Canadian Politics Today

Federal Politics => Canadian Politics => Topic started by: Squidward von Squidderson on April 19, 2020, 08:25:48 pm


Title: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Squidward von Squidderson on April 19, 2020, 08:25:48 pm
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5537598

Quote
At least 16 people were killed during a gunman's bloody 12-hour rampage through several Nova Scotia communities, and police warn there may be more victims.

In an update on Sunday evening, RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki said police know of at least 16 victims, besides the shooter. She also confirmed the incident is not terror-related at this time.

Nova Scotia RCMP said people were killed in several locations across the province, including a veteran RCMP officer.

Police said there may be more victims who have not been discovered yet and their investigation continues.

RCMP identified the gunman as Gabriel Wortman, 51. His rampage began late Saturday night in the small community of Portapique, N.S., about 40 kilometres west of Truro, N.S. He led police on a chase Sunday morning along one of the province's busiest highways.

The chase ended near a gas station about 35 kilometres north of Halifax in Enfield, N.S., around 11:40 a.m. local time. Police confirmed Sunday evening that the gunman was dead.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Omni on April 19, 2020, 08:40:20 pm
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5537598

Wow, I listened to the CBC tv interview earlier today when they said it was at least 10 and probably more. It's a shocker for sure and I used to live in NS and they were as nice a people as one could hope for. My heart goes out of course to those who have lost loved ones, and overall to the people who obviously must be in shock. Can you imagine how disturbing it would be if you happened to be a patient of this man. Hang in there Nova Scotian's we're by your side. 
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Granny on April 20, 2020, 05:17:32 pm
19 now
Some known to him, some random.

https://nationalpost.com/news/who-was-gabriel-wortman-the-denturist-behind-the-nova-scotia-mass-shooting
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: guest18 on April 20, 2020, 05:41:36 pm
I don't give a **** about who he was, National Post.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Squidward von Squidderson on May 08, 2020, 02:20:23 am
Good thing these cops were lousy shots...   whoever they were firing at probably $hit their pants!

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/confusion-over-cruiser-safety-vest-led-rcmp-to-shot-at-person-who-wasn-t-n-s-gunman-1.5559321

Quote
Confusion over a parked police cruiser and someone wearing a safety vest led two RCMP officers to start shooting at a person at a central Nova Scotia firehall during the manhunt for the gunman in last month's mass shooting, sources confirmed to CBC.

Officers missed and no one was injured in the April 19 incident at the Onslow Belmont Fire Brigade hall, which was left peppered with bullet holes. The gunman at the centre of the manhunt was not in the area at the time.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on May 12, 2020, 12:34:28 pm
Aside from firing at the wrong guy, aside from the inexplicable failure to issue an emergency broadcast alert, the cops overlooked red flags in the gunman's behavior.

https://www.halifaxexaminer.ca/featured/he-was-a-psychopath/

Quote
It began, Boe said, around 2004, not long after GW bought a house in Portapique.

    They weren’t even in that house for a year when [GW’s partner] ran over to my house one day saying that Gabriel was beating her up and she was scared. She wanted to hide somewhere because he had blocked her car with his truck so she couldn’t get out. But she managed to get away from the house.

Boe said she told GW’s partner that she needed to get help, that there were “a lot of services” and “a lot of places” that would keep her safe. Boe said she was unable to convince her, because, according to Boe, GW’s partner said that there was no way, because he was going to kill her.

But why didn't she tell the police?!  Well, she did:

Quote
Boe said she learned GW had again physically abused his partner, this time on a piece of property he owned:

    And he had [her] on the ground. He was choking her, screaming at her, telling everybody around… Just screaming at her and stuff … It was bad, bad, bad, bad.


Boe said the assault was witnessed by one of GW’s relatives, who was a good friend of hers when he lived in Portapique and who is now in a long-term care facility, following a stroke. Two other men also watched it happen.

When the relative told her about the incident, Boe called the RCMP. The responding officers asked if any of the three men would testify to witnessing the assault. Boe didn’t know. However, she did tell the responding officers that “he’s got a **** load of illegal weapons. I’ve seen them. My husband has seen them.”


Here's what happened next:

Quote
Boe said she and her husband know what weapons Canadians are allowed to own with a Firearms Acquisition Certificate, and that they knew GW’s were not legal. So she told the RCMP that, and then in their presence, she called GW’s relative and put him on speakerphone so the Mounties could hear him:

    So I called [the relative] and I said… “would you be willing to talk to the RCMP about what happened with [GW’s partner] and the illegal weapons that Gabriel has?” And he said, “no way, because he’s already told me he’ll kill me, because he’s already told me that he’s killed people in the United States.

    And I said, “Okay …  just chill. Just relax. Don’t worry about it.” I hung up and the RCMP basically said, “the only way that we can actually get the information on this and prove it … like for her being beaten and strangled and stuff like that. She has to say it.”  And there’s no way that she would do that. Gabriel had her under his thumb. And I mean, literally. If her family came over, he would be right beside her. So she wouldn’t say anything to them about what happened at all
.

22 people are dead because the RCMP suck at their job.

 -k
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Squidward von Squidderson on May 12, 2020, 01:19:13 pm
Aside from firing at the wrong guy, aside from the inexplicable failure to issue an emergency broadcast alert, the cops overlooked red flags in the gunman's behavior.

https://www.halifaxexaminer.ca/featured/he-was-a-psychopath/

But why didn't she tell the police?!  Well, she did:


Here's what happened next:

22 people are dead because the RCMP suck at their job.


I’m not willing to jump to that conclusion, especially on the basis of your linked article.  If no one testified to witnessing the assault, and the victim wouldn’t tell the police the truth, what are they to do?  They can’t search for guns on someone’s say-so.... someone who heard from someone about the assault. 

You would be freaking out about police overreach and “the war on gun owners” if the police were allowed to do this. 

It could be that the police were incompetent, and it seems in some ways, they were.  Not sending out an emergency broadcast seems pretty damn bad.  But, again, this isn’t necessarily a policing issue...  it could be an issue with the Province...   I have no idea who is responsible for giving the cops the go ahead to send out a broadcast, or what the routine is for doing so. 

It’s going to take an independent public inquiry to get to the bottom of all the things that went wrong here. 
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: JMT on May 12, 2020, 03:43:10 pm

22 people are dead because the RCMP suck at their job.


I always find that Monday morning is the best time to watch football, too.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on May 12, 2020, 11:47:42 pm

I’m not willing to jump to that conclusion, especially on the basis of your linked article.  If no one testified to witnessing the assault, and the victim wouldn’t tell the police the truth, what are they to do? 

Police don't need the victim's permission to investigate domestic violence allegations.

They can’t search for guns on someone’s say-so.... someone who heard from someone about the assault.

This is a guy with a known history of violence.
https://news.sky.com/story/father-of-canadas-worst-ever-mass-murderer-ive-contemplated-suicide-11978735
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2020/04/21/death-toll-could-rise-in-nova-scotia-as-investigation-into-mass-killing-continues.html

Assaulted a teenager on the street, required to take anger management and prohibited from owning weapons for 9 months. Beat up his own father. Threatened to kill his uncle. 

You've got a guy with a known history of violence, a credible allegation of domestic violence, an eyewitness claiming they've seen illegal firearms. All of this should have been enough to amount to "probable cause" to for police to investigate.

You would be freaking out about police overreach and “the war on gun owners” if the police were allowed to do this. 

This is a bullshit response for several reasons:

 (1) clearly neither you nor the government nor the RCMP give a **** about the feelings of gun owners, so citing the feelings of gun owners as a reason why you don't think they should have investigated this guy is clearly a load of crap.

 (2) legal gun owners, those of us who went through the process and got our licenses, have no complaint about the police investigating a guy with a known history of violence and a credible allegation of illegally acquired firearms. Legal gun owners have no interest in letting criminals obtain firearms and no interest in preventing the police from investigating people who have illegally acquired them.

 (3) I wouldn't be complaining about "the war on gun owners" if they did this, because the Firearms Act (https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/f-11.6/page-11.html) already gives the government the power to legally inspect my home for firearms on nothing more than a "reasonable belief" that there might be something amiss.  We have already agreed to let the firearms office inspect our collections at their convenience. We signed up for that when we applied for the license.  You have a PAL, don't you?  You should already know this.

Quote
Inspection

    102 (1) Subject to section 104, for the purpose of ensuring compliance with this Act and the regulations, an inspector may at any reasonable time enter and inspect any place where the inspector believes on reasonable grounds a business is being carried on or there is a record of a business, any place in which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds there is a gun collection or a record in relation to a gun collection or any place in which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds there is a prohibited firearm or there are more than 10 firearms and may

        (a) open any container that the inspector believes on reasonable grounds contains a firearm or other thing in respect of which this Act or the regulations apply;

        (b) examine any firearm and examine any other thing that the inspector finds and take samples of it;

        (c) conduct any tests or analyses or take any measurements; and

        (d) require any person to produce for examination or copying any records, books of account or other documents that the inspector believes on reasonable grounds contain information that is relevant to the enforcement of this Act or the regulations.

As well it needs to be pointed out that the police can and do confiscate firearms from licensed gun owners if they have reasonable concerns that the license holder may be a danger to themselves or other people. 


But all that only applies to PAL/RPAL holders.  Doesn't it seem ridiculous that if the RCMP gets a tip that a PAL holder has a gun that they shouldn't have, they can investigate immediately, but in this situation where the RCMP got a tip that somebody who doesn't have a license at all has a gun they shouldn't have, who also has a known history of violence and a credible allegation of domestic violence, their reaction is "meh, what can we do?"

It has a Monty Pythonesque quality to it.

"That bloke has firearms! It ain't legal!"
"Yeh, but ye see 'e ain't got a license."
"I know 'e ain't got a license, that's what makes it illegal!"
"Well if 'e 'ad a license we could go investigate, coz o' the Firearms Act. But since 'e ain't got a license, ain't nuffin' we can do, see?"
"Well if 'e 'ad a license it wouldn't be illegal!"
"Well that's a real conundrum, innit?"

It could be that the police were incompetent, and it seems in some ways, they were.  Not sending out an emergency broadcast seems pretty damn bad.  But, again, this isn’t necessarily a policing issue...  it could be an issue with the Province...   I have no idea who is responsible for giving the cops the go ahead to send out a broadcast, or what the routine is for doing so. 

It’s going to take an independent public inquiry to get to the bottom of all the things that went wrong here.

There should definitely be.

 -k
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on May 12, 2020, 11:50:50 pm
I always find that Monday morning is the best time to watch football, too.

They didn't bother investigating a credible allegation of domestic violence and an eyewitness claim of illegal guns, involving a guy with a known history of violence and anger management issues...

 ...and your response is "yeah well hindsight is 20/20"?

 -k
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: JMT on May 13, 2020, 12:40:13 am
They didn't bother investigating a credible allegation of domestic violence and an eyewitness claim of illegal guns, involving a guy with a known history of violence and anger management issues...

 ...and your response is "yeah well hindsight is 20/20"?

 -k

Hindsight is 20/20. That’s why we need to reduce access to guns from all sources, seeing how easily this guy got them.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on May 24, 2020, 02:09:16 pm
Hindsight is 20/20.

You don't get to say "highdsight is 20/20" when something entirely foreseeable happens.  If you store your bowling ball on the top shelf in your closet, and it rolls of and brains somebody when they open the door, you don't get to excuse yourself by saying "hindsight is 20/20", because that was an entirely foreseeable outcome.  You don't say "hindsight is 20/20", you say "I really screwed up."

The police were given a credible report of domestic violence. They were given an eyewitness statement that he had illegal firearms. He already had a record with police and a known history of anger issues.  Violence was entirely predictable.  Obviously nobody could have expected an outcome this horrific, but it was entirely predictable that somebody-- most likely his female partner-- was going to get hurt or killed. They were given all the information they needed, and they did nothing.

This wasn't a failure of gun control laws, this was a failure of policing. Period.  Any attempt to deflect blame from the RCMP to legal gun owners is dishonest and ridiculous.

That’s why we need to reduce access to guns from all sources, seeing how easily this guy got them.

At this point we are like one of those Japanese houses with oiled-paper walls.  You can put up a thicker door, you can put a deadbolt on the door, a bar on the door, a security plate on the door, but continuing to focus your efforts on the door does nothing further to make the paper house more secure.

If the police won't even listen to an eyewitness claim that he had illegal firearms, what good does any of this do? Laws only work if the police will bother to enforce them.

This was a failure of policing.

 -k
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Squidward von Squidderson on May 24, 2020, 03:14:00 pm
Quote
If the police won't even listen to an eyewitness claim that he had illegal firearms...

Cite
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on May 24, 2020, 03:36:27 pm
Cite

I already posted an article supporting that.  More have come out since to verify that. You already tried to deflect that with your super-dumb post about how gun owners would be mad if police investigated it, remember?

 -k
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Squidward von Squidderson on May 24, 2020, 03:43:53 pm
I already posted an article supporting that.  More have come out since to verify that. You already tried to deflect that with your super-dumb post about how gun owners would be mad if police investigated it, remember?

 -k

No.  I commented on that article that these people had 2nd hand information that there were illegal guns. 
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: JMT on May 24, 2020, 08:16:14 pm
You don't get to say "highdsight is 20/20" when something entirely foreseeable happens.  If you store your bowling ball on the top shelf in your closet, and it rolls of and brains somebody when they open the door, you don't get to excuse yourself by saying "hindsight is 20/20", because that was an entirely foreseeable outcome.  You don't say "hindsight is 20/20", you say "I really screwed up."

The police were given a credible report of domestic violence. They were given an eyewitness statement that he had illegal firearms. He already had a record with police and a known history of anger issues.  Violence was entirely predictable.  Obviously nobody could have expected an outcome this horrific, but it was entirely predictable that somebody-- most likely his female partner-- was going to get hurt or killed. They were given all the information they needed, and they did nothing.

This wasn't a failure of gun control laws, this was a failure of policing. Period.  Any attempt to deflect blame from the RCMP to legal gun owners is dishonest and ridiculous.

At this point we are like one of those Japanese houses with oiled-paper walls.  You can put up a thicker door, you can put a deadbolt on the door, a bar on the door, a security plate on the door, but continuing to focus your efforts on the door does nothing further to make the paper house more secure.

If the police won't even listen to an eyewitness claim that he had illegal firearms, what good does any of this do? Laws only work if the police will bother to enforce them.

This was a failure of policing.

 -k

Exactly what level of police state are you comfortable with? I, for one, don't want officers arresting, searching, or interrogating people bases on 'information'.

Like I said, hindsight is 20/20. We can learn from this, but we can't go back. Accusing one of the world's most professional police force of incompetence over human failures is something.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: wilber on May 24, 2020, 08:42:33 pm
Exactly what level of police state are you comfortable with? I, for one, don't want officers arresting, searching, or interrogating people bases on 'information'.

Like I said, hindsight is 20/20. We can learn from this, but we can't go back. Accusing one of the world's most professional police force of incompetence over human failures is something.

So if someone reports illegal weapons, police shouldn't react because it is a violation of privacy. Do the police actually have to see the weapons before they do anything? If you own restricted firearms legally, the police can enter your home to ensure they are stored properly.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: JMT on May 24, 2020, 08:52:00 pm
So if someone reports illegal weapons, police shouldn't react because it is a violation of privacy.

How far would you have them go based on hearsay? How many of your actual rights, as opposed to mythical gun rights, are you willing to give up?
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: wilber on May 24, 2020, 09:24:02 pm
How far would you have them go based on hearsay? How many of your actual rights, as opposed to mythical gun rights, are you willing to give up?

Since when did someone saying that they and their husband had personally seen them become hearsay?
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: JMT on May 24, 2020, 09:26:23 pm
Since when did someone saying that they and their husband had personally seen them become hearsay?

Since always.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: wilber on May 24, 2020, 11:28:02 pm
Since always.

So if you see something and tell the police, it is just heresy and they should ignore you.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Squidward von Squidderson on May 24, 2020, 11:47:28 pm
So if you see something and tell the police, it is just heresy and they should ignore you.

I am guessing that the report from these people about all the “illegal guns” probably wasn’t strong enough to get a search warrant...  despite what they told the press.

Police aren’t shy about looking for guns when they’re reported.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on May 24, 2020, 11:53:51 pm
Exactly what level of police state are you comfortable with? I, for one, don't want officers arresting, searching, or interrogating people bases on 'information'.

On the one hand we have people like Squidward saying that the government should do everything possible to prevent a mass shooting, and yet we have this example of the police being spoon-fed the information they needed to actually prevent a tragedy, and you guys are trying to rationalize their inaction by saying "yeah well that would have violated his privacy."

Well guess what:  all this talk from Bill Blair and the Prime Minister and others about doing more to reduce the flow of illegal guns coming into Canada?  Completely worthless if the police aren't willing to do the police-work required to actually investigate.

If somebody gave the RCMP a tip about an alleged white nationalist or Muslim extremist who was asking around town about how to buy a large quantity of fertilizer, how do you think the authorities would weigh the question of public safety vs privacy?  If the police received a tip like that, do you think they'd say "well, we can't violate this individual's privacy based on just some 'information'"?

Bill Blair also talked about "red flag laws", which are also worthless if the police aren't going to bother doing police work. We already have red flag laws.  One of the first things you see when you go to the RCMP firearms page is information for reporting somebody who you think might be a danger (https://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/en/firearms/contact-the-canadian-firearms-program). If a credible tip isn't enough to interest the police in investigating somebody, what does it take? Wandering down mainstreet with a gun in plain sight?

You and Squidward and Bill Blair and PM Trudeau all talk a big game about how they aren't just harassing licensed gun owners, they're Doing More~~~! to stop illegal guns.

But presented with this example of how the police could have and should have Done More~~~! your response is "b-b-but privacy!"  The truth is that you don't have the courage of your convictions, and you don't really believe the police should Do More~~~!

The truth is you're not okay with doing the police work required to actually crack down on illegal guns, because you understand that there has to be a balance between providing security and maintaining peoples' freedoms.

Which is as it should be. But don't pretend like further harassment of legal gun owners is going to compensate for it.

Like I said, hindsight is 20/20. We can learn from this, but we can't go back. Accusing one of the world's most professional police force of incompetence over human failures is something.

The RCMP have a lot of "human failures" on their resume.  Their track record is hardly above reproach.  And in this instance there's plenty of questions to be asked. The first is why no amber alert was issued. The second is how this guy who was a walking red flag slipped through their fingers.  A third is why so little information is forthcoming about the details of this incident, and why what little data they've surrendered has been so heavily redacted.

 -k
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: waldo on May 25, 2020, 12:39:10 am
On the one hand we have people like Squidward saying that the government should do everything possible to prevent a mass shooting, and yet we have this example of the police being spoon-fed the information they needed to actually prevent a tragedy

if only you could cite support your claims, hey! The accounts I've read state the RCMP have no record of an alleged complaint lodged by the 'former neighbour' (a supposed complaint of assault by the killer - assault said to have been witnessed by several people... and of the killer owning illegal weapons). By the former neighbour's own account she stated the RCMP advised her they couldn't act on the assault claim without the help of witnesses - who, apparently, were unwilling to come forward and go on record.

be better member kimmy - be better!

But don't pretend like further harassment of legal gun owners is going to compensate for it.

is it harassment to set up an exchange program to pay you 'fair-market' value for your guns? Why do you need... really need... the firearms you're alleging harassment over?
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: JMT on May 25, 2020, 01:05:35 am
On the one hand we have people like Squidward saying that the government should do everything possible to prevent a mass shooting, and yet we have this example of the police being spoon-fed the information they needed to actually prevent a tragedy, and you guys are trying to rationalize their inaction by saying "yeah well that would have violated his privacy."

Well guess what:  all this talk from Bill Blair and the Prime Minister and others about doing more to reduce the flow of illegal guns coming into Canada?  Completely worthless if the police aren't willing to do the police-work required to actually investigate.

If somebody gave the RCMP a tip about an alleged white nationalist or Muslim extremist who was asking around town about how to buy a large quantity of fertilizer, how do you think the authorities would weigh the question of public safety vs privacy?  If the police received a tip like that, do you think they'd say "well, we can't violate this individual's privacy based on just some 'information'"?

Bill Blair also talked about "red flag laws", which are also worthless if the police aren't going to bother doing police work. We already have red flag laws.  One of the first things you see when you go to the RCMP firearms page is information for reporting somebody who you think might be a danger (https://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/en/firearms/contact-the-canadian-firearms-program). If a credible tip isn't enough to interest the police in investigating somebody, what does it take? Wandering down mainstreet with a gun in plain sight?

You and Squidward and Bill Blair and PM Trudeau all talk a big game about how they aren't just harassing licensed gun owners, they're Doing More~~~! to stop illegal guns.

But presented with this example of how the police could have and should have Done More~~~! your response is "b-b-but privacy!"  The truth is that you don't have the courage of your convictions, and you don't really believe the police should Do More~~~!

The truth is you're not okay with doing the police work required to actually crack down on illegal guns, because you understand that there has to be a balance between providing security and maintaining peoples' freedoms.

Which is as it should be. But don't pretend like further harassment of legal gun owners is going to compensate for it.

The RCMP have a lot of "human failures" on their resume.  Their track record is hardly above reproach.  And in this instance there's plenty of questions to be asked. The first is why no amber alert was issued. The second is how this guy who was a walking red flag slipped through their fingers.  A third is why so little information is forthcoming about the details of this incident, and why what little data they've surrendered has been so heavily redacted.

 -k

If you think this is about just privacy idk what to say.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: wilber on May 25, 2020, 09:05:49 am
I am guessing that the report from these people about all the “illegal guns” probably wasn’t strong enough to get a search warrant...  despite what they told the press.

Police aren’t shy about looking for guns when they’re reported.

Obviously they were wrong.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on May 25, 2020, 09:28:31 am
If you think this is about just privacy idk what to say.

Here's why you don't know what to say:

You're not comfortable with the kind of potentially invasive police work that would be required to actually prevent illegal firearms from entering the country, but you can't articulate how Bill Blair's promises of tougher border enforcement and red-flag laws and so-on will have any practical value without that kind of police work.

That's why you don't know what to say.

 -k
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on May 25, 2020, 09:36:56 am
if only you could cite support your claims, hey! The accounts I've read state the RCMP have no record of an alleged complaint lodged by the 'former neighbour' (a supposed complaint of assault by the killer - assault said to have been witnessed by several people... and of the killer owning illegal weapons). By the former neighbour's own account she stated the RCMP advised her they couldn't act on the assault claim without the help of witnesses - who, apparently, were unwilling to come forward and go on record.

The police don't actually need the victim's cooperation to investigate domestic abuse.

is it harassment to set up an exchange program to pay you 'fair-market' value for your guns?

If you prefer some other phrase to harassment, that's up to you.

Why do you need... really need... the firearms you're alleging harassment over?

There are many, many things that people don't need.  We don't need cars that go 3 times the legal speed limit. We don't need recreational watercraft. We don't need backcountry snowmobiling. We don't need swimming pools. We don't need skiing.  All that stuff kills people too, and isn't needed.   For that matter, we don't need alcohol or tobacco either, and that stuff costs far more lives than guns.

We don't decide to ban stuff based on whether people need it.

 -k
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: wilber on May 25, 2020, 10:02:22 am
Life would be really boring if we banned all the things we don't need which kill people.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: JMT on May 25, 2020, 10:28:16 am
Here's why you don't know what to say:

I's not that at all.  We have guaranteed constitutional rights when it comes to unreasonable search and seizure. I'll have them ban every gun in existence before I give that up, because that's actually important.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: waldo on May 25, 2020, 10:55:46 am
if only you could cite support your claims, hey! The accounts I've read state the RCMP have no record of an alleged complaint lodged by the 'former neighbour' (a supposed complaint of assault by the killer - assault said to have been witnessed by several people... and of the killer owning illegal weapons). By the former neighbour's own account she stated the RCMP advised her they couldn't act on the assault claim without the help of witnesses - who, apparently, were unwilling to come forward and go on record.

be better member kimmy - be better!

The police don't actually need the victim's cooperation to investigate domestic abuse.

and the police investigation being able to support a successful prosecution... witnesses not necessary? Like I said, if only you could cite support your claims.


is it harassment to set up an exchange program to pay you 'fair-market' value for your guns?

If you prefer some other phrase to harassment, that's up to you.

why thank you! I'll refer to it as: "a lawful assault-style firearms buyback program - one instituted to purchase privately owned assault-style firearms with a goal to reduce the number of assault-style firearms owned by civilians... and to provide a process whereby civilians can sell their privately owned assault-style firearms to the government without risk of prosecution... while receiving fair market value for said assault-style firearms"


Why do you need... really need... the firearms you're alleging harassment over?

There are many, many things that people don't need.  We don't need cars that go 3 times the legal speed limit. We don't need recreational watercraft. We don't need backcountry snowmobiling. We don't need swimming pools. We don't need skiing.  All that stuff kills people too, and isn't needed.   For that matter, we don't need alcohol or tobacco either, and that stuff costs far more lives than guns.

We don't decide to ban stuff based on whether people need it.

that's a mighty deflection member kimmy! For some reason you chose not to describe why YOU need... really need... the assault-style firearms you're alleging harassment over?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bz4tvxJB790 --- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcUpDssvhPU

Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: wilber on May 25, 2020, 11:31:22 am
Quote
and the police investigation being able to support a successful prosecution... witnesses not necessary? Like I said, if only you could cite support your claims.

Investigating domestic abuse is about 1: preventing someone from being harmed 2: supporting a prosecution, in that order.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: waldo on May 25, 2020, 11:46:47 am
Investigating domestic abuse is about 1: preventing someone from being harmed 2: supporting a prosecution, in that order.

and there are practicalities you want to ignore. Clogged courts force prosecutors to align their limited resources to cases they can actually make/win... which requires a partnership with police bringing forward investigation results that include witnesses willing to make their accounts public - to go on record... to be prepared to go to court if called.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: wilber on May 25, 2020, 11:58:40 am
and there are practicalities you want to ignore. Clogged courts force prosecutors to align their limited resources to cases they can actually make/win... which requires a partnership with police bringing forward investigation results that include witnesses willing to make their accounts public - to go on record... to be prepared to go to court if called.

The number one job of the police is public safety, that comes before anything else.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: waldo on May 25, 2020, 12:10:07 pm
The number one job of the police is public safety, that comes before anything else.

you should apply that/your statement to this situation and the alleged domestic violence - are you stating, with certainty, that the RCMP did not investigate the allegation made by the former neighbour - notwithstanding, apparently, the RCMP state/claim they have no record of the former neighbour's supposed complaint. I appreciate you really want to take this discussion away from gun control measures targeting assault-style firearms...
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: wilber on May 25, 2020, 12:22:11 pm
you should apply that/your statement to this situation and the alleged domestic violence - are you stating, with certainty, that the RCMP did not investigate the allegation made by the former neighbour - notwithstanding, apparently, the RCMP state/claim they have no record of the former neighbour's supposed complaint. I appreciate you really want to take this discussion away from gun control measures targeting assault-style firearms...

Maybe you should re read the title of this topic.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: waldo on May 25, 2020, 02:09:14 pm
Maybe you should re read the title of this topic.

look back and advise which member steered the discussion towards firearms... assault style firearms - cause it twas not the waldo! In any case, do you believe this should be a thread devoid of any references to, uhhh... the type of firearms used, the resulting impact of said firearms, their origin, etc.?
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: wilber on May 25, 2020, 03:05:02 pm
look back and advise which member steered the discussion towards firearms... assault style firearms - cause it twas not the waldo! In any case, do you believe this should be a thread devoid of any references to, uhhh... the type of firearms used, the resulting impact of said firearms, their origin, etc.?


I've never said it shouldn't include references to firearms but it is about the slaughter of 22 people.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: wilber on June 04, 2020, 06:07:26 pm
Quote
Three of the illegal guns came from the U.S., one was obtained illegally in Canada through the estate of a deceased associate, and the fifth belonged to Const. Heidi Stevenson, who was killed while trying to stop the gunman. Only one of the guns used in the attack was mentioned in a 2011 police bulletin about the gunman.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/ns-gunman-2011-warning-1.5589277
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on June 07, 2020, 01:52:18 pm
They had a credible report of domestic violence.  They had an eyewitness claim that he had illegal guns. They had another tip about a stash of guns and a claim that he wanted to kill a cop.  This guy was a walking red flag, and the police wouldn't/couldn't do anything about it.

If they didn't have enough information to look into Gabriel Wortman, there's no hope of them being able to deliver on promises of tougher border enforcement or red flag laws.   The new gun ban wouldn't have changed one iota of the events in Portapique, and it's pathetic and dishonest for politicians to keep pretending it would have.

Quote
Police agencies across Nova Scotia were warned in May 2011 that a denturist named Gabriel Wortman had a stash of guns and said he wanted "to kill a cop," according to records newly obtained by CBC News.

But the Nova Scotia RCMP can't say what, if anything, was done with the tip about the man who police believe went on to kill 22 people, including an RCMP officer, in rural Nova Scotia in April.

The 2011 warning came after an unnamed source approached Truro police Cpl. Greg Densmore with detailed information about where Wortman kept his guns, including that he may have been transporting a handgun between his home in Dartmouth and his cottage in Portapique, N.S.

CBC News obtained a copy of Densmore's report from the Truro Police Service through an access-to-information request. Sections are redacted, but it shows the bulletin was distributed through the Criminal Intelligence Service of Nova Scotia, a network of policing agencies that share information.

 -k
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on June 07, 2020, 02:01:52 pm

that's a mighty deflection member kimmy! For some reason you chose not to describe why YOU need... really need... the assault-style firearms you're alleging harassment over? 

It's not a deflection.  Canadians don't need to justify their ownership of their legally-acquired property.  Somebody with a 6000 square foot house doesn't have to justify it. Somebody with a high performance car doesn't need to justify it. I don't need to justify owning my rifle.

 -k
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: wilber on June 07, 2020, 07:21:21 pm
Interesting that almost two months later, the RCMP still hasn't revealed what firearms were used. I don't recall this ever happening before. What's the big secret?
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Granny on June 08, 2020, 09:45:13 am
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/ns-gunman-2011-warning-1.5589277

Typical RCMP bs - never cooperate with another police jurisdiction, never act on info shared with them by other police force ... Also responsible for their inaction on MMIW info - women taken in City jurisdictions and murdered and dumped in RCMP jurisdictions outside the city. ... perps know the RCMP won't even bother to investigate info from city police.
DEFUND DISBAND the RCMP, I say.
They have no standards for practice, no public accountability: Even when a complaint was made to the CRCC, the RCMP simply failed to respond.
They think they're f'n god, out of control and accountable to no one.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on June 08, 2020, 11:46:10 pm
Interesting that almost two months later, the RCMP still hasn't revealed what firearms were used. I don't recall this ever happening before. What's the big secret?

They have been very closed lipped about everything related to this case.  What little information the press has been able to obtain has been heavily redacted.


What's the big secret?  In regard to the firearms question, I will bet valuable Kimmy Points that the secret they are so reluctant to reveal is that the one Canadian-sourced gun used during the rampage (aside from Constable Stevenson's sidearm) is not on the list of weapons prohibited by the May OIC.   Wortman obtained this mystery gun illegally, from an estate sale. When they do eventually tell us what the mystery gun was, it's going to be a duck-hunting shotgun or a deer-hunting rifle, not a "military grade assault rifle".   And when they admit that, the last bit of phony pretense that the OIC has anything to do with Wortman's rampage will have completely evaporated.

 -k
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: waldo on June 09, 2020, 12:45:24 am
...the last bit of phony pretense that the OIC has anything to do with Wortman's rampage will have completely evaporated.

no - the phony pretense is yours! The ban intent has been Liberal Party policy within the platforms of the last 2 election campaigns...

no - your self-serving revisionism isn't factual: the regulations were always intended to be presented this session... late March. And then, you know, COVID-19 redirected the near entirety of the government's attention, particularly Public Safety Minister Blair's focus on border security and other pandemic related public safety concerns.

Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on June 09, 2020, 01:18:29 am
And yet they've fully co-opted the Nova Scotia murder spree to sell their initiative to the public. "See? This is why we have to act now!"  Never let a tragedy go to waste.

 -k
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: waldo on June 09, 2020, 01:23:11 am
...the last bit of phony pretense that the OIC has anything to do with Wortman's rampage will have completely evaporated.

no - the phony pretense is yours! The ban intent has been Liberal Party policy within the platforms of the last 2 election campaigns...

no - your self-serving revisionism isn't factual: the regulations were always intended to be presented this session... late March. And then, you know, COVID-19 redirected the near entirety of the government's attention, particularly Public Safety Minister Blair's focus on border security and other pandemic related public safety concerns.

And yet they've fully co-opted the Nova Scotia murder spree to sell their initiative to the public. "See? This is why we have to act now!"  Never let a tragedy go to waste.

who is your "they've"? I expect you have ready examples of your described "they've" and your stated, "initiative selling" - yes?
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on June 09, 2020, 01:33:48 am
no - the phony pretense is yours! The ban intent has been Liberal Party policy within the platforms of the last 2 election campaigns...


who is your "they've"? I expect you have ready examples of your described "they've" and your stated, "initiative selling" - yes?

Well, here's Bill Blair:

Quote
Both Blair and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau referenced the Nova Scotia shootings in their remarks, with Blair saying it "deepened our resolve to move forward as quickly as possible" to introduce regulations.

Bill was also out quick to point out that two of the weapons Wortman used were covered by the OIC:

Quote
"But I can tell you that every firearm begins legally and then moves into an illegal market," he said.

"And I can say with some confidence that the two long-guns that were involved in that investigation, without identifying them, are included on today's list."

So yes, they were certainly pimping the Nova Scotia murder spree to bolster their narrative.   

So how come Bill could tell us the same day of the OIC that two of Wortman's weapons were on the list, but over a month later they still can't tell us anything else? What are they hiding?

 -k

edit to add link:  https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/ns-shooting-firearms-1.5552773
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: waldo on June 09, 2020, 02:56:36 am
So yes, they were certainly pimping the Nova Scotia murder spree to bolster their narrative.   

So how come Bill could tell us the same day of the OIC that two of Wortman's weapons were on the list, but over a month later they still can't tell us anything else? What are they hiding?

only a gunner like you would call referencing Canada's deadliest gun shooting... "pimping it". Again, the ban intent has been prominent Liberal Party election campaign policy for the last 2 elections. Recent polls show an overwhelming percentage of those polled agree with the ban. You're on the losing side of this issue - get over it and just accept your eventual buyback monies.

your own linked article has Minister Blair deferring to the RCMP to provide additional details concerning the firearms the gunman used. To fit your narrative, can't you directly accuse the RCMP of... sumthin!
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: wilber on June 09, 2020, 09:17:34 am
only a gunner like you would call referencing Canada's deadliest gun shooting... "pimping it". Again, the ban intent has been prominent Liberal Party election campaign policy for the last 2 elections. Recent polls show an overwhelming percentage of those polled agree with the ban. You're on the losing side of this issue - get over it and just accept your eventual buyback monies.

your own linked article has Minister Blair deferring to the RCMP to provide additional details concerning the firearms the gunman used. To fit your narrative, can't you directly accuse the RCMP of... sumthin!

The public is on the losing side because the RCMP is deliberately withholding information it is entitled to and Trudeau is using it as an excuse to make major changes in gun legislation through an order in council without providing the evidence to justify it. When has the RCMP ever  done this before and why would they do it? Blair deferring my ass. More of JT’s vaunted transparency.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Granny on June 09, 2020, 10:36:26 am
The public is on the losing side because the RCMP is deliberately withholding information it is entitled to ... When has the RCMP ever  done this before and why would they do it?

Are you REALLY saying that the RCMP has never withheld information from the public?
 ???
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: wilber on June 09, 2020, 11:06:09 am
Are you REALLY saying that the RCMP has never withheld information from the public?
 ???

Regarding the firearms or other weapons used in a crime. No, I don't recall them ever doing that.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Granny on June 21, 2020, 08:16:31 am
Stranger still ...

https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/the-nova-scotia-shooter-case-has-hallmarks-of-an-undercover-operation/

The withdrawal of $475,000 in cash by the man who killed 22 Nova Scotians in April matches the method the RCMP uses to send money to confidential informants and agents, sources say.
...
If Wortman was an RCMP informant or agent, it could explain why the force appeared not to take action on complaints about his illegal guns and his assault on his common-law wife.

READ MORE: The Nova Scotia killer had ties to criminals and withdrew a huge sum of cash before the shooting

A Mountie familiar with the techniques used by the force in undercover operations, but not with the details of the investigation into the shooting, says Wortman could not have collected his own money from Brink’s as a private citizen.

“There’s no way a civilian can just make an arrangement like that,” he said in an interview.

He added that Wortman’s transaction is consistent with the Mountie’s experience in how the RCMP pays its assets. “I’ve worked a number of CI cases over the years and that’s how things go. All the payments are made in cash. To me that transaction alone proves he has a secret relationship with the force.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on June 22, 2020, 09:23:08 pm
They can't keep silent on this.  There are too many unanswered questions and it is undermining their credibility.

 -k
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Granny on June 22, 2020, 10:02:04 pm
They can't keep silent on this.  There are too many unanswered questions and it is undermining their credibility.

 -k

<crickets>

Unfortunately there is no reason to take any answer from the RCMP on faith. It’s time for a full judicial inquiry.

https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/time-for-real-answers-on-the-nova-scotia-mass-murder/
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Queefer Sutherland on June 22, 2020, 11:26:10 pm
So maybe those RCMP cruisers and uniforms he had weren't replicas.  Did a crappy job of hiding them though.

Would explain how this guy knew how to go full Rambo.  His rampage seemed like he knew well what he was doing.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Michael Hardner on June 23, 2020, 09:21:56 am
Strange but this could be addressed with a single comment from the RCMP.  Given how terrible they are at communicating, this could be just a coincidence, and a denial would be enough.  But ... we don't have that.

Also squid, lay off the 'DUMB' tagging, when the post isn't dumb...
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: Squidward von Squidderson on June 23, 2020, 03:47:05 pm
Strange but this could be addressed with a single comment from the RCMP.  Given how terrible they are at communicating, this could be just a coincidence, and a denial would be enough.  But ... we don't have that.

Also squid, lay off the 'DUMB' tagging, when the post isn't dumb...

To imply that maybe the RCMP gave their possible CI police uniforms and a replica car is **** idiotic...   but the dumb tag is the closest I could find....
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: wilber on June 23, 2020, 09:39:39 pm
To imply that maybe the RCMP gave their possible CI police uniforms and a replica car is **** idiotic...   but the dumb tag is the closest I could find....

Historically the RCMP has been very protective of its copyrighted material.
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on July 26, 2020, 01:48:54 pm
So 3 months later, they have announced that there will be a "review" into the incident, which is not a public inquiry.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53530262

Quote
In a letter, lawyers representing family members in lawsuit against the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the gunman's estate called the review "wholly insufficient".

"(Government officials) have hidden behind their contrived notion of a 'trauma-free' process to exclude the full participation of the families under the guise of protecting them from further trauma. This is not how the families wish to be treated," the letter said.

Some of the main concerns raised are:

    * The panel will not be able to compel testimony or subpoena witnesses
    * Interested parties will not be able to cross-examine the witnesses
    * The review process will not be fully public: The findings will be made public after they have been presented to the provincial justice minister and the federal minister of public safety; an interim review will also be made available

This is not what transparency looks like.

 -k
Title: Re: Rampage murder in NS - at least 16 dead
Post by: kimmy on August 02, 2020, 03:30:37 am
That didn't last long.  After a wave of negative publicity regarding the review, Bill Blair and friends have changed their minds and agreed to a real public inquiry.

 -k