Friday, July 20, 2007
Canadian Supreme Court: You Can Be Charged with Having a Gun Even if You Don't Have One
In Liberal Land, up means down and the sky is green all day. So how odd should it appear that the Canadian Supreme Court has ruled that even if you commit a crime without a gun, saying that you have one means that you can be changed with a gun offense.
According to this theory, if I say I have a million dollars but have nothing, I am still a millionaire.
Offender can 'use' a handgun even without carrying one, top court rules
Yep - liberal thinking at its finest.
In Liberal Land, up means down and the sky is green all day. So how odd should it appear that the Canadian Supreme Court has ruled that even if you commit a crime without a gun, saying that you have one means that you can be changed with a gun offense.
According to this theory, if I say I have a million dollars but have nothing, I am still a millionaire.
Offender can 'use' a handgun even without carrying one, top court rules
Threatening someone with a gun may be enough to warrant being charged with a firearms offence, even if one isn't being carried, Canada's top court ruled Friday.
In a unanimous ruling, the nine-member Supreme Court of Canada upheld a court decision in B.C. that convicted a man of gun possession, even though he argued he never had the weapon on him during a break-in four years ago.
It didn't matter whether 25-year-old Andre Omar Steele or his three accomplices carried a gun during the crime, the top court said.
An offender "uses" a firearm when he or she makes it known "by words or conduct" that it is available, and as long as it is on the body or readily available, Justice Morris Fish wrote.
Yep - liberal thinking at its finest.
