Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
Show ALL Forums  > Manitoba  > another legal system story that makes you go WTF?      Home login  
Joined: 5/16/2007
Msg: 31
another legal system story that makes you go WTF?Page 3 of 3    (1, 2, 3)
More info on the criminal thatfired shots into vehicles & into a house ( injuring 2 young girls inside):

excerpts fromthe story in the Free Press:

A 19-year-old gang member accused of two West End shootings this week was also involved in the fatal shooting of a 13-year-old boy in February 2008.

In the earlier shooting, the Indian Posse member, who was 17 years old at the time, broke into a Home Street garage with 13-year-old Cody Shuya. After the two fought over a loaded pellet gun left there, the gun fired and shot Shuya's eye, fatally damaging his brain. The 17-year-old pleaded guilty in 2008 to careless use of a firearm.

fired several shots that struck two vehicles. The vehicles were apparently not involved in the shooting and no occupants were injured, police said. The 19-year-old is now charged with attempted murder for firing at the vehicles, say police.

Just over 24 hours later, on Wednesday evening, three shots were fired into the front window of 542 Victor St. A 10-year-old girl was hit in the leg and an eight-year-old girl was grazed in the head by flying debris. Police say the girls were not the intended targets. The 19-year-old is now charged with attempted murder for firing at the house.

During the two shootings this week, the 19-year-old man was out on bail for a previous break-and-enter. He's also been convicted several times for breaching his sentence in relation to Shuya's death and was under a court-ordered weapons ban.

So he pleads guilty to careless use of a firearm in 2008 causing death ( a firearm he stole btw), is out on bail for a B & E and has been convicted several times for breaching his sentence in relation to Shuya's death and was under a court-ordered weapons ban...

and our wonderful legal system has him roaming the streets...

Time to get some legally owned & stored firearms & start arming ourselves people; the system isn't going to protect us. It's too busy re-arresting & releasing dangerous criminals into society.
Joined: 5/16/2007
Msg: 32
another legal system story that makes you go WTF?
Posted: 6/12/2010 9:55:30 PM
Another article in the paper that shows how the "legal" system is geared to protect the criminal:

from the Free Press June 12, 2010 :

<div class="quote">Be nice to burglars, it's the law
By: Douglas Johnston

My wife and I are Neighbourhood Watch block captains for our street in Fort Garry. As block captains, we receive voice-mail reports from the City of Winnipeg Police about criminal activity in the area. Rarely a month goes by without our receiving a voice-mail message from the police advising of a litany of residential break-ins in our neighbourhood.

Break, enter and theft, as it's properly called, is rampant in Winnipeg, and Canada. It's a crime that's touched most of us one way or another. It's rare to find someone who's not been a victim of a break and enter, or doesn't know someone who's been a victim. And evidence of its prevalence isn't just anecdotal. It regularly appears in national police statistics as one of the most common property offences, usually ranked second, behind only property theft under a value of $5,000, in the tally of most committed crimes.

Residential break, enter and theft is a traumatizing property crime. The economic loss -- the property damage and value of the goods stolen -- is tough enough. But material harm is compounded by a sense of violation. Because it's your home that's been invaded, feelings of fear and outrage that your privacy and security have been breached are inevitable.

The crime used to go by another name. Fiction and movies knew it as burglary. Historically, even our law called it burglary. It used to be that if a break-in happened during daylight hours, the crime was called "housebreaking." If nocturnal, the same offence was burglary.

And Canada's criminal law was once unforgiving of residential break and enters. The severity with which the law regarded break-ins was reflected in the penalty. Until the early 19th century, burglary was a capital offence. As late as 1837, if you were convicted of the crime, the penalty was death. After 1837, the penalty was relaxed: It became life imprisonment.

But if 19th-century law was appallingly harsh on convicted home invaders, 21st-century law is far too kind.

In 2010 you can't use force against a criminal who breaks into your home and steals your property -- unless and until he assaults you by resisting your efforts to get your property back. And if you do use force, you're the one who's liable to be charged.

It's an astonishing result. But Canada's Criminal Code codifies this absurdity.

Sec. 38 of the Criminal Code is a short provision. But its language is abundantly clear:

"38 (1) Every one who is in peaceable possession of personal property, and every one lawfully assisting him, is justified

(a) in preventing a trespasser from taking it, or

(b) in taking it from a trespasser who has taken it, if he does not strike or cause bodily harm to the trespasser.

38 (2) Where a person who is in peaceable possession of personal property lays hands on it, a trespasser who persists in attempting to keep it or take it from him or from any one lawfully assisting him shall be deemed to commit an assault without justification or provocation."

So, for example, if a thief is hightailing it down your driveway with your laptop, and to stop him you trip him, or tackle him, or grab a garden hoe out of the garage and whack him in the shin, you're a criminal, too. You'll likely be charged with assault. This isn't something police are keen to do. But our Criminal Code gives them little discretion.

The Criminal Code says you must first try to somehow peaceably retrieve the laptop out of the thief's hands, and then, when he resists -- and only then -- is he the one who's committing an assault.

The nicey-nicey non-violent recovery of your property from a fleeing felon required by our Criminal Code defies reality. A fleeing thief is likely to react violently to your attempt to yank the goods out of his hands. Likely very violently. The probable result -- you'll suffer physical injury if you attempt the initial Gandhian recovery of your property our law prescribes.

Our criminal law should not make the average Joe a criminal just for protecting his property. An amendment to the current Code could easily be made to permit a homeowner to use "reasonable force" or "as much force as is reasonably necessary" to prevent a thief from absconding with his or her property. Use of the words "reasonable" or "reasonably necessary" would make it clear you can't use force that's excessive or disproportionate in the circumstances.

Firing shotgun rounds at a thief as he heads for his car with your belongings, for example, wouldn't be a reasonably justifiable use of force.

Sec. 40 of the Criminal Code already has wording like this. That section permits you to use "as much force as is necessary" when trying to stop someone from breaking into your home. So why not the same latitude when the thief's already in and absconding with your property?

Instead, as the law stands now, once a thief gets into your home and grabs your stuff, you're the outlaw if you use force to try to recover your property.

A result that at once comforts the criminal, and criminalizes the victim.

Douglas J. Johnston is a Winnipeg lawyer.

another example of how the system is more worried about what happens to the criminal and protecting the criminal than what happens to you & your possesions.
Joined: 5/16/2007
Msg: 33
another legal system story that makes you go WTF?
Posted: 6/19/2010 1:36:21 PM

I would suppose that at some point a thief must have gone to court and sued some victim and won. It makes you wonder how someone who has to resort to stealing to survive could afford to fight this in court.

Yet another argument for using deadly force as your first line of defence when faced with a home invader; dead criminald don't sue anybody.

Its easy to sit and complain but the fact is SOMEONE made a decision based on SOMETHING regarding this.

Politicians who are safe from such criminals because they live in heavily alarmed & guarded ivory towers made the decisions.

Usually after being convinced by (small "L" ) liberals (who see every criminal act as a cry for help from the ( in THEIR rose-colored eyes) real victim) that incarcerating the victim ( criminal) is an archaic response, & that by not incarcerating the criminal & trying to reform the criminal ( without any sort of punishment or making the criminal feel bad about themself, that'd be barbaric) is the only possible humane response.

The brainwashed politician becomes convinced that society will view them as forward thinking visionaries.

This won't change until someone important ( politician, judge, rich business leader) is affected by the actions of a car thief or arsonist or home invader... long as just the "common rabble" have to deal with the aftermath of the "catch & release" no consequences or punishment for your crimes legal system, and the criminals stay in the unimportant areas of the city, the system won't change.

So do your part, people! If you catch someone breaking into your house, stealing your vehicle, or setting fire to your property use lethal force & save the system the $$$$ that'd be wasted catching, arresting, charging & releasing the criminals over & over.

If I catch someone breaking into my home, kill them while defending myself & my property, and am asked by some bleeding heart "how do I sleep knowing what I did?" I'll say "usually I start out lying on my back, then roll onto my right side".
Joined: 5/16/2007
Msg: 34
another legal system story that makes you go WTF?
Posted: 6/22/2010 6:18:11 PM

Now dud...quit talking about susan cd that way..LOL...just teasing..

^^^^ LOL...

well, these forums are a good place to vent..

And at least there's been no study or claim yet linking re-posting the same stuff over & over causing autism & MS like vaccines are claimed to do..
Joined: 5/16/2007
Msg: 35
another legal system story that makes you go WTF?
Posted: 6/26/2010 9:05:07 AM
And once again our lovely "justice" ( ) system lets the safety of a serious criminal trump the safety of the rest of us :

from the Winnipeg Sun June 25/10:

New plans to deport Somali
Jama completes prison term, claims ‘I am a different man’

If at first you don’t succeed ...

Canadian immigration officials will try for the second time to deport Somali refugee and convicted criminal Mohamed Said Jama.

Jama, 40, will remain in custody pending his deportation, expected within the next three months. The Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada ordered his continued detention Friday, ruling he posed a danger to the community if released and was unlikely to report for his deportation.

Jama was released from federal prison on statutory release in May 2009. He was in prison for a violent home invasion in which he stabbed a man in the face.

An attempt to deport Jama failed last fall. He got as far as Nairobi, Kenya, before safety concerns forced his Canadian escorts to return him to Canada. It was later learned Jama had access to a cellphone while in custody and used it to call family members, who threatened violence if his plane landed in Somalia.

Jama has been in custody since March, when he was arrested on a Canada-wide arrest warrant. Police issued the warrant after he was granted release by an immigration review board member and promptly disappeared.

Jama finished serving the remainder of his home invasion sentence Wednesday.

“Seven years ago I committed this crime but I turned things around and changed my life,” he told a detention review hearing Friday. “I am a different man ... I am not a criminal. Why do I have to sit here in custody?”

Jama rejected new evidence revealing he has a criminal record in the U.S. as well as Canada, including convictions for passing a forged cheque, impaired driving and probation violations.

“Someone else’s criminal history is here, this definitely isn’t me,” Jama said.

Jama has claimed he will face almost certain death if deported to his homeland.

He will appear for another detention review hearing July 2.

He faces certain death if deported to his homeland? Gee, I wonder whatcrimes he commited there that would cause such an outcome? In any event, tough chit, if he didn't want to getdeported he shouldn't have : "invaded a home, stabbed a man in the face, passed a forged cheque, impaired driving and probation violations".

He claims "I committed this crime but I turned things around and changed my life,” he told a detention review hearing Friday. “I am a different man ... I am not a criminal. Why do I have to sit here in custody?".

Because you ARE a criminal.

If the same thing happens, & they feel they can't land the plane because of the threatened violence (gee, if you threaten violence you trump the law, good to know) then just have the plane make a low pass over the runway ( not too low, the people on the ground may have firearme.... say 2,000 feet) and toss him out the open door... problem solved.
Show ALL Forums  > Manitoba  > another legal system story that makes you go WTF?