Thread: A scary article
View Single Post
Old March 17th, 2009, 18:51   #36
Administrator Malleus Veto
MadMorbius's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Send a message via ICQ to MadMorbius
Originally Posted by Danke View Post
You'd have to prove the intent to charge the caller with mischief, unless there was a pattern of fake calls that'd be tough to do.
Not at all. If it's obviously a toy gun, the caller ought to have known his actions would unnecessarily "obstruct, interrupt or interfere with any person in the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property."

Whether he did or did not know is irrelevant. A reasonable person should be able to gauge the implication of their actions in this regard, and that's how the law should look at it; if it were anything other than a firearms issue.

Can't say about fire alarms but I know out in Vancouver if you have too many false alarms with your entry system you'll loose your permit and be fined.
Yes, you'll be fined and the fire department will no longer respond to alarms without secondary confirmation. That's not the same as pulling out your fire protection system. Regardless, it's metaphorical; no person should have to surrender property that is lawfully theirs, particularly where no real offense took place and there is no lawful grounds to call for its surrender.

Right now out West they're executing tons of warrants looking for grow ops in folk's houses. Along with the Police there are city bylaw folks. They gain entry, see there's no operation in the place but instead of leaving they proceed to search for building code infractions and if they find any they slap a vacate order on the place. That seems more draconian to me than this incident.
I'm going to guess that you don't own firearms. If you did, you might find this incident a little more significant.

Let me put it this way - forget for a moment that a toy gun was involved; if you own something, lawfully, and the act of owning the article is not itself illegal, what business does law enforcement have to enter your premises, based on heresy evidence of a third party that your property simply exists, and then seize that legally owned property?

Owning a gun is not illegal. Owning a toy gun is not illegal. Owning a replica firearm is not illegal. Leaving a gun, real or otherwise, on a shelf when you are present in the home is not illegal. So WHY DID THE POLICE INVADE THIS PERSON'S HOME?

What law was potentially being violated that justified a search and seizure in the pursuance of fundamental justice as per section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
Originally Posted by Deaf_shooter View Post
what if it model after his?
MadMorbius is offline   Reply With Quote