• Home
  • About
    • About Christopher di Armani
    • Disclosure Statement
    • Code of Ethics
    • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
  • Gun Laws 101
  • FPO Violators
  • Store
  • Donate
  • Hire Me

Christopher di Armani.com

In Praise of Individual Rights and Freedoms

  • Top 25
  • Big Brother
    • Access To Information
    • Bureaucratic Incompetence
    • Bureaucrat’s Rule #1
    • Censorship
    • Feeding at the Government Trough
    • Lemonade Freedom
  • Common Sense
    • Expressions of Gratitude
    • Good Samaritans
    • Good Stuff
    • In Memoriam — Remembering our Heros
    • Life
    • Personal Responsibility
    • Politically Correct Madness
  • Courts
    • Abusive Prosecutions
    • Civil Forfeiture
    • Human Rights Tribunals
    • Judicial Corruption
    • Justice Denied
    • Justice System Abuses
    • Police Sentencing Double-Standards
    • Prosecutorial Misconduct
    • SLAPP Lawsuits
  • Crime
    • Abuse of Trust
    • Canadian Mass Murders
    • Firearm Prohibition Orders
    • Human Depravity
    • Immigration Issues
    • Racism
    • Restraining Orders
    • Sexual Predators
    • Violent Criminals
    • Wrongful Convictions
  • Guns
    • Concealed Carry
    • Dial 9-1-1 and Die
    • Firearms Act
    • Fun Gun Stuff
    • Gun Control
    • Gun-Free Zones
    • Gun Politics
    • Gun Registration
    • Negligent Discharges
    • Target Shooting Competitions
  • Islam
    • Canadian Islamic Disgraces
    • Islamic Terrorism
    • Radical Islam
    • Sharia Law
    • The Religion Of Peace
  • Police
    • Abuse of Police Authority
    • Filming Police
    • Great Police Officers
    • Officer Down
    • Police Brutality
    • Police Corruption
    • Police Misconduct
    • RCMP Accountability
    • RCMP Hall of Shame
    • Warrantless Searches
  • Politics
    • Elections
    • Ethics in Politics
    • Political Antics
    • Political Corruption
    • Social Justice
    • Stupid Human Tricks
    • Union Bay Improvement District
  • Rights
    • Charter of Rights and Freedoms
    • Constitutional Violations
    • Freedom of Assembly
    • Freedom of Religion
    • Freedom of Speech
    • Property Rights
    • Privacy Rights
    • Self-Defense
    • Unreasonable Search and Seizure

David Lametti Drops Mandatory Minimums for Serious Firearm Offences

Published February 24, 2021 by Christopher di Armani Filed Under: Crime, Gun Politics, Gun Smuggling, Politics


Justice Minister David Lametti’s performance during last Thursday’s press conference for Bill C-22 rivalled Justin Trudeau’s or even William Shatner’s for overacting.

“We’re turning the page on a FAILED [overemphasised for dramatic effect] Conservative criminal justice policy.”

“It was an approach that did NOT [overemphasised for dramatic effect] make our communities safer.”

“It did NOT [overemphasised for dramatic effect] deter criminals.”

“It did NOT [overemphasised for dramatic effect] make the justice system system more effective or more fair.”

Eventually, or perhaps thankfully, Lametti finally stopped over-acting and spoke softly and lovingly into the television camera.

“I’m not talking about hardened criminals here,” he said. “I’m talking about low-risk, first-time, low-risk non-violent offenders. I’m talking about single moms. I’m talking about people with problematic addictions or other health problems.”

“Think about your own kids,” Lametti opined. “I bet you would want them, the first time around, to get the benefit of the doubt or a second chance if they messed up.”

While I may want my kid to get a second chance, there is no denying that if his first arrest is for armed robbery or extortion with a firearm, it’s probably not his first crime – it’s just the first time he got caught.

These are not the actions of a ‘low-risk, non-violent offender’ as Justice Minister Lametti would have us believe.

After lamenting further about a young Northern man who fired a rifle into an abandoned building (without knowing it was empty, Lametti conveniently ignores) who received the mandatory 4-year sentence for “discharging a firearm while being reckless.”

Was that sentence life-destroying?

Absolutely, I have no doubt.

But Lametti is basing his assessment of this young man solely on the fact nobody was injured or killed by his reckless actions.

Had someone been inside the building and they were hit with that reckless bullet, I doubt Minister Lametti would present this young man as “a victim of our criminal justice system.” Good luck is all that prevented someone from being injured or killed on that fateful night of drunken stupidity.

 

No More Mandatory Minimums

“We proposed to repeal minimum mandatory penalties of imprisonment for all drug offences and certain firearm offences.”

If Lametti dropped mandatory minimums for all drug possession only offences, I’m all for it. Filling prisons with addicts is just plain dumb. They need help, not jail time.

Drug traffickers and illegal drug producers are an entirely different matter, and those are the crimes addressed specifically in the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

I’m no fan of removing mandatory minimum sentences for those who profit by destroying the lives of others. This page is filled with cases of drug dealers and other criminals arrested in the possession of illegal guns in violation of their Firearm Prohibition Orders. They need to be removed from police society for a time.

For better or worse, we’ll see if Lametti’s policy positively or negatively affects public safety should it become law.

My bet is residents of our largest cities can look forward to more street violence, not less, if Bill C-22 becomes law.

 

Extortion, Robbery with a Firearm

Lametti really goes off the rails when it comes to firearms offences, though.

These are the offences for which our Justice Minister believes criminals should not be sent to prison for a minimum amount of time:

  • Using a firearm or imitation firearm in commission of offence (two separate offences)
    • Paragraphs 85(3)(a) and (b): MMPs of 1 year (first offence) and 3 years (second and subsequent offence)
  • Possession of weapon obtained by commission of offence
    • Paragraph 96(2)(a): MMP of 1 year
  • Weapons trafficking (excluding firearms and ammunition)
    • Subsection 99(3): MMP of 1 year
  • Possession for purpose of weapons trafficking (excluding firearms and ammunition)
    • Subsection 100(3): MMP of 1 year
  • Importing or exporting knowing it is unauthorized (gun smuggling)
    • Subsection 103(2.1): MMP of 1 year
  • Discharging firearm with intent
    • Paragraph 244(2)(b): MMP of 4 years
  • Discharging firearm — recklessness
    • Paragraph 244.2(3)(b): MMP of 4 years
  • Robbery with a firearm
    • Paragraph 344(1)(a.1): MMP of 4 years
  • Extortion with a firearm
    • Paragraph 346(1.1)(a.1): MMP of 4 years

If you’re willing to hold a gun to someone’s head and demand money or other valuables from them, I fail to see why you shouldn’t spend a few years as a guest of the state. Same with gun smuggling, weapons trafficking and using a firearm to commit other offences.

There are two offences for which I agree the mandatory minimum penalty should be removed:

  • Possession of firearm or weapon knowing its possession is unauthorized (two separate offences)
    • Paragraphs 92(3)(b) and (c): MMP of 1 year (second offence) and 2 years less a day (third and subsequent offence)
  • Possession of prohibited or restricted firearm with ammunition
    • Paragraphs 95(2)(i) and (ii): MMPs of 3 years (first offence) and 5 years (second and subsequent offence)

These are charges any firearms owner could face if their Possession and Acquisition License inadvertently expires, for example. Does a gun owner falling afoul of a paper crime deserve to spend a mandatory one or three years in prison?

Of course not. Are licensed gun owners the only ones who could run afoul of this law? No. And many of them don’t deserve to go to jail either.

 

Lametti’s Overall Stance on Mandatory Minimum Sentences

“The reason the numbers are so high is due, in good part, to current sentencing laws which focus on punishment through imprisonment. At the centre of this approach is the mandatory minimum penalty.”

I agree with the Liberal Minister on this point.

Think lapsed PAL holder receiving three years in prison for the handgun and ammunition that lever left his gun safe.

The Supreme Court hates mandatory minimum sentences because they don’t allow a judge to sentence an individual based on the specifics of their case.

There are always exceptions to the rule for which the mandatory minimum penalty was created and judges must be free to sentence them appropriately.

Author

  • Christopher di Armani
    Christopher di Armani

    Christopher 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.

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Tags: David Lametti, mandatory minimum penalties, Possession and Acquisition License, R. v. Nur

Did you find value in this article?

If you found this article useful or it contained valuable information and you want to thank me, the best way is to buy me a coffee or two.

1. Send an Interac eTransfer to author @ christopherdiarmani.net (remove spaces)

2. Send via PayPal using this link: https://www.paypal.me/ThatLibertyGuy

3. Use your credit card in my online store to support me with a one-time donation, a monthly recurring donation, or an annual donation. See these links for all the details about the thank-you gifts I offer my supporters.

Comments

  1. Arie Intveld says

    February 25, 2021 at 12:48 pm

    I must emphasize yet again that Canada has a criminal LEGAL system and NOT a criminal JUSTICE system. And now with Bill C-22, the courts’ leniency in sentencing you for your transgressions will not be predicated on how heinous your criminal actions were nor on the number of people you have victimized. Rather, it will be dependent on the colour of your hide, your station in life, your culture and your political ideology.

    Canadian law DOES NOT APPLY EQUALLY to each and every Canadian. It never has.

    Reply
  2. Milt says

    February 26, 2021 at 10:40 am

    Why do Liberals believe that with a simple slash of a pen can or will have any long term effect on a person (criminal) that already understands the weak justice system rules or punishments much better than David Lametti or Bill Blair or JusTin Trudeau.

    You could win a bet that the person pointing the firearm, trafficking the firearm or stealing the legally registered firearm during a break in are well versed in the total consequence that the act is libel to cost them and they do not care.

    That is probably why they are often repeat offenders.

    Reply
  3. peter bolten says

    February 26, 2021 at 3:31 pm

    Hello Christopher,,

    After reading this see-saw swing of sentences and mandatory minimums, seems the bar has been set and we are on the same level of torturers and sexual violence abusing criminals should we trip up legally with all these stacked upon layers of redefinitions of our hobbies. I say this because this a.m. I heard on the radio about a former Syrian secret police officer that was sentenced to four and half years for his role in atrocious human rights abuses….

    https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2021-02-24/former-syrian-secret-policeman-convicted-aiding-torture

    This may seem like ‘apple’ and oranges’ comparison to some here, but I am not an apple nor orange nor have I ever hurt anyone and I doubt that the courts would give me credits for my exemplary lifestyle and services to the public should I in theory balk at all these Laws and say no to compliances.

    Why would any partisan group throw me under a heavy unfair bus for being simply Canadian?

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe to my commentaries

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Pinterest
  • RSS
  • Twitter

Latest Tweets

Follow @ThatLibertyGuy

Christopher di Armani 🇨🇦 🇺🇸
@ThatLibertyGuy

  • New comment: Edmonton Police Service Constable Adam Kube Refused Any Appeal In His Termination for Corrupt Practices christopherdiarmani.com/10846/police/p…
    about 2 weeks ago
    Reply Retweet Favorite
  • A big shout out to @CandiceMalcolm, @AndrewLawton, @AnthonyFurey and the entire team at @TrueNorthCentre for sendin… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
    about 3 weeks ago
    Reply Retweet Favorite
  • For earthly princes lay aside their power when they rise up against God, and are unworthy to be reckoned among the… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
    about 1 month ago
    Reply Retweet Favorite
  • New comment: Paul Rogan Passes: The End of an Era christopherdiarmani.com/18908/common-s…
    about 2 months ago
    Reply Retweet Favorite
  • To restore common sense to our nation, this is the path. The political left works around the clock and around the… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
    about 2 months ago
    Reply Retweet Favorite

Most Popular This Week

  • All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing
  • How did Live-Streaming Rape Become a ‘Thing’?
  • Dale Merle Nelson’s 1970 Murder Spree in Creston, British Columbia
  • The National Anthem BANNED… at Indiana’s Goshen College?
  • Yvon Mercier: From RCMP Depot Trainer to Double-Murderer
  • A Historic Day for Freedom of Speech: Geert Wilders
  • Constable Adam Massart: Give him the finger, he’ll point his service pistol at you

Most Popular This Month

  • Yvon Mercier: From RCMP Depot Trainer to Double-Murderer
  • All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing
  • OPP Sgt. Mike Dolderman’s Sexual Assault Trial Delayed Again
  • Dale Merle Nelson’s 1970 Murder Spree in Creston, British Columbia
  • How did Live-Streaming Rape Become a ‘Thing’?
  • OPP Sergeant Jamie Gillespie Pleads Guilty to attempting to intercept private communications
  • Escaped Mental Patient William Bernard Lepine and the 1972 Kettle Valley Murders

© 2004–2023 ChristopherDiArmani.com | All Rights Reserved

Close

Buy me a cup of coffee

A ridiculous amount of coffee was consumed in the process of writing these articles. If you enjoy my work, please buy me a coffee or two to keep me going!