[Gunnair]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

It's truly amazing that you can't admit that it is a factor when discussing these things. Do you honestly think this discussion is anything but polarized views? Yourself included!

We are not discussing these things, we are discussing this case.

This is a case of irresponsible and illegal use of a weapon. It is against the criminal code of canada to use deadly force to protect your quad from a fleeing suspect. Full stop.

This became an issue when gun advocates began cheerleading this. I would have hoped that gun advocates would have reacted differently, envoking the holy trilogy of gun ownership responsibility, accountability, and proprer employment - all things I fully agree with and are also keys to relaxing some of our current gun laws. But that was not the case. Instead, it's the typical knee jerk/Pavlovian response that the owner was completely in his rights to act illegally and break the law to stop someone from breaking the law. Ludicrous, hypocritical, and ultimately damaging to their gun lobby and feeding into the anti-gun lobby.

[GreenTiger]

It's quite interesting how much attention this thread has received.

[andyt]

Maybe where we can all agree is that part of the problem is the lack of meaningful sentences for these dickheads. Another version of this article on the homepage says they got probation or $400 fines. Maybe if they got a year or two in jail it would reduce the incidence of theft (at least while they're in jail) and give some satisfaction to the victims.

Of course the thieves are victims too, since they are First Nations, and so they should be getting recompensed instead of punished. Where it gets complicated is that the victims are First Nations too - so who's victim hood trumps who's here?

[fifeboy]

Gunnair Gunnair:

2Cdo 2Cdo:

It's truly amazing that you can't admit that it is a factor when discussing these things. Do you honestly think this discussion is anything but polarized views? Yourself included!

We are not discussing these things, we are discussing this case.

This is a case of irresponsible and illegal use of a weapon. It is against the criminal code of canada to use deadly force to protect your quad from a fleeing suspect. Full stop.

This became an issue when gun advocates began cheerleading this. I would have hoped that gun advocates would have reacted differently, envoking the holy trilogy of gun ownership responsibility, accountability, and proprer employment - all things I fully agree with and are also keys to relaxing some of our current gun laws. But that was not the case. Instead, it's the typical knee jerk/Pavlovian response that the owner was completely in his rights to act illegally and break the law to stop someone from breaking the law. Ludicrous, hypocritical, and ultimately damaging to their gun lobby and feeding into the anti-gun lobby.

[Gunnair]

andyt andyt:

Maybe where we can all agree is that part of the problem is the lack of meaningful sentences for these dickheads. Another version of this article on the homepage says they got probation or $400 fines. Maybe if they got a year or two in jail it would reduce the incidence of theft (at least while they're in jail) and give some satisfaction to the victims.

Of course the thieves are victims too, since they are First Nations, and so they should be getting recompensed instead of punished. Where it gets complicated is that the victims are First Nations too - so who's victim hood trumps who's here?

Corporal punishment.

Don't believe in cell time for petty thievery as it wastes resources and is too damned expensive. I would not be opposed to public caning or something similar.

Painful and embarassing.

Sadly, it ain't going to happen.

[DerbyX]

Gunnair Gunnair:

andyt andyt:

Maybe where we can all agree is that part of the problem is the lack of meaningful sentences for these dickheads. Another version of this article on the homepage says they got probation or $400 fines. Maybe if they got a year or two in jail it would reduce the incidence of theft (at least while they're in jail) and give some satisfaction to the victims.

Of course the thieves are victims too, since they are First Nations, and so they should be getting recompensed instead of punished. Where it gets complicated is that the victims are First Nations too - so who's victim hood trumps who's here?

Corporal punishment.

Don't believe in cell time for petty thievery as it wastes resources and is too damned expensive. I would not be opposed to public caning or something similar.

Painful and embarassing.

Sadly, it ain't going to happen.

Is that the Navy in you? They don't still flog people do they?

[andyt]

Gunnair Gunnair:

andyt andyt:

Maybe where we can all agree is that part of the problem is the lack of meaningful sentences for these dickheads. Another version of this article on the homepage says they got probation or $400 fines. Maybe if they got a year or two in jail it would reduce the incidence of theft (at least while they're in jail) and give some satisfaction to the victims.

Of course the thieves are victims too, since they are First Nations, and so they should be getting recompensed instead of punished. Where it gets complicated is that the victims are First Nations too - so who's victim hood trumps who's here?

Corporal punishment.

Don't believe in cell time for petty thievery as it wastes resources and is too damned expensive. I would not be opposed to public caning or something similar.

Painful and embarassing.

Sadly, it ain't going to happen.

Na, and I'm not sure we want to go down that road. But I bet those Indian reserves have all kinds of work that needs doing for improvements. Put them to work on a chain gang. Heck, what's the diff, we support them if they're in jail or on welfare anyway.

[Gunnair]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Gunnair Gunnair:

andyt andyt:

Maybe where we can all agree is that part of the problem is the lack of meaningful sentences for these dickheads. Another version of this article on the homepage says they got probation or $400 fines. Maybe if they got a year or two in jail it would reduce the incidence of theft (at least while they're in jail) and give some satisfaction to the victims.

Of course the thieves are victims too, since they are First Nations, and so they should be getting recompensed instead of punished. Where it gets complicated is that the victims are First Nations too - so who's victim hood trumps who's here?

Corporal punishment.

Don't believe in cell time for petty thievery as it wastes resources and is too damned expensive. I would not be opposed to public caning or something similar.

Painful and embarassing.

Sadly, it ain't going to happen.

Is that the Navy in you? They don't still flog people do they?

Oh sometimes I wish they would...

[DerbyX]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Oh sometimes I wish they would...

You mean like "to teach the young'uns proper" or like "get dressed up in your best bondage gear and heels and beg for more"?

[Gunnair]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Gunnair Gunnair:

Oh sometimes I wish they would...

You mean like "to teach the young'uns proper" or like "get dressed up in your best bondage gear and heels and beg for more"?

How can you even ask?

... get dressed up in your best bondage... yadda yadda yadda

[ASLplease]

andyt andyt:

As people have pointed out, they were running away, no threat to anyone.

The planes - that dropped bombs on Hiroshima - flew away, no threat to anyone.

Now I happen to support their(the planes) actions, but I dont support the idea that anyone, anywhere, has the right to turn tail and once they are 'no threat' they should not be shot at.

[andyt]

ASLplease ASLplease:

andyt andyt:

As people have pointed out, they were running away, no threat to anyone.

The planes - that dropped bombs on Hiroshima - flew away, no threat to anyone.

Now I happen to support their(the planes) actions, but I dont support the idea that anyone, anywhere, has the right to turn tail and once they are 'no threat' they should not be shot at.

I think someone forgot to take their meds this morning.

Well, if these particular natives had dropped atom bombs on the owner of those quads, I would wholeheartedly support his or your right to shoot them.

But yes, under the law in Canada, you're not allowed to shoot someone who is no longer a threat, even if they've done you grievous harm. Crazy eh?

[Gunnair]

ASLplease ASLplease:

andyt andyt:

As people have pointed out, they were running away, no threat to anyone.

The planes - that dropped bombs on Hiroshima - flew away, no threat to anyone.

Now I happen to support their(the planes) actions, but I dont support the idea that anyone, anywhere, has the right to turn tail and once they are 'no threat' they should not be shot at.

Can I refer you to the Canadian Action Party thread? You and Charisma should be able to converse in 'idiot' for quite some time.

[GreenTiger]

andyt andyt:

Maybe where we can all agree is that part of the problem is the lack of meaningful sentences for these dickheads. Another version of this article on the homepage says they got probation or $400 fines. Maybe if they got a year or two in jail it would reduce the incidence of theft (at least while they're in jail) and give some satisfaction to the victims.

Of course the thieves are victims too, since they are First Nations, and so they should be getting recompensed instead of punished. Where it gets complicated is that the victims are First Nations too - so who's victim hood trumps who's here?

If they are all First Nations would Canadian Law apply? Aren't they indepependent, or do they just have "Home Rule"?

[Gunnair]

GreenTiger GreenTiger:

andyt andyt:

Maybe where we can all agree is that part of the problem is the lack of meaningful sentences for these dickheads. Another version of this article on the homepage says they got probation or $400 fines. Maybe if they got a year or two in jail it would reduce the incidence of theft (at least while they're in jail) and give some satisfaction to the victims.

Of course the thieves are victims too, since they are First Nations, and so they should be getting recompensed instead of punished. Where it gets complicated is that the victims are First Nations too - so who's victim hood trumps who's here?

If they are all First Nations would Canadian Law apply? Aren't they indepependent, or do they just have "Home Rule"?

Federal laws apply - the process of applying them tends to be the sticky part.