Ontario court rules mandatory minimum sentence unconstitutional in gun

[olpfan1]

Thank goodness for the courts..they are our only saving grace from Harper, the dude didn't even do anything that should warrant house arrest or prison..it wasn't his gun! But I am glad the judge gave him just house arrest

This doesn't bode well for Harpos future mandatory Marijuana sentences

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ontario-court-rules-mandatory-minimum-sentence-unconstitutional-in-gun-case/article2336816/

An Ontario Superior Court judge has struck down a mandatory sentence of three years for a firearm offence, saying the sentence would have had grave consequences for a defendant who intended no harm.

Madam Justice Anne Molloy said it would amount to cruel and unusual punishment to impose a three-year sentence on the accused, Leroy Smickle, who was arrested while posing with a loaded gun and striking a “cool” pose.

Instead, Judge Malloy gave Mr. Smickle a one-year conditional sentence to be served under house arrest.

The decision is almost certain to be appealed, putting the courts on a collision course with the Harper government, which has made mandatory minimum sentences a cornerstone of its tough-on-crime justice platform.

Judge Malloy said that the presence of handguns in the community is a grave concern, but that Mr. Smickle’s bad judgment fell well short of dangerous criminal intent.

“To impose such an onerous punishment would, in my view, be grossly disproportionate to what Mr. Smickle deserves for a single act of bad judgment and foolishness,” she said.

Judge Malloy found there was evidence that Mr. Smickle, 30, was holding a loaded firearm when police suddenly smashed down the door of a relative’s apartment where he was staying. Police were executing a search warrant on the owner of the apartment, Mr. Stickle’s cousin, who was believed to be in possession of illegal weapons. Judge Malloy said that Mr. Stickle did not intend to threaten the police, but was merely engaged in the “very foolish act” of posing with the gun while holding his laptop computer in his other hand.

The judge cited the fact that Mr. Stickle, who is right-handed, was holding the gun in his left hand when police burst in. She also said that Mr. Stickle was so startled by the intrusion that he dropped both the gun and his laptop.

Judge Malloy said the mandatory sentence of three years was out of line with Mr. Smickle’s offence, and that elements of the law containing the sentence are “irrational and arbitrary.”

She added that a three-year prison sentence would have a harsh effect on his fiancée and a young child he has from a previous relationship. He would also face great difficulty finding a job after surviving the rigours of three years in prison, she said.

[Bryan]

Add this to the file of activist judges that should be fired outright.

The police were executing a search warrant for illegal firearms. The guy was found waiving around a loaded illegal firearm. If anything, three years is too lenient.

[mentalfloss]

So the government gives gun lovers a big win by scrapping the registry and then gives them a 3 year mandatory minimum sentence if they snap a pic with their love.

Happy Valentines Day!

[Topaz]

I'm with the judge, everyone deserves a second chance and everyone should be judge by their history with the law. BTW, I wonder how many of the MP's,especially the ones out West, have unregistered guns?

[Guest Peeves]

I'm with the judge, everyone deserves a second chance and everyone should be judge by their history with the law. BTW, I wonder how many of the MP's,especially the ones out West, have unregistered guns?

While three years might be excessive(debatable), it is time the judges stopped writing the laws and started enforcing them.

The public is hypocritical and want tougher gun registration that does nothing, but wants a guy holding a loaded gun to be treated as a minor infraction. Many want the public to have no access to guns at all.

Can't have it both ways guys.

You're a fickle lot at best.

When it conflicts with a government law, blame Harper. When a guy is caught holding an illegal loaded gun and sentenced, blame Harper. If a guy defends his home from fire bombs, charge him " unsafe storage of a firearm", when a (in this case),illegal cache of guns is found and an appropriate sentence is denied by a judge, it's because of Harper's laws. Not because of the whining gun lobbyists that want stricter gun laws, but Harper's laws. Nonsense!

The Liberals and NDP would have blamed Harper if the judge had let the guy off,if the judge had slapped his wrists, or if he was given 1 year. All they (YOU) need is an opening to take a shot.

Canadians elected our government. A guy holding an illegal loaded gun is breaking the law.

So what sentence would you whiners have doled out?...OH I know... LOCK UP HARPER and let the criminalfree and give the judge a medal then all would be right with YOUR world.

These aren't Harper's laws, they are OUR CANADIANS LAWS.I want a judge to do the job they're paid to do, administer the law, not write one of their own.

I hope it's appealed and he gets more time. He gives gun owners a bad name and no gun lobbyists more fodder for their mewling.

[olpfan1]

Add this to the file of activist judges that should be fired outright.

The police were executing a search warrant for illegal firearms. The guy was found waiving around a loaded illegal firearm. If anything, three years is too lenient.

It was in his friends possession.. he didn't steal it

[olpfan1]

lol cue the activist judges rant... we need activist judges when the government is unreasonable & ideological

[PIK]

If I remember correctly did the idiots that killed the kids at colubine, did they not have pics of themselves waving thier guns around, before they went nuts. Send the idiot to jail for at least 3 years.

[guyser]

If I remember correctly did the idiots that killed the kids at colubine, did they not have pics of themselves waving thier guns around, before they went nuts. Send the idiot to jail for at least 3 years.

If I remember correctly , the price of oranges was at an all time low before the price went nuts/ Send the idiot to jail for life !

About as relevant.

Edited February 14, 2012 by guyser

[Guest Peeves]

It was in his friends possession.. he didn't steal it

So then by default your position is that it is rather then, a legal loaded unsafely stored/secured gun he was waving around?

,,and, it was in his possession.

[olpfan1]

So then by default your position is that it is rather then, a legal loaded unsafely stored/secured gun he was waving around?

,,and, it was in his possession.

what if his friend didnt tell him it was stolen?

[Guest Manny]

So he was playing with a gun in his apartment. He was making a stupid picture for his facebook page, and cops happened to burst in looking for someone else.

He may be a "goof", but three years is not necessary. In fact no prison time is necessary at all.

[The_Squid]

Sounds like a reasonable judgement to me...

What is unreasonable is sending an idiot to jail as if he was some sort of criminal.

The funny part is, if the right-wingers on this forum had their way and gun laws were more like the USA's gun laws, what this guy was doing would not even be illegal! But now they want him thrown in jail for three years....

How do they square that circle???

[capricorn]

The judge cited the fact that Mr. Stickle, who is right-handed, was holding the gun in his left hand when police burst in. She also said that Mr. Stickle was so startled by the intrusion that he dropped both the gun and his laptop.

Stickle is damned lucky the gun didn't go off when he dropped it. Now that would have startled him even more.

[PIK]

If I remember correctly , the price of oranges was at an all time low before the price went nuts/ Send the idiot to jail for life !

About as relevant.

Why? These idiots like to brag before they do it. You guys all screamed about the gun reg , but this happens and it is ok. I read a article today about how the left hates guns umless they are pointed at a con. Edited February 14, 2012 by PIK

[guyser]

Why?

Um...Columbine, different laws, different country...shall I go on?

These idiots like to brag before they do it. You guys all screamed about the gun reg , but this happens and it is ok. I read a article today about how the left hates guns umless they are pointed at a con.

Who said it was ok? No one.

Which article is it you read today ?

[g_bambino]

...t is time the judges stopped writing the laws and started enforcing them.

Judges neither enforce the law nor write it. They render justice based upon the law and can only do so within the bounds of the law as written or established through convention. In this case, the constitution - as it always does - trumps an Act of Parliament. That fact isn't the judge's fault.

[Guest Peeves]

what if his friend didnt tell him it was stolen?

Now your taking flights of fancy.

Look. It was not his gun...He had no right to have it in his possession.

It was not securely stored per law...

It was loaded also breaking the law.

He was in illegal possession of a loaded unsecured fire arm.

That was grounds for incarceration or a fine, or both.

Now try to slip around them FACTS!

[Guest Peeves]

Judges neither enforce the law nor write it. They render justice based upon the law and can only do so within the bounds of the law as written or established through convention. In this case, the constitution - as it always does - trumps an Act of Parliament. That fact isn't the judge's fault.

Tis so. AND judges all too often try to set the laws rather than administer them.. If the proscribed sentence was deemed inappropriate by his lawyer an appeal would be his next move. The judge should be removed from the bench pending a judicial review.

[olpfan1]

Now your taking flights of fancy.

Look. It was not his gun...He had no right to have it in his possession.

It was not securely stored per law...

It was loaded also breaking the law.

He was in illegal possession of a loaded unsecured fire arm.

That was grounds for incarceration or a fine, or both.

Now try to slip around them FACTS!

Facts? maybe, but the judge found it Unconstitutional.. Did you know the thing we call The Charter of Rights & Freedoms trumps law?

You seem to be Anti charter peeves, what gives?

Edited February 14, 2012 by olpfan1

[olpfan1]

The dude was at his cousins apartment..it WASN'T his apartment .. yes, he was posing with it to look cool like normal young guys do in a time and age where guns are seen as cool..3 years for that? rofl, that is not justice Peeves, the judge couldn't connect this guy to his cousins criminal activities and it's against the Charter to assume he's guilty because he's at his cousins apartment

You are way, way, way out of line on this Peeves

Edited February 14, 2012 by olpfan1

[Guest Peeves]

Sounds like a reasonable judgement to me...

What is unreasonable is sending an idiot to jail as if he was some sort of criminal.

The funny part is, if the right-wingers on this forum had their way and gun laws were more like the USA's gun laws, what this guy was doing would not even be illegal! But now they want him thrown in jail for three years....

How do they square that circle???

What the USA laws are is a non sequitur.

Laws are not like the USA's though and we here know that it is a crime to be holding an illegal, loaded firearm.

Since I have one, I certainly know.

It must be registered. I must have a license FAC to have one. I must store it securely with the bullets stored separately.

The guy was breaking SEVERAL CANADIAN laws.

Liberals in Ontario agree with mandatory minimum sentences.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/mcguinty-reaffirms-support-for-mandatory-minimum-sentences-139287038.html

[olpfan1]

Liberals in Ontario agree with mandatory minimum sentences.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/mcguinty-reaffirms-support-for-mandatory-minimum-sentences-139287038.html

I don't think many people like Mcguinty and his lieberals..he was only elected in again cause it was either him or Hudak

your link also said he wants to BAN ALL HANDGUNS, do you support it still?

Edited February 14, 2012 by olpfan1

[guyser]

Now your taking flights of fancy.

Careful, so could you be...

Look. It was not his gun...He had no right to have it in his possession.

It was not securely stored per law...

Custody is not necessarily possession. He did not possess anything anymore than you are in my house and possess my remote.

Securely stored is not his problem.

It was loaded also breaking the law.

He was in illegal possession of a loaded unsecured fire arm.

That was grounds for incarceration or a fine, or both.

Now try to slip around them FACTS!

Loaded but not his , not illegal possession or a loaded firearm.....what facts ?

[dre]

Tis so. AND judges all too often try to set the laws rather than administer them.. If the proscribed sentence was deemed inappropriate by his lawyer an appeal would be his next move. The judge should be removed from the bench pending a judicial review.

Politicians should be completely removed from the sentencing process. They offer absolutely nothing of value, and the last thing we need is a politician thousands of miles away deciding the outcome of a trial without hearing a word of testimony or reviewing a shred of evidence.

Mandatory minimum sentencing is an utter abject failure.

It would have cost about 1/4 of a million dollars to throw this guy in jail for three years, and quite likely deprived the government of a bunch of tax revenue as well. And he would likely pose a bigger risk to society after being immerse in prison culture for 3 years, and making a new group of friends and associates there, then he his now.