January 3, 2012
Ian Thomson of Port Colbourne, Ontario, was found NOT GUILTY by Justice Colvin in a 45-minute decision that finally takes the weight off the man who had the audacity to defend his life from masked men trying to murder him in his home while he slept.
It’s a case that should never happened.
Police should have commended Thomson for his restraint in firing warning shots over the heads of the men who tried to murder him, not arrest him on bogus safe storage charges.
Crown Counsel should have declined to prosecute because it is not in the public interest to proceed with such an asinine case. Then again, Crown Counsel should have charged the men who tried to kill Ian Thomson with attempted murder too… something they just couldn’t bring themselves to do.
Naturally, when the Crown Counsel’s head is stuffed this far into his own behind, he won’t accept the decision of the court. Long before the decision came down today, January 3rd, Crown prosecutors made it very clear they would appeal the decision if it didn’t go their way.
I truly do not comprehend the mindset of police and lawyers who would rather see a man dead, burned alive, than defend his life against masked men trying to murderer him.
It makes no sense to me.
Unless, that is, I accept the fact that police and crown prosecutors, at least in Ontario, do not believe we mere citizens of Canada should be “allowed” to defend our lives in the face of imminent and mortal danger.
It’s fine for them, of course… just not for the rest of us.
The sheer hypocrisy of this is, well, disgusting.
Let me leave you with a few thoughts I wrote almost a year ago in an article titled “Vigilantism vs Self-Defense: Why Bob Rae is a buffoon completely out of touch with reality”
…in the early morning hours of August 22, 2010, Port Colborne, Ontario resident Ian Thomson used a legally-owned and registered handgun to fire warning shots over the heads of the three murderous cretins (no relation to our former prime minister) who were attempting to kill him by burning down Mr. Thomson’s home with him inside it.
The police and Crown prosecutors have decided that saving his own life is not acceptable behaviour. Instead, Crown prosecutors seem to be content that Ian Thomson should have dialed 9-1-1 and then promptly died at the hands of his attackers, like a good little sheeple.
A police officer actually had the gall to say that Thomson was able to retrieve his firearms “too quickly”, therefore he was obviously guilty of the unsafe storage of firearms.
It’s an asinine comment and an even more asinine conclusion to draw. Ian Thomson’s life was in immediate and imminent danger from three men caught on video cameras screaming death threats and tossing Molotov cocktails at his home.
It was only his ability to retrieve his firearms and fire a couple of warning shots to scare off his would-be murderers that allows Ian Thomson to be alive to suffer the abusive prosecution he is currently facing, not to mention the moronic comments of that policeman and now Bob Rae.
This is beyond absurd. If an inmate inside a maximum security prison can use a concealed weapon to kill another inmate according the the Supreme Court of Canada (R. v. Kerr, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 371, 2004 SCC 44), then why can’t a man with no criminal record and a legally-owned firearms defend his life against three men actively trying to murder him?
