Victoria is facing a public-safety crisis

[daftandbarmy]

If you conducted a proper citizens arrest, you be labelled a vigilante regardless. They don't want Canadians to be able to defend themselves, it's ironic that most of the successful cases of self defense here were bad guy on bad guy. Because they basically made it illegal to level the playing field for the law abiding.

More about that....

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/billy-mcgillicuddy-mcadam-vigilante-1.6635153

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The CFO went all stinky on my friend when he tried to register a 16" barrelled 870. They deemed it a prohibited device and wanted to charge him. Turns out that the gun had belonged (sold as surplused) to the SQ and they had cut the 2" off themselves and since they were not a "Licenced gun manufacturer" that was deemed as a "Sawn off gun". In the end he had to turn in the barrel and buy a new 14" barrel for it that was legal....

 

[daftandbarmy]

Stating the obvious....

‘I believe Victoria is a city and that’s a good thing’: Alto aims for transformation with intent​

Long-serving councillor has an ambitious vision for Victoria as well as an eye for moderation


Marianne Alto will be sworn in as Victoria mayor on Nov. 3, heading a council table full of new faces after 12 years as a city councillor herself.
Alto decisively defeated fellow councillor Stephen Andrew to win the mayoral race by a margin of more than 6,000 votes, a result that somewhat surprised the low-key longtime politician.

“I tried really hard to be really brutally honest about who I am and what I think and what I want to do,” Alto told Capital Daily of her successful campaign. “And for whatever reason, that's what [Victoria voters] elected.”

Alto ran on a platform stuffed with references to existing city policies with promises to accelerate and expand them. Her campaign emphasized her experience in local government and promised voters balance and progress.

‘I believe Victoria is a city and that’s a good thing’: Alto aims for transformation with intent

Long-serving councillor has an ambitious vision for Victoria as well as an eye for moderation

www.capitaldaily.ca

 

[NavyShooter]

Ahhh.....common sense is not so common....

 

[medicineman]

I am no social scientist, but this is how I see it.

I think the idea behind the restricting or private citizens from enacting their own defence comes from a naïve and altruistic nature. We see ourselves or peaceful and orderly, and relatively crime free. And for many Canadians violence is a disgusting action and really only acceptable in a hockey rink.

Its not a terrible way to run a society, so long as our police and corrections forces are kept large and equipped enough to deal with crimes quickly and house the dangerous indefinitely.

The problems arise when the above breaks down or is underfunded, understaffed and underequipped. And when the perception is that offender rights have reach parity with that of the victims.

I've been dealing with mentally unstable neighbor. Multiple calls to the city and the police. They all agree he needs help, but until he threatens violence and/or acts violently there is nothing they can do. They visit him and he's combative and espouses conspiracies.

The frustration from the constable we have been dealing with is palpable, she continually apologizes that she cant do more and has advised us to seek a peace bond, which really does nothing if he goes violent, and continue to call the non emergency line and report the incidents. So now I have to stand by and wait until things really go sideways instead of having our institutions act proactively and get this individual the help they need.

I also want to put out there that I recognize my negative bias when it comes to LEOs, but the last couple of months has been refreshing and I can really say I appreciate the work the HRP has done for me and my family.

Suggestion - gather/keep as much evidence of what's going on as you can. Look up your provincial Mental Health Act for what "Forms" apply to private citizens requesting examination by a physician and swear the application before a magistrate - if they feel it's legit, a warrant will be issued for detention under the MHA and the person would be taken to an ER for examination +/- referral for formal psychiatric examination/hold. If the person is very fucked up, especially not looking after themselves and becoming a potential threat to others around, it may get them the help they need.

Example - S10(1) Manitoba Mental Health Act, which would lead to a Form 2 here. C.C.S.M. c. M110

 

[Halifax Tar]

Suggestion - gather/keep as much evidence of what's going on as you can. Look up your provincial Mental Health Act for what "Forms" apply to private citizens requesting examination by a physician and swear the application before a magistrate - if they feel it's legit, a warrant will be issued for detention under the MHA and the person would be taken to an ER for examination +/- referral for formal psychiatric examination/hold. If the person is very fucked up, especially not looking after themselves and becoming a potential threat to others around, it may get them the help they need.

Example - S10(1) Manitoba Mental Health Act, which would lead to a Form 2 here. C.C.S.M. c. M110

Thanks for the advice, we will definitely look into that.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Suggestion - gather/keep as much evidence of what's going on as you can. Look up your provincial Mental Health Act for what "Forms" apply to private citizens requesting examination by a physician and swear the application before a magistrate - if they feel it's legit, a warrant will be issued for detention under the MHA and the person would be taken to an ER for examination +/- referral for formal psychiatric examination/hold. If the person is very fucked up, especially not looking after themselves and becoming a potential threat to others around, it may get them the help they need.

Example - S10(1) Manitoba Mental Health Act, which would lead to a Form 2 here. C.C.S.M. c. M110

Or do what alot of other people do and move out of the area.... so it eventually becomes a slum

 

[Brad Sallows]

Seconded. "I'm moving on. You caught it, you clean it."

 

[Halifax Tar]

Or do what alot of other people do and move out of the area.... so it eventually becomes a slum

It is a slum... I swear Fairview is the only district of Halifax that didn't gentrify in the last 20 years. We used to have an HA clubhouse that kept the garbage cleaned up. The police raided them and shut them down in 2001 or 2002.

Its my wifes childhood neighborhood... She's dug in deeper than a tic... She's the VP of the school, knows everyone... all the kids... ect ect

I thought I had her convinced to finally pop smoke... I was wrong...

 

[brihard]

Suggestion - gather/keep as much evidence of what's going on as you can. Look up your provincial Mental Health Act for what "Forms" apply to private citizens requesting examination by a physician and swear the application before a magistrate - if they feel it's legit, a warrant will be issued for detention under the MHA and the person would be taken to an ER for examination +/- referral for formal psychiatric examination/hold. If the person is very fucked up, especially not looking after themselves and becoming a potential threat to others around, it may get them the help they need.

Example - S10(1) Manitoba Mental Health Act, which would lead to a Form 2 here. C.C.S.M. c. M110

Good advice. Any provincial mental health act that I’ve looked at has similar provisions. You can bring information to a Justice of the Peace, and, if the JO is satisfied that a person, due to mental illness, is a real risk to themselves or others, can authorize police to apprehend them for examination.

‘Crazy neighbour’ calls are some of the most frustrating, because yeah, often it’s short of being something we can effectively act on.

Regarding self defense, the law does allow it, including reasonable force. See s. 34 Criminal Code. Same for defense of property under S. 35. But, ‘reasonable force’ is meaningful. You pull a gun on someone for an attempt to steal property, you’ve now escalated from property crime to threat of death or grievous bodily harm.

Citizen’s arrest is s. 494. You can arrest someone found committing an indictable offense; I won’t parse what indictable means, but any crime of violence to a person, or a mischief (damaging property) or theft in progress will meet that. Again, Force used must be reasonable.

Point a gun at someone for stealing something: no. Tackle and restrain someone committing assault or smashing something up, yes.

If you feel in danger to the point where you access a weapon to defend yourself, you must be able to reasonably articulate why you fear death or similar injury. We don’t have ‘stand your ground’ laws; if you can reasonably retreat to safety, you’re at less legal risk.

But, if you’re genuinely in serious danger and don’t have a reasonable way out in the totality of the circumstances, the law absolutely does allow you to use reasonably necessary force. I think we’ve seen crown and police make progress in their understanding of this in recent years since the Ian Thompson case.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Good advice. Any provincial mental health act that I’ve looked at has similar provisions. You can bring information to a Justice of the Peace, and, if the JO is satisfied that a person, due to mental illness, is a real risk to themselves or others, can authorize police to apprehend them for examination.

‘Crazy neighbour’ calls are some of the most frustrating, because yeah, often it’s short of being something we can effectively act on.

Regarding self defense, the law does allow it, including reasonable force. See s. 34 Criminal Code. Same for defense of property under S. 35. But, ‘reasonable force’ is meaningful. You pull a gun on someone for an attempt to steal property, you’ve now escalated from property crime to threat of death or grievous bodily harm.

Citizen’s arrest is s. 494. You can arrest someone found committing an indictable offense; I won’t parse what indictable means, but any crime of violence to a person, or a mischief (damaging property) or theft in progress will meet that. Again, Force used must be reasonable.

Point a gun at someone for stealing something: no. Tackle and restrain someone committing assault or smashing something up, yes.

If you feel in danger to the point where you access a weapon to defend yourself, you must be able to reasonably articulate why you fear death or similar injury. We don’t have ‘stand your ground’ laws; if you can reasonably retreat to safety, you’re at less legal risk.

But, if you’re genuinely in serious danger and don’t have a reasonable way out in the totality of the circumstances, the law absolutely does allow you to use reasonably necessary force. I think we’ve seen crown and police make progress in their understanding of this in recent years since the Ian Thompson case.

Excellent input thank you!

I really cant say how much I have appreciated the support HRP has given my family.

Regarding self defense, how does this encompass pets ? I assume it doesn't cover them at all.

I have plans. Take what ever you like downstairs or in the basement, I'm insured, but make a move up my stairs towards my family and the plot will thicken dramatically.

 

[Booter]

Thanks for the advice, we will definitely look into that.

It’s a very high threshold. And doesn’t cover crazy- annoying and yelling. Needs to be associated to substantial likelihood that the person will eventually cause themselves significant harm or someone else.

I would be surprised if the circumstances warranted it and the officer you’re dealing with didn’t suggest it.

I assisted a family with one a few weeks ago- of course the person wasn’t even in custody for two hours but that’s the health care system.

Edit- I just looked at nova scotias it’s a little more vague which is in your favour. Maybe you aren’t in Nova Scotia and I’m right out of ‘er

 

[brihard]

Excellent input thank you!

I really cant say how much I have appreciated the support HRP has given my family.

Regarding self defense, how does this encompass pets ? I assume it doesn't cover them at all.

I have plans. Take what ever you like downstairs or in the basement, I'm insured, but make a move up my stairs towards my family and the plot will thicken dramatically.

Pets would be defense of property. You definitely can’t pull a gun in someone for threatening your dog, for instance.

‘Fortress upstairs’ isn’t a terrible idea. And if someone’s in the house, obviously call police immediately if you’re able (tough to justify not doing so), and call out to an intruder that police are on the way and that you’re armed and will defend yourself. You’re creating a fact set that puts you in the position of having been reasonable, restrained, and having used force only as a last reasonable resort.

 

[Halifax Tar]

It’s a very high threshold. And doesn’t cover crazy- annoying and yelling. Needs to be associated to substantial likelihood that the person will eventually cause themselves significant harm or someone else.

I would be surprised if the circumstances warranted it and the officer you’re dealing with didn’t suggest it.

I assisted a family with one a few weeks ago- of course the person wasn’t even in custody for two hours but that’s the health care system.

Edit- I just looked at nova scotias it’s a little more vague which is in your favour. Maybe you aren’t in Nova Scotia and I’m right out of ‘er

Yup I am in NS.

Honestly at this point I worry any further action on our part will escalate him. Like in your scenario, he simply returns home and who knows what happens. We are going to pretend like its a vacant lot beside us and continue to report the erratic and bizarre behavior.

I really don't want disclose an specifics but he's highly conspiratorial and to sum up believes we (My family) are trying to force recruit him into the free masons. This has lead very strange happenings, construction and conversations. That has the whole neighborhood on edge. We arent the only ones.

Pets would be defense of property. You definitely can’t pull a gun in someone for threatening your dog, for instance.

‘Fortress upstairs’ isn’t a terrible idea. And if someone’s in the house, obviously call police immediately if you’re able (tough to justify not doing so), and call out to an intruder that police are on the way and that you’re armed and will defend yourself. You’re creating a fact set that puts you in the position of having been reasonable, restrained, and having used force only as a last reasonable resort.

Again, thank you very much.

 

[medicineman]

I really don't want disclose an specifics but he's highly conspiratorial and to sum up believes we (My family) are trying to force recruit him into the free masons. This has lead very strange happenings, construction and conversations. That has the whole neighborhood on edge. We arent the only ones.

Sounds like a bit of a fixed delusional disorder...or a very cunning, run of the mill, asshole trying to "persuade" people to leave.

 

[Booter]

That’s very close to the avenue I’d be taking with him as well. I would be watching for any increase in frequency or intensity of “outbursts”. And I’d report it as necessary- but pulling the trigger on MORE formal interactions isn’t necessarily good advice.

They won’t hold him- and youll be the object of their fixation. Beyond what you are now.

Have contingency plans and go about life as best you can. Conspiratorial fixation isn’t going to get them apprehended.

 

[mariomike]

Point a gun at someone for stealing something: no.

When I worked part-time at Brinks, the carrying permit said: "For protection of life."

Ontario paramedic guidelines go into detail about ( Ontario ) Mental Health Act transport,

The following persons may be transported without consent, subject to the provisions of the Mental Health Act (Ontario) (Note: this list is not exhaustive, please refer to the Mental Health Act for further details): o The subject of an application for assessment signed by a physician under subsection 15(1) or 15(1.1) of the Mental Health Act (Ontario) (Form 1) o The subject of an order for examination signed by a Justice of the Peace under subsection 16(1) of the Mental Health Act (Form 2); and o A person taken into custody by a police officer under subsection 17 of the Mental Health Act (Ontario); and o A patient detained in a psychiatric facility under a certificate of involuntary admission under subsection 20(4) of the Mental Health Act (Ontario) (Form 3) or a certificate of renewal (Form 4)

Immobilize the patient’s limbs and head in one coordinated effort. Grasp each limb at the main joint and between the main joint and the distal joint, e.g. one hand on the elbow, the other on the forearm. • Place the patient in a supine “spread eagle” position or in the left lateral position. • Restrain extremities as follows: o Secure one arm above the head and the other to the stretcher at waist level, or secure both hands to one side of the stretcher. o Elevate the head of the stretcher to protect the airway and to allow the paramedic greater visibility. o Secure the feet. o Ensure that the limbs are secured to the main frame of the stretcher, not to the stretcher side rails. • If the patient is spitting, consider use of a surgical mask on the patient.

not transport a patient in the prone position;

We used to carry Strait ( correct spelling ) jackets and padded leather body harnesses. Not sure if they still do.

 

[brihard]

That’s very close to the avenue I’d be taking with him as well. I would be watching for any increase in frequency or intensity of “outbursts”. And I’d report it as necessary- but pulling the trigger on MORE formal interactions isn’t necessarily good advice.

They won’t hold him- and youll be the object of their fixation. Beyond what you are now.

Have contingency plans and go about life as best you can. Conspiratorial fixation isn’t going to get them apprehended.

Agreed. Don’t move officially til there’s enough to make it really count. People don’t get held in secure psych for being crazy or delusional, but because they’re tangibly and articulably dangerous.

 

[Brad Sallows]

A problem with tolerating low-level risks is that sometimes the threshold for severe correction is realized only after the risk has manifested.

 

[mariomike]

‘Fortress upstairs’ isn’t a terrible idea.

There are second floor fire escape ladders.

I guess they could be used for non-fire emergency egress.

Yes, it sounds sort of cowardly.

I read some houses even have "panic" rooms.

Safe room - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org