten Boushie Decision

[storm rider]

its against the law to use unreasonable force to protect yourself. while most think this simply protects criminals, it actually protects everyone from being murdered under the pretense of self defense, or by mistake or any number of situation that can occur in the heat of the moment.

while the farmer may be not guilty of murder he certainly put a gun to someones head with fatal consequences. that farmer is responsible to a degree for his actions. thats what gets people upset.

What needs to be determined is.....what is unreasonable?
The law , and lawyers...cannot take away the right to protect oneself, particularly while on your own property.
The dead guy was armed.....And causing harm, and potential further harm to the property owner, and his family.
Case closed....it don't matter what colour or race anyone was.

Regarding these comments all I can say is my father got into a confrontation with a guy when he lived in northern BC and the RCMP got involved.This situation developed into further bad blood including the asshole pouring sand into the gas tank of my father's truck......the last thing the investigating RCMP officer said to my father was "dead men tell no tales" and left it at that.

For Erica Phoenix vis-a-vis handguns are not "needed" but they are "wanted" and they are granted after the proper courses are completed and the proper background checks are done and to own 1 or a bunch of them come with a lot of signifigant restrictions with regards to both storage and transportation not to mention that Law Enforcement has the right at ANY time to show up on your door to see if they the owner is in compliance.

Per the the poster earlier in the thread who said "nobody who lives in the city should have a gun" what gives you the right to determine that?Nobody in the GVDR can own a gun?So no hunting enthusiast who wants to bag a deer/moose and travels into a designated hunting area OUTSIDE of the GVRD can OWN a gun......that is a pretty huge infringement for sportsmen who want to kill and harvest their own meat.

This thread has really gotten stupid to be BLUNT on PERB and the outcome of the trial on a National basis has gotten even more stupid especially with the Leftist media leading the charge and the Lieberals using it to shore up support for that idiot Trudeau after his gaffe of "peoplekind" which was of course ignored by the Canadian Leftist media but was MOCKED by the media around the world.

SR

 

[bsgrinder]

The crown prosecutor, who must have been disappointed to lose the case, said that he believed that the jury took their responsibilities seriously and worked hard to fulfill their responsibilities.

 

[Cock Throppled]

I'm not aware of the finer details, but were any of the natives invvolved in this incident charged? By most accounts, they were on a crime spree before they even arrived at the Stanley farm.

Did the fact one of them ended up dead just erase what they did that eventually led to the death?

 

[johnsmit]

No Leo Lachine case comes up.!

 

[marsvolta]

What needs to be determined is.....what is unreasonable?
The law , and lawyers...cannot take away the right to protect oneself, particularly while on your own property.
The dead guy was armed.....And causing harm, and potential further harm to the property owner, and his family.
Case closed....it don't matter what colour or race anyone was.

you missed the fact that the farmer was charged with murder. so yes, the law does take action against unreasonable force and in fact does so successfully. thus the shock that the farmer walked.

what the family is arguing is that race was involved in the farmer walking. from an earlier article someone posted there appears to be a lot of bad blood in the area.

i'm going to bet that he is charged with some other offense shortly. he's certainly going to suffer a civil suite.

I'd suggest that it's probable that he never meant to hurt the boy. How he got out of manslaughter is kinda hard to believe.

 

[Ulysses]

I'm going to bet that he is charged with some other offense shortly. He's certainly going to suffer a civil suit.

Absent a successful appeal by the Crown, you will lose your bet. He can't be charged with another offence arising out of the same facts. The matter is what is referred to in law as res judicata. However, he can be sued civilly, where the standard of proof is "on a balance of probabilities" as opposed to the criminal standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[sybian]

you missed the fact that the farmer was charged with murder. so yes, the law does take action against unreasonable force and in fact does so successfully. thus the shock that the farmer walked.

We have a difference of opinion there.....I didn't miss the fact he was charged with murder...in fact I would expect so in Canada. He was charged, the case was argued, and he walked ....my point exactaly .
The RCMP have everyone fooled they cannot protect themselves....when in fact if you review the majority of similar cases, you'll find the same outcome as this case.....for the large majority anyhow.
There have been a few, that have gone the other way,....but they are very few.

As far as the family....they can make any comment they want, without recourse.
The RCMP like to charge , but they let the courts decide who the criminals really are.....I like the old saying.." I'd rather be a living breathing convict, than a law abiding corpse"
A man has the right to protect himself...and no lawyer, or judge ...can take that away.

 

[doctordoom]

Many people are under the impression there are not many guns in Canada and they are very hard to get. Its really the opposite just many don't use their rights to purchase and possess them, we don't have the same romantic tenancies with them like south of the border.

I myself have many handguns, semi and wheel, tac shotty's and tac rifiles including a AR, Tar 21 and X95 for the enthusiasts out there. I fully endorse sybian's comment about being able to protect yourself and anyone that has taken their rpal know the legal ramifications of the use of weapons to do so. That being said if I found myself in a bad situation like Stanley found himself in I would almost always go for the tac shotty over banishing a handgun. I think it makes a bigger visual statement and audio statement and doesn't immediately get you on the wrong side of the law the moment you take it out of its locked case in your house. Just no good usually comes out of it.
I am not suggesting anyone use a firearm for anything than protecting yourself or family if you are in mortal danger, its a last resort option but if you are like Sybian with pack of wolves following you around while you are battling the flu its a good option but again leave the handgun in the cabinet and keep the 00 at the ready.

Also a slam fire happening normally when charging a weapon or after a fired shot. The old sks's were really bad for that with a floating firing pin. If you didn't keep your gun clean the pin would get stuck in the extended position and when you racked the action you had a unintended full auto with no off switch other than empty mag. If he used slam fire as an excuse you would need both hands on the weapon, one to hold and one to rack the action. Kinda kills the leaning in with left hand to get the keys idea when the firearm unintentionally discharged.

End of day, go on a farmers land causing shit, doesn't matter if you are white, yellow, brown or indigenous you will find yourself in a world of hurt and rightly so.

 

[Mrmotorscooter]

Here's what I keep asking myself.

Why did have a hand gun? Why did he NEED a handgun for? What's a handgun good for? Killing people. I understand why a rural farmer needs a shotgun on hand. Why did he have a hadgun?

Actually handguns are a lot of fun to shoot, gun shooting of any kind really is a blast but they must be respected. I saw a pic in the news of this story that showed the handgun with the Russian Star on the side of it, the thing looked like a t-33 Tokarev to me which is a nice inexpensive collector gun. It's hard to imagine what you would do when a group of drunken hoodlums show up at your place and you know they are up to no good. His gun could have been nearby and he just grabbed it so he could say to them, say hello to my little friend and scare them off. Its highly doubtful he intended to kill anyone but in a situation like that where you are outnumbered and they were also armed stupid shit can happen. It's terrible when a young person dies under stupid circumstances but that is how most young people die, bad choices behind the wheel, drug OD's etc. they should never have ventured onto the farmers property. This has a bad feeling all around, there can be no winners in this, I know under the same circumstances I would have had my shotgun but when there is no time to think you grab what you can.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

i'm going to bet that he is charged with some other offense shortly. he's certainly going to suffer a civil suite.

An appeal, other charges or even a civil suit, while they can be filed, would be unsuccessful thanks to Prime Minister Dumbfuck and his comments.
I have a friend who is a very high profile local defense lawyer and another who is a judge. They have both told me that since Turdeau (no that's not a spelling mistake, that's what I call him) has stepped in and potentially tainted the entire process and any potential jurors, he has given Stanley's lawyers an automatic ground for appeal which would very likely be successful.

Cheers
J

 

[marsvolta]

The gun club members on this post have proven my point about how dangerous guns are and about what they do to people's attitudes. Law enforcement consistently pleads with the public to remove themselves from any situation in which they feel threatened and let the authorities who are trained to do so take care of the situation. Every pro-gun comment on here has been to promote exactly the opposite. Owning a gun does not suddenly make you judge, jury and executioner. You guys need to get that before a similar situation happens to you.

This farmer may have got off but I can tell you he regrets it. His whole family probably wishes he just went into the house and called the cops. They may be selling the farm so that they aren't having to look over their shoulders for the rest of their lives. He may find a few people supporting him but for the rest of his life he will be 'that guy who killed the native kid'. What I'm trying to say here is there is no glory from all this for him like people who love the power of these weapons tend to make up in their minds. It's all bad.

And in the heat of the moment with few facts you are taking huge chances. Am I killing a murderer to be a sudden community hero? Or is that just the neighbors kid fetching his ball in my yard in the twilight of evening. Probability will always imply the latter. As someone who feels no need for anyone to be brandishing weapons I'd rather not give the responsibility of those decisions to anyone but trained authorities. And God knows they fuck up the same situations enough.

 

[Ghostwalker]

Defence can appeal on a mistake of fact and/or law..... crown can only appeal on a mistake of law. A jury’s decision is generally characterized as a mistake of fact.....hence it is not appealable.....though instructions to the jury by the judge may be appealable.

 

[Ghostwalker]

The charge would have been manslaughter..... which is a lesser included offence of second degree murder..... and as I understand the judge did instruct the jury that they could convict on the charge of mansaughter.... which actually would have not been unreasonable of the jury to do so.

 

[jgg]

let the authorities who are trained to do so take care of the situation.

I don't know where you live but where I'm from there isn't a cruiser a couple of blocks or even minutes away. At best, daylight regular shift, it can be over an hour response time if you can hit 911 in a poor cell coverage area.

This farmer may have got off but I can tell you he regrets it. His whole family probably wishes he just went into the house and called the cops.

Everyone wishes this, in reality wishing never works.

It's all bad.

Yes, it's all bad. In the all bad, we seemed to have forgotten what precipitated this in the first place. Four drunken men on a crime spree, trespassing, attempting to steal and do harm, with a firearm in their vehicle.

Or is that just the neighbors kid fetching his ball in my yard in the twilight of evening.

I think you live in suburbia? There is not likely a neighbour for miles.

And God knows.

This we can agree on.

 

[doctordoom]

I know under the same circumstances I would have had my shotgun but when there is no time to think you grab what you can.

Without getting into a gun law debate (which I think the current laws are a very good mix of pro gun and safety mix) the comment "grab what you can" definitely to towards grabbing a shotgun. In Canada all restricted firearms (handguns, AR and variants) must be trigger locked and in a locked container and generally accepted of out of site (hidden in your closet) or in a gun safe. Shotty, trigger locked, unloaded and hanging on your wall or in your umbrella stand next to the door. Doesn't get much more legally accessible than that. Of course this depends if you happen to have kids around then I don't recommend this practice at all. This is more for the boonies where you may need to project your livestock or property in a hurry and you have no neighbors for miles and LE is a hour away. I live in the suburbs so everything is under lock and key.

jgg, bang on, agree 100%. I have also lived out where you can't count on fast response from LE.

marsvolta's comment about guns being dangerous is obviously correct but only in the wrong hands. I find that most holders of specifically a Rpal go overboard on safety. I trigger lock and have in safe all my restricted firearms, one step over what I legally have to do.

I know off topic but leads back to "why a handgun" That's my only problem with the outcome of the case. Again I wasn't there so there may be a reason for it, that is what a jury is for and they made their decision.

 

[Ms Erica Phoenix]

I know off topic but leads back to "why a handgun" That's my only problem with the outcome of the case. Again I wasn't there so there may be a reason for it, that is what a jury is for and they made their decision.

Yes..that was my point, as I am aware of what the laws say handgun owners are supposed to do...

 

[sybian]

The gun club members on this post have proven my point about how dangerous guns are and about what they do to people's attitudes. Law enforcement consistently pleads with the public to remove themselves from any situation in which they feel threatened and let the authorities who are trained to do so take care of the situation. Every pro-gun comment on here has been to promote exactly the opposite. Owning a gun does not suddenly make you judge, jury and executioner. You guys need to get that before a similar situation happens to you.

With all due respect, and not having the convenience of living behind a gated, securely policed community.....what makes you think this hasn't happened to me?

 

[marsvolta]

what i always find interesting in these situations is how many gun owners simply "shoot themselves in the foot" in their support of people like this farmer. he fucked up. people are upset because he fucked up. some drunk kids were committing property crime and he stuck a handgun to a kids head and while the kid had his hands in the air and farmer was attempting to grab ignition keys the gun went off and the kids brains got blown out all over the dashboard. attempting to justify his actions is rather fruitless. even gun owners in this thread admit that his actions over property crime was a bad idea.

but i've always believed that most gun owners are also somewhat anti authoritarian. they don't like to be told what they can and cannot do by the state or anyone else for that matter. but, alas, its counter productive to their desires in many cases.

if, instead of defending this guy who fucked up they also called on him being hung out to dry then people who are not gun owners would feel better about gun owners and gun laws in general. if gun owners continued to push for stiffer regulations around firearms then they essentially protect any rights they have to own those devices because they prevent guys like farmer from fucking up and causing the vast majority to cry for regulation that they will have no control over.

but maybe thats a pipe dream. deep down the real fear is that many gun owners are just addicted to a guns power. and they will defend the use of that power even if in the most vile way.

 

[westwoody]

You guys need to get that before a similar situation happens to you..

You have completely misread the comments.
Almost all of them are from people who HAVE been in similar circumstances.

There is nowhere to run.
There are no cops.
You are outnumbered and the intruders are actively threatening you.
They are actively destroying and stealing your property that you need to feed your family.
You have a family, wife and children who are depending on you for protection.
If the intruders destroy your farm equipment you may lose your income for the year.

You, marsvolta, are the one who needs to be in someone else's shoes.
Try living in the middle of nowhere with nobody to count on but yourself.
Nobody.
Just yourself.

Oh wait after your last post I see you are just trolling.

 

[ddcanz]

....End of day, go on a farmers land causing shit, doesn't matter if you are white, yellow, brown or indigenous you will find yourself in a world of hurt and rightly so.

Back in the 70s we had a hobby farm in Albion.
Up the road in Thornhill the farmer father of a girlfriend from our 4-H club ran into a little issue with a couple of bikers "camping" out on the backside of his property. Seemed they'd twisted a couple of his chickens and were having a nice little meal. Upon a quick discussion they basically told him to bugger off and no one would get hurt- they'd be leaving the next morning. He put both of them in the hospital with the assistance of his handy little equalizer- a short hardwood club.
To my knowledge no charges were laid- or if they were they were dismissed. Mr. I**** claimed self defence in the course of protecting his livestock.
Don't fuck around with farmers.