Why does the government refuse to change the law to allow police to track violent repeat offenders with Firearm Prohibition Orders? If they had, perhaps Buck Evans would still be alive today.
On December 26, 2018, 34-year-old Buck Evans was shot dead by Edmonton police during what was called a high-risk arrest of an armed and dangerous suspect whose criminal record dates back to 2003.
Evans’ most recent warrants, issued on November 28, 2018, were for possession of a controlled substance and failing to comply with his probation order.
In addition to those outstanding warrants, Buck Evans also had four (4) Firearms Prohibition Orders registered against him, including two lifetime firearm bans.
None of those prohibitions stopped Evans from illegally obtaining the gun he used to shoot at police.
A public inquiry into his death is pending but according to the Alberta government’s Fatality Inquiry Schedules, updated January 8, 2020, the investigation into Buck Evans death is not yet complete.
Melissa Dumais, identified as Evans’ girlfriend, readily admits the semi-automatic rifle was in Evans’ vehicle.
“He opened up the door and I saw his gun and I said, ‘Buck, why do you need that? What are you doing?’ He said, ‘I’m scared, I feel like something is going to happen to me’.”
Dumais insists Evans never touched the gun.
“The gun was nowhere near his hands. The driver had his hands up, I had my hands up. And Buck had his hands up. He wasn’t holding it at all. It was on the ground.”
Her statement contradicts the news release issued by the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team.
“The 34-year-old man was given verbal directions to exit the vehicle which he failed to comply with. Independent evidence gathered to date would suggest that the man was in possession of a firearm and that the firearm was, in fact, discharged by the man.”
Melissa Dumais says she will sue police for Buck Evans’ death.
“I hope that I can get the cops that did this to him, because I am going to be taking it to court. I have enough evidence that this was excessive force. It may make my life a living hell, in the end. So be it.”
Diane Delorme, Evans’ former girlfriend, doesn’t believe Edmonton Police needed to shoot him.
“I’m sure the police were doing their job, but they didn’t have to shoot, did they?”
She says he had a long criminal history but he wanted to turn his life around.
“I just want people to know that Buck wasn’t a monster that they portrayed him out to be. He had a good heart. He’s gone through a lot, but he’s still a good person at the end of it all.”
While this may be true, the fact remains that Buck Evans was in illegal possession of a firearm in violation of two lifetime Firearm Prohibition Orders. He was also wanted on outstanding warrants for other criminal offenses.
Buck Evans is dead today because he pointed a loaded gun at police and fired, not because he was a good person who was just misunderstood.
Buck Evans Firearm Prohibition Order History
- 2005 – a 5-year firearm prohibition order
- 2011 – a 10-year firearm prohibition order
- January 2017 lifetime firearm prohibition order
- February 2018 lifetime firearm prohibition order
Should the government track violent repeat offenders with firearm prohibition orders?
Or should the government continue to ignore people like Buck Evans who, despite two lifetime firearm bans, still managed to get his hands on the rifle he used to shoot at Edmonton Police officers?
Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.
Author
-
Christopher di ArmaniChristopher di Armani is a freedom-loving Amazon bestselling author and current events commentator from Lytton, BC, Canada, who strives to awaken the passion for liberty inside every human being.
Who cares about Buck Evens, he reaped what he sowed . Just be thankful he did not kill or wound some innocent by stander .
The left wing governments always go after the law abiding citizen , not the criminals/gang’s . It seems to be a flaw in their character .
Ed .
Legal firearms owners have to comply with the law. If Buck Evans had complied with the prohibition he would most likely be alive today. No sympathy.
lynn
??????????????? WHOA! Sooooooooooooo many questions here. Buck’s lifestyle obviously indicates some questionable??? choices. HOWEVER — its very clear that regulations and restrictions apply only to the very honest and law abiding — the most innocent of all. I don’t have an answer but I wonder if one sentence carried out may not be a better deterrent. Forgiveness is not in the legal library of defenitions — damned if you do or damned if you don’t. Sad but true.
Do we know for sure that Buck Evans discharged a firearm at all? Or that’s according to police officers? Is there body cam evidence? If latter, then well, the other party can’t speak anymore… If all we have is their word against his. Also, what is ASIRT exactly? Sounds like police checking themselves. I am seeing “civilian investigators” but it very well might be retired police officers or a related group of compassionate fellas.
I’ve seen no mention of body cam footage, only news reports saying Evans shot at police and they returned fire. The inquiry into the “incident” is not scheduled yet, apparently because the investigation is not yet complete.
ASIRT is Alberta Serious Incident Response Team, and their mandate is to “Investigates events where serious injury or death may have been caused by police and serious or sensitive allegations of police misconduct.”
Although I wasn’t physically with Buck at this time, his intent that day was not a firing match with EPS. I find it extremely worrysome that EPS chose to deploy overkill in this situation. I was with Buck earlier in the day. Bucks demeanor that day was not of an agressor, as EPS portrayed him to be. My hope is that the inquiry will bring to light ASIRT’s extremely excessive force that ended the life of man that didn’t deserve to die in what I will always precieve as an execution. I find it hurtful that the media continues to portray Buck as a gun-toting renegade with a death wish. I can assure you, this was not the man I knew and loved. Although I am described as former girlfriend, Ms. Dumais, I was told by Buck, was not a girlfriend but a paying customer for said ,’uncontrolled substances’ that may or may not have been found on Buck. My resolve is strengthened by what legacy will be left to Buck’s young son. Buck was a good man who had a good heart, resolved to be a good standing contributer in the community. This is what he wanted for his son and his family.
Thank you for reaching out and sharing your experience, Diane. I, too, am looking forward to the inquiry into his death to (hopefully) learn the full extent of what happened that day.
I would also love to speak with you about the man you knew and the discrepancy between that and how he is portrayed in the media. If you are interested in that conversation, please contact me through the form at https://ChristopherDiArmani.org with a phone number where I can reach you, and the best day/time to call.