Law

All posts tagged Law


Trudeau’s Mimicking Birds

Image may contain: 2 people, people smiling

 

Recent current events indicate that Canada is approaching a very slippery slope. It is apparent that evermore-oppressive gun restrictions are on the horizon if left to the discretion of the Liberals and socialists.

For example we need only look to “worship” John Tory, reelected as Mayor of Toronto on Oct. 22, 2018. Tory has made a renewed call for gun control laws in the city asking “why does anyone in Toronto need a gun?” at a recent city council meeting. [1] Tory apparently believes that a total handgun & ammunition ban in The City of Toronto is the solution to gun-related crime. He declared this openly, clearly forgetting the fact that in 2008, he was quoted in the National Post as saying that “the real problem was guns coming over the border, and a handgun ban isn’t the answer.” [2]

And let us not forget the ‘honourable’ M.P. Bill Blair, minister of border security and organized crime reduction. His misguided initiative to ban handguns and assault rifles Canada wide in 2019 has been well advertised and is slated for immediate roll-out should the Liberals achieve reelection.

Blair’s ‘objective’ of seeking out public opinion on firearms by way of a ‘consulting tour’, a “charade to give the impression of action without a definitive commitment” [3] while simultaneously vilifying legal firearm owners and fudging statistical data, can only result in a single conclusion. Undoubtedly, Blair will deduce on behalf of all Canadian citizens that firearms “cause crime”. Firearms, he argues, must be removed from the possession of legal gun owners to prevent them from falling into the hands of gang members.

Mr. Blair said he “wants the consultations to be completed by the end of the year”, which means that any legislation to ban handguns could be introduced as early as 2019. The government will thereby “change firearms laws without any guarantee that the measure will reduce crime.” [4]

Canadian gun owners are now truly under attack by the current Liberal regime. Our government would seem to be running out the clock before the next major election and are poised for a crackdown on legal gun owners. We hear nebulous rumors of a restricted firearms ban, talk of centralized storage facilities for restricted firearms and murmurs of reclassification (categorization of “non-restricted firearm” to “hunting firearm” and “restricted firearm” to “circumscribed firearm.” [5]) Harsh sounding words like ‘assault rifle’ are constantly being used, saturating the media and discouraging rational debate.

With the Liberal’s disastrous blunders now becoming known, the upcoming election is looming large. It is obvious that in order to minimize their shortcomings (unsustainable debt, social & economic gaffes and violations of freedoms and privacy) Liberals are now sensationalizing their only “accomplishment” and taking a hard stance on gun crime to coincide with the election.

Marijuana legalization is the single feather in their caps, the only Liberal campaign promise that has been fulfilled. The exaggeration of firearm related crime in Canada, accompanied by sensational talk of a handgun ban is being used to facilitate their re-election. Our once great nation’s rights and freedoms are on the Liberal chopping block, and we dare not say a single thing about it.

The Liberal model of removing firearms from private ownership for the safety of all is surely folly. We must remember the old adage “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns” [6], for criminals will surely continue to find ways to obtain them illicitly. If we don’t put a stop to this government and their envisioned misdeeds now, the agendas set forth in their first term will come to fruition during their second.

As ridiculous as the questionnaire is, we at RWN urge all Canadian Firearms owners to answer the Public Safety dialogue on the government website, available until Nov 10th.

Answer the multiple choice and be sure to reiterate in the comments section the foolishness and obvious ignorance of the questions asked. For example, defining ‘Assault Weapons’ and then going so far as to asking the public if they want easier access to them. Let them have it.

https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/cnslttns/hndgn/index-en.aspx

Equally important, the National Firearms Association have started an e-Petition concerning Canadian firearms rights. Let the Liberal government know that they cannot slide this extreme affront to our rights and freedoms under the radar and that you as Conservative Canadians are paying attention and will not stand for it.

https://petitions.ourcommons.ca/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-1883


Hypocrisy: how minority status trumps Justice

mi-bc-archive-orion-hutchinson

Orion Hutchinson

 

Delta B.C., October 2008. 21 year old Orion Hutchinson pulled into an intersection on his motorcycle and was struck down by a jeep, brutally being torn from this world. The other driver, who failed to stop, was Monty Robinson, on his way home from a party, his children in the back seat.

Immediately after accident, Robinson, an off-duty RCMP officer, began acting strangely. He handed his driver’s license off to a witnessing bystander and left scene on foot to put his children to bed. Upon arrival home he took a moment to hurriedly pound down a couple of shots of vodka. After tidying up, Robinson leisurely returned to the four-way stop and greeted police, now-on-scene. He explained to police that he had gone home to put his kids to be and to ‘calm his nerves’ with some alcohol.

 

mi-bc-120720-robinson-delta-crash

All the while, Hutchinson lay underneath this wreckage. It was unknown if he was alive or dead. Robinson did not care enough to even check.

Just the usual routine right? Not conspicuous at all, right?

Funnily enough, an unnamed toxicologist at the ensuing trial testified that she had given classes to police officers how to properly administer breathalyzer tests.  One of the components discussed in her course was dealing with a tactic called the “drinking after driving” defense, in which a driver might drink alcohol after an accident in efforts to disguise how impaired he might have been while driving.

It is perhaps important to mention that Robinson had been one of the officers present at this informative lecture.

It is also important to note that the toxicologist was adamant that this particular defense was a clear cut case of obstruction of justice and, although it may obscure measurement of alcohol consumption at the time of an accident, it would be considered a crime in the aftermath. But obstruction of justice, unfortunately, isn’t exactly as damning as a drunk driving leading to manslaughter.

Adding fuel to the fire, Robinson’s own daughter testified that she had witnessed her father consume several beers prior to the accident at the ‘Hallowe’en party’ they had attended. She could not remember the brand or how many, but it was definitely more than one. [1]

To continue on, the word ‘alcoholic’ was bandied about during the trial a great deal. Robinson admitted to drinking to “dull the pain of the job”. An unidentifiable Crown witness even came forward to testify that she had heard Robinson consulting with another individual about how to beat drunk driving charges by consuming alcohol afterward. [2]

And this was not the first time that Monty had found himself on the wrong side of the law while in uniform. Monty Robinson was also one of the RCMP officers involved in the tasering death of Robert Dziekanski in October 2007, almost exactly a year prior to his drunken accident. At this trial he was convicted of perjury by the Supreme Court in Vancouver. The final verdict in that incident: “The final inquiry report released Friday June 18, 2010 concluded the RCMP were not justified in using a Taser against Mr. Dziekański and that the officers later deliberately misrepresented their actions to investigators.” [3] One could say that Monty had had practice lying to officers and was accustomed to using deception to justify his actions in the line of duty.

 

08 four e / 2nd batch (rough sequence only). ** This is second batch = more detail ** Nov. 14, 2007. Frame grab from video, released to media today, shot by Paul Pritchard at the Vancouver International Airport when he witnessed the tasering of Robert Dziekanski. Handout - video courtesy Paul Pritchard. [PNG Merlin Archive] [PNG Merlin Archive]

Hey, I think I recognize that guy on the right helping murder that helpless Polish guy…

Damning evidence indeed. And, if the story were to end here, one might draw the sensible conclusion that this off duty RCMP officer, who ought to have been held to higher standards than common citizens, should have had the book thrown at him by the courts. He would have had to have been made an example and seen the fullest extent of judiciary punishment. That would make sense, wouldn’t it?

 

former-rcmp-cpl-benjamin-monty-robinson-20120720

Obstruction of Justice? Pshh…Been there, done that!

Let that sit with you for a moment. We’ll get back to this in a moment, but first, let’s have a look at different individual and an unrelated incident, coincidentally in the same part of the country.

Let us now turn to an incident that occurred on February 2011, Edmond’s Station in Burnaby B.C. Veteran bus driver Charles Dixon noticed an individual sneaking through the rear door of the bus he was operating without payment. Dixon demanded that the man approach and pay for his ride or exit the bus. The stranger made his way to the front of the bus, seemingly to make payment. Suddenly and without provocation, the passenger attacked Dixon, smashing his fists into the unsuspecting bus driver’s face. Shattered face in his hands, the 55 year old driver crumpled and fell to the floor from the sucker punch.

Dixon’s son, who also happened to be on the bus at the time, went to the defense of his father and was also assaulted by Louie who at this point it was noticed was also extremely intoxicated.
This was also not the first time he had attacked a late night bus driver.
(http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/man-who-punched-bus-driver-spared-jail-time-due-to-his-native-ancestry/article4098224/)

Charles Dixon

Sucker punched the generations of ‘White Guilt’ right out of him.

His single blow broke two bones on the right side of the driver’s face and caused other injuries, including cognitive and psychological difficulties. The momentary lapse of sanity and act of extreme aggression by Louie had forever altered Dixon and his life.

A man just trying to do his job was assaulted and very nearly killed.

Again, common sense would dictate that Louie would be behind bars for a very long time for his violent and psychotic act.

But this is Canada – where common sense is far and few between.
And both of these men have one ‘Golden Ticket’in common – they are both aboriginal.

hi-bc-111129-charles-dixon-4col

Oh Gosh – You’re aboriginal? That changes everything!! Please, hit me again!

Robinson’s sentence for the death of Orion Hutchinson that night when he mowed him down with his jeep, children in tow?(Keep in mind, he stonewalled at every turn and was caught lying on the stand more than once during his trial)
One month of house arrest, 11 months on probation. A letter of apology to the Hutchinson family and a fine of $1,000 to Victim Services.
Why? B.C. Supreme Court Judge Janice Dillon is quoted as stating “mitigating factors” – including taking into account his aboriginal heritage. No charges for driving under the influence, only charges for obstruction of justice.

Del Louie’s sentence for assaulting and forever altering the life of Charles Dixon?
Provincial Court Judge Karen Walker handed him an 18-month conditional sentence to be served at a rehab residence, 200 hours of community service and two years probation – due to his ‘aboriginal heritage’ and Fetal Alcohol Syndrome Disorder.

The ‘Race’ Card wins again – Hell, it trumps the rest of the deck any time its played it seems.

Leftists lauded these decisions as a victory for equality and compensation for our cruel and malevolent dealings with our natives.

I could go on and on with examples, but will digress after these two.
Since the 1998 ruling of Regina v Gladue – where the Supreme Court of Canada issued an iron-clad edict that sentencing judges must search out lenient or creative sentences for aboriginal offenders that recognize the oppressive cultural conditions, there are many court cases available to peruse where perpetrators of horrific crimes both to native AND non-native individuals were thrown out or given slaps on the wrist due to aboriginal ancestry.
(http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/judges-must-weigh-cultural-factors-in-native-sentencing-court-rules/article535585/)

Single-Handed,_Charles_Marion_Russell_1912

…I sentence you to one ‘macaroni noodle picture’ and three ‘smiley face paintings’ to put on our fridge at the Police Station

What I consider extremely racist however, is the Liberal mentality that these people are somewhat ‘inhuman’ and not up to the standards of the law and should therefore be exempt due to their ‘having to be cared for’ status. All the while, individuals seeking equality and justice are then considered RACIST…You know, like the average common sense Canadian…oh, and did I mention THE BC UNION OF INDIAN CHIEFS?

“This is a misapplication in his case because (these provisions) were never meant to be a loophole or a matter of convenience that high-priced lawyers can reach for in order to keep their clients out of jail,So I think in that regard, this is a miscarriage of those provisions in the justice system.”

-B.C. Union of Indian Chiefs Grand Chief Stewart Phillip to ‘The Province’ Newspaper in regards to the trial of Monty Robinson

The hypocrisy of Liberals implying that aboriginals and other minorities should not be punished due to their inability to tell right from wrong, and then push quotas of ethnic minorities into positions of dutiful law enforcement is so ridiculously racist and at the same time hypocritically insane that I have no idea how they can argue either side of their farce of an argument with a straight face knowing what is on the other side of the coin. It is refreshing to see that a considerable amount of natives see the ridiculousness of the scenario as well.

$(KGrHqUOKisE3G+OKBSHBN3,tmO8lg--0_35

“You’re a good little indian, yes you are, yes you are!” … “Give it a rest, Whitey!”

The color of your skin, your ethnicity, and your upbringing are no excuse for blatant criminal activity.
Being more of a minority does not make the extent of the crime any less horrific and the victim any less victimized.

In my opinion, if we are all equal, there should be no conceivable premise for favoritism with anything – especially the law. It could have just as easily been a caucasian to perpetrate the crimes above. The only difference would have been that justice probably would have been served.

Justice may be blind, but she can apparently see skin color – at least in Canada…