• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

Loachman

Former Army Pilot in Drag
Staff member
Directing Staff
Reaction score
452
Points
980
Colin P said:
Well they tried charging a guy for unsafe storage when it took the bad guys 3 days with power tools to break into his safe.

Mike Hargreaves, a firearms instructor who also wrote articles for Blue Line Magazine. I remember this incident well.

Only one article popped up when I (quickly) searched: https://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/comments/1yt5l0/charges_dropped_in_mike_hargreaves_unsafe_storage/
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
3,682
Points
1,060
Loachman said:
Mike Hargreaves, a firearms instructor who also wrote articles for Blue Line Magazine. I remember this incident well.

Only one article popped up when I (quickly) searched: https://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/comments/1yt5l0/charges_dropped_in_mike_hargreaves_unsafe_storage/

Thats such a messed up situation. 2 days to burn their way into a safe and he was still charged.


I do recall reading allegations the police had something against him and eledgedly wanted to punish him. Also allegations that the theives had connections to the police or one of the officers.

Not trying to disparage the police but when you consider it took 11 years to drop the charges and the whole 2 days to blow torch their way in = unsafe storage it doesn't seem implausible.
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
8,355
Points
1,360
And yet a Member can lose their service S&W from a Satchel..in a mall....le sigh...
 

Eaglelord17

Sr. Member
Reaction score
433
Points
810
Jarnhamar said:
Understanding how flippy floppy our storage laws are, I don't think insecure firearms are a victimless crime. If they're stolen they can very much create victims. It's kind of like saying drinking and driving is a victimless crime as long as you don't crash. Lots of missing information so it's hard to make an informed opinion.

No its more like saying leaving your car idling with the keys in it is a victimless crime. If its stolen it can very much create victims. That still doesn't make it the fault of the car owner, rather the fault of the criminal who chooses to commit the crime. I also suspect that his home is still more locked up than that, as it likely had the front door locked at least.
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,645
Points
1,090
Eaglelord17 said:
No its more like saying leaving your car idling with the keys in it is a victimless crime. If its stolen it can very much create victims. That still doesn't make it the fault of the car owner, rather the fault of the criminal who chooses to commit the crime. I also suspect that his home is still more locked up than that, as it likely had the front door locked at least.

Your example is a better comparison.

But how would your insurance company react if you left your car idling with the doors unlocked?

Not saying it's right but how many times have criminals successfully sued people for unsafe conditions when they break into things?

But negligence can lead to prosecution.  If I plan an expedition with an inexperienced group and we hit by sudden bad weather and they die am I liable despite it not being my fault? What if my equipment was sub par?  The storm killed them but if I had taken precautions they would all still be alive.

I am not a lawyer nor have I played one on TV so maybe my example (which I poached btw) may not be a good one.

On the flip side, if the storm hit and I lucked out that no one was killed would I still get charged?   
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
3,682
Points
1,060
Eaglelord17 said:
No its more like saying leaving your car idling with the keys in it is a victimless crime. If its stolen it can very much create victims. That still doesn't make it the fault of the car owner, rather the fault of the criminal who chooses to commit the crime. I also suspect that his home is still more locked up than that, as it likely had the front door locked at least.

The firearm community didn't consider this a victimless crime.

RCMP officer, whose gun was stolen from cruiser and used in shooting, remains on duty

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.3297483

In fairness I don't remember if this was the case where the police officer was "eatting supper" at midnight at a sports bar when the gun was stolen. But, victimless crime?
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
3,682
Points
1,060
I can't tell if this is a legitimate website or not.

Police meet with gang leaders to try and convince them to surrender guns during amnesty

Illegal guns are remaining in the hands of organised crime as gang leaders refuse to give up their weapons.

Police have met with more than 50 gang leaders in an effort to get them to comply with firearm law changes before an amnesty ends.

But it's proving to be fruitless, as the patched members remain "very reluctant", Police Commissioner Mike Bush told the Justice Select Committee on Thursday.

https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/117242736/police-meet-with-gang-leaders-to-try-and-convince-them-to-surrender-guns-during-amnesty?fbclid=IwAR1u_aV6jSuq6XIVBmbg0OIjtXr7irk0adzBn3UaATmHgPopFkgDNZu1xXI

Thats gotta be some New Zealand version of the Beaverton right?

I mean, criminals refusing to give up guns?

I know from reading forum posts from NZ gun owners they're saying the police are habitually under valuing firearms.  Others have said ammunition is is being banned but no compensation is being offered. Not sure if that's accurate.
 

The Bread Guy

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,366
Points
1,260

Eaglelord17

Sr. Member
Reaction score
433
Points
810
Remius said:
Your example is a better comparison.

But how would your insurance company react if you left your car idling with the doors unlocked?

Not saying it's right but how many times have criminals successfully sued people for unsafe conditions when they break into things?   

And that's between you and the insurance company, that doesn't mean that the person who was victimized deserves to go to jail or have their property permanently taken away because of a criminals actions, or in the case of the gun collector here, a potential criminal action. When you think about it the only real victim here is the man being arrested. No attempts to harm others, no threats made, but the State has deemed it necessary to use force to arrest and take away this mans legally acquired property.

I also don't agree with the ability for criminals to sue when injured in places they aren't legally entitled to be in, another example of punishing the victim.
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,019
Points
1,040
I think that the discussion about this incident on this site perfectly exemplifies the divide in Canadian opinion over gun ownership.

Those that have been exposed to "gun culture" or whatever you wish to call it note that the collector was legally entitled to own the guns.  There is no indication that this individual had any criminal intent or posed any risk to society.  The debate then revolves around how reasonable our storage laws are and how hard the legal system comes down on what some view as minor infractions compared to the relative slap on the wrist that actual criminals get.

On the other hand, many of the general public that don't have exposure to gun culture simply think WTF?  250 guns???  200,000 rounds of ammo???  What kind of whack-job needs enough weapons and ammo to start WWIII???  And when they hear other gun enthusiasts reacting like "meh, no biggie" they think that they must all be "gun nuts". 

There is a fundamental divide between those that view guns as a tool like any other tool and when used reasonably by a law abiding citizen pose no more risk to society than any other tool and don't deserve any special regulation by the state.  Then there are those that view guns primarily as a weapon that should be strictly controlled to prevent their misuse.  Some lump all guns into this category while some (maybe the silent majority?) accept that there are some legitimate uses for guns (mainly hunting rifles) but don't get why anyone needs a "military-style" weapon or handgun as typically the only time they actually see those types of guns used is by criminals or nut-jobs.

:2c:
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
3,682
Points
1,060
Having a little familiarity with firearms the "oh no military style firearms" narrative really bugs me.

The idea that a gun commonly used for hunting aninals like a 600 pound bear or 1200 pound moose is some how less deadly is ridiculous.

As much as I enjoy owning and shooting handguns they're statistically more attractive and present in criminal activity and shootings. Yet like the US handguns are being ignored over ambiguous and non statistically supported assault weapons.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,836
Points
1,160
Murders in the US by rifles of all types range between 375-400 per year on average. Both Canada and the US should be asking why young males generally going to school are driven to attack groups of people and deal with those social issues openly. Sadly to many scared cows to be examined I think.
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
3,682
Points
1,060
Colin P said:
Murders in the US by rifles of all types range between 375-400 per year on average.

And handguns are in the 8000-9000 range aren't they?
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,836
Points
1,160
About 6,000 https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/

Mind you this year they have a large "type unknown". The great thing about US stats is that they are generally very detailed and well done all things considered, once you start going into the county level, you can really see that the issues are very geographically contained. Canada is not bad, but not as precise as the US. Canada throws everything but the kitchen sink into the "firearm category" including imitation and pellet guns, this helps to create a worse situation than exists. Also if firearms are at the scene of a domestic incident and are still locked in the safe and never used, they can be counted as a firearm related crime.

from https://thegunblog.ca/facts-stats/
Homicide: (This is 2017 data.) Fatal stabbings exceeded fatal shootings in 7 of the past 10 years. Shooting overtook stabbing as the leading method of homicide in 2016, led by gang murders in Toronto and Vancouver. Note: StatsCan includes flare guns, nail guns, pellet guns and other non-firearms in its totals for “firearm-related homicide.”

from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-how-the-globe-tried-and-failed-to-find-the-source-of-canadas/
Our access-to-information requests to municipal police forces also came up short: Of the 36 forces across the country from which we requested firearms-tracing data, none were able to provide it.

In almost all cases, we found that police-level tracing information – when it existed – was kept as written reports attached to individual case files. The police forces said they would have to spend hundreds or thousands of hours to find, scan, redact and release each tracing report for the thousands of firearms they seize each year. It could be years before we received the files we’d requested.

The fee estimates were often staggering. The Peterborough Police Service quoted us $4,000 to provide any kind of tracing information. Windsor said it would cost $6,000. Our largest fee estimate came from the Greater Sudbury Police Service, which asked for $26,460 to produce the files.

We eventually changed our requests to accommodate what the police forces felt they were capable of providing in a reasonable time frame, which meant excluding tracing information and focusing on seized and surrendered statistics, which would show us the number and kinds of firearms law enforcement were seizing.

Some police forces refused to release anything at all. The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary, a provincial police force that is also the local police in St. John’s, denied us outright, as did the Longueuil and Quebec City police forces.
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
3,682
Points
1,060
This guy had over 850 guns. Police Say all legally owned. Looks like they're be returned to him despite some of them apparently improperly stored.

https://globalnews.ca/news/6163162/heron-gate-home-450-guns/?fbclid=IwAR3hb8d7BCnEh2EomaBEdn0Orz_KavHP5piuoAcIeMBWXN6wTfDHmMuVc6E
 

Jonezy76

New Member
Reaction score
0
Points
110
I'd bet that they don't come back is as good condition as when they left. I'll hazard a guess and say that the owner didn't just have them laying in a heap like in the picture. I'd lose my mind if that's how my property were treated.

If they were stored like that, then that's just not right..
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
3,682
Points
1,060
I'm willing to bet he didn't have 850 guns stored with the same care and space me and you store ours. That's a lot of guns dude.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
4,946
Points
1,360
Jarnhamar said:
This guy had over 850 guns. Police Say all legally owned. Looks like they're be returned to him despite some of them apparently improperly stored.

https://globalnews.ca/news/6163162/heron-gate-home-450-guns/?fbclid=IwAR3hb8d7BCnEh2EomaBEdn0Orz_KavHP5piuoAcIeMBWXN6wTfDHmMuVc6E

Check out that AK front and centre  ;D
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,836
Points
1,160
I also guess that the Crown Prosecutors said "little hope of successful prosecution". I bet he hired a good firearms lawyer. 
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
3,682
Points
1,060
Humphrey Bogart said:
Check out that AK front and centre  ;D

Interesting collection for sure. It looks like he has a Sten gun too. Kinda seems all over the place.

 
Top