Your home is not your castle

Forum Sponsor
kiterider said:
Are we allowed to take videos/pics up skirts in public? Not sure if that's against the law in Ontario.

I'm sure there was a ruckus a few yrs ago across the border on someone pulling such a stunt in public. Was thrown out based on that fact, that it was in public where one cannot hold onto the expectation of privacy that one would expect within the confines on ones home.

Trying to see if that would apply here are well.
Click to expand...

There have been problems laying charges, in the past. Not so much now, as they seem to have found a valid charge to apply. Moral of the story: Don't be a scumbag, or you'll go to jail.

http://www.torontosun.com/2011/09/05/charge-laid-after-upskirt-photos-allegedly-taken
 
kiterider said:
It's interesting how logic dictates the formulation of some laws and not others. Wonder what governs the decision making process of our lawmakers.

Magic 8 ball or a coin toss?
Click to expand...

Laws are created to solve perceived problems, not out of thin air.
 
Can you really say the house is yours if you can't even reasonably protect your own family? Fail Durham.

If this is really aimed at curbing gang activity of grow ops, why not get down to the root of the problem: their revenue stream! Legalize weed, make it cheaper and taxable.
 
^ok that is really creapy. Glad the contractors reported that for the police to investigate.
 
Firearm owners have had the prospect of random home inspections hanging over their heads for many years now. The police and politicians take your rights away a little bit at a time. The excuse is always public safety. They start with the easy ones like gun owners, make sure they store the firearms safely, then the regular non firearm home owners are now targets. Maybe you guys should have stood up in defense of gun owners 15 years ago. Now your in the same situation I'm in. The great news is with the growth in the use of civil forfeiture laws someone who defies the anti fortification bylaws may lose their home if the inspector is in a bad mood:evil:
 
Icbones said:
Firearm owners have had the prospect of random home inspections hanging over their heads for many years now. The police and politicians take your rights away a little bit at a time. The excuse is always public safety. They start with the easy ones like gun owners, make sure they store the firearms safely, then the regular non firearm home owners are now targets. Maybe you guys should have stood up in defense of gun owners 15 years ago. Now your in the same situation I'm in. The great news is with the growth in the use of civil forfeiture laws someone who defies the anti fortification bylaws may lose their home if the inspector is in a bad mood:evil:
Click to expand...

Its up to you to let him inspect your home or your storage. He has to ask you and just say NO. Nicely say you are busy and need to step out.
Just like a roadside inspection, do you say yes when they ask to search your car?
 
RockerGuy said:
Its up to you to let him inspect your home or your storage. He has to ask you and just say NO. Nicely say you are busy and need to step out.
Just like a roadside inspection, do you say yes when they ask to search your car?
Click to expand...

Negative. As a firearms owner, you don't have the option of saying no.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
Negative. As a firearms owner, you don't have the option of saying no.
Click to expand...

There is a formalized inspection process and the inspection has to be arranged at your convenience and conducted by people who actually know the law, not your typical cops asking for your FAC lol.. Otherwise, if the RCMP has a REAL hard-on to inspect a legal firearm owner's house, they have to get a warrant. If your typical city cop wants to go Gestapo on you (*), he only has the standard 2 options...

1) Lie to get a warrant

2) Make up reasonable grounds



(*) In this case, "you" refers to the law-abiding (**) legal firearm owner

(**) Which typically means every legal firearm owner since legal firearm owners are the lowest risk group for committing criminal offences in Canada.
 
FiReSTaRT said:
There is a formalized inspection process and the inspection has to be arranged at your convenience and conducted by people who actually know the law, not your typical cops asking for your FAC lol.. Otherwise, if the RCMP has a REAL hard-on to inspect a legal firearm owner's house, they have to get a warrant. If your typical city cop wants to go Gestapo on you (*), he only has the standard 2 options...

1) Lie to get a warrant

2) Make up reasonable grounds



(*) In this case, "you" refers to the law-abiding (**) legal firearm owner

(**) Which typically means every legal firearm owner since legal firearm owners are the lowest risk group for committing criminal offences in Canada.
Click to expand...

Do u happen to have a link for that?

Just need it just in case ;)
 
FiReSTaRT said:
There is a formalized inspection process and the inspection has to be arranged at your convenience and conducted by people who actually know the law, not your typical cops asking for your FAC lol.. Otherwise, if the RCMP has a REAL hard-on to inspect a legal firearm owner's house, they have to get a warrant. If your typical city cop wants to go Gestapo on you (*), he only has the standard 2 options...

1) Lie to get a warrant

2) Make up reasonable grounds



(*) In this case, "you" refers to the law-abiding (**) legal firearm owner

(**) Which typically means every legal firearm owner since legal firearm owners are the lowest risk group for committing criminal offences in Canada.
Click to expand...

Correction: "At your convenience, within a reasonable timeframe", by one of approximately 200 firearms officers in Ontario.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
Correction: "At your convenience, within a reasonable timeframe", by one of approximately 200 firearms officers in Ontario.
Click to expand...

Which means that they can't just barge in whenever they please. While the firearm-owning community doesn't like the intrusion, at least it's handled in a civilized manner. Your typical firearm owner won't get inspected, period. There's about 5,000 firearms owners per CFO officer, so they only investigate if there's a complaint and the occasional owner of 10+ firearms.

It's the regular cops who muddy the waters through their ignorance of the law. They expect to be let in without a warrant or appointment in order to enforce a law they're not familiar with. There was a case of a firearm owner going away on vacation and burglars having to come back to the premises several times over, over several days in order to break into the gun safe, which resulted in "unsafe storage" charges for the owner. (*) Of course, they got laughed out of the court, but it cost him more than a few bucks as all criminal charges do.

(*) This is wrong on 2 levels...

1) If it was that time-intensive for the firearms to be removed from the premises, laying charges is pure idiocy
2) The storage laws were not meant to prevent theft.. They were meant to prevent crimes of passion along the lines of "wife tells me she's cheetin' on meh with muh dawg, so I shoot her" or "my life has no philosophical meaning, so I decide to end it"... Some of that passion wears off while you unlock the safe and load your gun.
 
FiReSTaRT said:
"my life has no philosophical meaning, so I decide to end it"... Some of that passion wears off while you unlock the safe and load your gun.
Click to expand...

Combine with a 3rd safe on the 1911 that not alot of ppl know about. It was put in place so the Marines would not use it to commit suicide in battle
 
RockerGuy said:
Combine with a 3rd safe on the 1911 that not alot of ppl know about. It was put in place so the Marines would not use it to commit suicide in battle
Click to expand...

They were issued hand-grenades, right? :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom