Pissed! Surveillance camera video of firebomb attack

[Colpy]

Why on earth would I do that?

Look it's obvious the OP was never properly read or researched and it has been fun watching some people try to make this guy out to be something more than just another lunatic arrested in his underwear. It's just that this gonch wearing lunatic was arrested for thinking with his steel dick which is out of the norm.

What I really want to know is what did this guy do to piss people off that they'd fire bomb him?

I don't know, maybe the thought of him in his underwear made them hot....you know, he really shouldn't run around like that,,,,just eggs them on.

Blame the victim.

Disgusting.

Liberals are just like lemmings....only not as cute.

(that has to be an Ann Coulter quote)

 

[DaSleeper]

Why on earth would I do that?

Look it's obvious the OP was never properly read or researched and it has been fun watching some people try to make this guy out to be something more than just another lunatic arrested in his underwear. It's just that this gonch wearing lunatic was arrested for thinking with his steel dick which is out of the norm.

What I really want to know is what did this guy do to piss people off that they'd fire bomb him?

Well... did he shoot at the car? a simple yes or no will do:smile:

 

[Cliffy]

The biblical response would have been for him to have fire bombed their car. Everybody should have a Molotov cocktail or two stored in their garage just for such occasions.

 

[DaSleeper]

Well he did fire the gun right or do you also dispute that? Maybe it was into the ground maybe it was into the air maybe it was at the car maybe it was a lot of things. Fact is he was charged and in the jurisdiction where he lives, the Crown Attorney accepted the evidence that he pointed the firearm at someone.

He admitted to firing the gun and so will take the hit for that. Since probably simply brandishing the weapon would have been enough to scare off the attackers. At which point it's no longer self defense.

Also the two counts of improper storage means that he was leaving guns around unattended.
He will also bite it on that I would imagine.

When it comes to sentencing though, I suspect he won't do a day in jail and maybe will lose his license to keep hand guns or other restricted weapons.

The unsafe storage charge is a joke. My nephew went to court on such a charge in North Bay after a B&E in his house while he was working in alberta and the guns were found by the cops, well hidden in his house only after he gave them detailed instructions over the phone how to find them since they were not in the gun locker that the thieves had broken into,
He didn't even have a lawyer. And the charges were dismissed by the judge...
I predict that his guns will also be returned and that his defense will be paid for by the many gun clubs across Canada and the U. S.
I don't think that he had that lawyer's name in his address book.
If I ever got in similar trouble I would call O.F.A.H. or the Ontario handgun association

 

[Unforgiven]

The unsafe storage charge is a joke. My nephew went to court on such a charge in North Bay after a B&E in his house while he was working in alberta and the guns were found by the cops, well hidden in his house only after he gave them detailed instructions over the phone how to find them since they were not in the gun locker that the thieves had broken into,
He didn't even have a lawyer. And the charges were dismissed by the judge...
I predict that his guns will also be returned and that his defense will be paid for by the many gun clubs across Canada and the U. S.
I don't think that he had that lawyer's name in his address book.
If I ever got in similar trouble I would call O.F.A.H. or the Ontario handgun association

That could very well be the case. But each case is different right? So that is why we have a judge make the call and not the police. If it rests with the police to make the call, then you have a right to argue with the police. Since you don't have the right to argue with the police, they aren't allowed to make that call.

I know of a story where some schmuck in the US put the loaded hand gun in the drawer under the stove. Friend turns on the oven and the guy gets shot by the gun as the magazine starts to melt. Do you figure charging him with unsafe storage is also a joke?

 

[DaSleeper]

I changed my mind about calling the O.F.A.H.

I have this friend with a backhoe.;-)

 

[Unforgiven]

I changed my mind about calling the O.F.A.H.

I have this friend with a backhoe.;-)

I mean I am with ya, but I just don't get it!

 

[DaSleeper]

I mean I am with ya, but I just don't get it!

 

[earth_as_one]

You can discharge a firearm at another person in self defense. Since these people were armed with firebombs, he should be able to claim self defense. But the police still have to charge him and let the courts decide. Let me know when the guy is convicted...

Meanwhile, this homeowner would face jail time if this incident happened in Canada:
Defense Depicts Japanese Boy as 'Scary' - NYTimes.com

Which is what Canada's gun laws are trying to avoid. That and vigilantism.

 

[mentalfloss]

Now, let's get to the crux of the matter......firearms are used in self defense in the USA about 2 million times per year, and in Canada about 20,000 times a year. Rarely are shots fired. Nine times out of ten, the mere display of a weapon deters criminal assault.

Okay.. now this is funny.

Let's go with Colpy math here:

9 out of 10 times, the display of a weapon deters criminal assault. That would mean that 10% of the time, a weapon is fired or criminal assault is not deterred.

10% of 20,000 is 2,000 people. In a country of 30 million people, 2,000 people are at risk every year.

If everyone went to Dollar-a-ma and bought a fakey for a few bucks, we would effectively be reducing our chances of serious risk to 2,000/30,000,000... or a 0.00006% chance of any injury (whether moderate or severe)

It's patently obvious - even by your own account - that gun proliferation would not be in the best interests of the country. It's a waste of time, in fact.

 

[Colpy]

Okay.. now this is funny.

Let's go with Colpy math here:

9 out of 10 times, the display of a weapon deters criminal assault. That would mean that 10% of the time, a weapon is fired or criminal assault is not deterred.

10% of 20,000 is 2,000 people. In a country of 30 million people, 2,000 people are at risk every year.

If everyone went to Dollar-a-ma and bought a fakey for a few bucks, we would effectively be reducing our chances of serious risk to 2,000/30,000,000... or a 0.00006% chance of any injury (whether moderate or severe)

It's patently obvious - even by your own account - that gun proliferation would not be in the best interests of the country. It's a waste of time, in fact.

OMG....you asre soooooo lefty!!!! lol

Here is the oh-so-obvious point......

Dead Bad Guys are a GOOD thing!

Relatively speaking.....better 100 dead guys killed while perpetrating criminal assault than one victim badly hurt.....

Now re-calculate...

(GEEZUS!!!!!)

lol

BTW, actually the number of incidents where a criminal is detered without a shot fired is higher than 90%, I believe it is 92% (from memory)

Then there are warning shots, which most people don't understand are a BAD idea.

Then there are harmless misses.

Then woundings.....about 3%.

Then finally, perpetrators killed by gunfire may be as high as 3,000 a year in the USA.

It's all good.

 

[Unforgiven]

I'm not so sure this Ian Thompson is as innocent as you make him out to be. If that was the neighbour doing the fire bombing, he was pretty pissed off at Thompson and I suspect he had some reason in his head to be that angry. Maybe all the chicken killing that was supposed to have been going on was a contributing factor. Some of these "rural folk" can be rather mean and crazy.

 

[DaSleeper]

I'm not so sure this Ian Thompson is as innocent as you make him out to be. If that was the neighbour doing the fire bombing, he was pretty pissed off at Thompson and I suspect he had some reason in his head to be that angry. Maybe all the chicken killing that was supposed to have been going on was a contributing factor. Some of these "rural folk" can be rather mean and crazy.

There's all kinds of smelly shyte.....but....

Chicken shyte has to be the smelliest...I so would shoot a chicken shyting in my yard..

But goose has to be the messiest...

 

[Unforgiven]

There's all kinds of smelly shyte.....but....

Chicken shyte has to be the smelliest...I so would shoot a chicken shyting in my yard..

But goose has to be the messiest...

Oh you gotta watch it with the geese. Cops will kick ya if you're shootin the geese man. It's true! heh heh

 

[Colpy]

I'm not so sure this Ian Thompson is as innocent as you make him out to be. If that was the neighbour doing the fire bombing, he was pretty pissed off at Thompson and I suspect he had some reason in his head to be that angry. Maybe all the chicken killing that was supposed to have been going on was a contributing factor. Some of these "rural folk" can be rather mean and crazy.

I am not at all sure Mr. Thompson is "innocent". I have little doubt things were said and done on both sides of the on-going dispute that would set Miss Manners all a-flutter.

I am, however, pretty sure he is "not guilty". Of any of the charges against him.

There's a big difference.........

 

[petros]

It's not a minor charge to discharge Colpy.

Don't you understand that firing a weapon in an unsafe manor in a resdential area is about the worst safety infraction you can face.

You talk about gun safety all the time. Was that safe?

Did he or did he not discharge his weapon in a region where it is illegal to do so?

 

[cdn_bc_ca]

Here is the oh-so-obvious point......

Dead Bad Guys are a GOOD thing!

I agree. But the important note to take away from this is how you go about producing the dead bad guys... because if you do it wrong, you end up being the bad guy.

This guy Ian Thompson, being a firearms instructor no less, had the right intentions but executed them poorly. he should know better.

 

[Colpy]

It's not a minor charge to discharge Colpy.

Don't you understand that firing a weapon in an unsafe manor in a resdential area is about the worst safety infraction you can face.

You talk about gun safety all the time. Was that safe?

Did he or did he not discharge his weapon in a region where it is illegal to do so?

He did not.

There is no place in Canada where it is illegal to discharge a firearm in self-defense.

 

[mentalfloss]

OMG....you asre soooooo lefty!!!! lol

Here is the oh-so-obvious point......

Dead Bad Guys are a GOOD thing!

Relatively speaking.....better 100 dead guys killed while perpetrating criminal assault than one victim badly hurt.....

Now re-calculate...

(GEEZUS!!!!!)

lol

BTW, actually the number of incidents where a criminal is detered without a shot fired is higher than 90%, I believe it is 92% (from memory)

Then there are warning shots, which most people don't understand are a BAD idea.

Then there are harmless misses.

Then woundings.....about 3%.

Then finally, perpetrators killed by gunfire may be as high as 3,000 a year in the USA.

It's all good.

Just buy a fake gun from Dollar-ama. The placebo effect more than substantiates the purchase as you've proven. It's a bit pointless going through your ethical conundrum on a case-by-case basis if it is only going to affect an insignificant portion of the population.

If you're out to save that small little puddle, then you better have an argument that ensures that everyone is safe and nobody 'good' dies.

 

[Colpy]

Just buy a fake gun from Dollar-ama. The placebo effect more than substantiates the purchase as you've proven.

Try killing 3,000 bad guys with a water pistol....lol

good luck with that.

I'll watch from over here........