Didn’t they fall to the ground?
Robert Mahler
Assistant Crown attorney in Ontario, Canada
January 31, 2012
Court adjourns homeowner’s self-defence trial to clarify confusing gun control law
This was referring to the shell casing from a .38 caliber revolver. Mahler was prosecuting a man for firing three shots to scare off masked men who were throwing “firebombs” (Molotov Cocktails) at his house.
[Not only is the prosecutor so ignorant of firearms that he believed revolvers automatically eject spent shell casings but the government initially attempted to prosecute him for defending himself and his home. The video of the three guys calmly walking around throwing the “firebombs” apparently was going to hinder the case of the prosecution so they dropped that charge. They then charged the victim with “careless storage of a firearm”.
I am of the opinion the prosecutor should be charged with crimes against humanity. Everyone knows you have a right to defend yourself against a violent attack. For the prosecutor to use the force of government to intimidate people who exercise such an obvious natural right warrants an extremely harsh response. And for the prosecutor to base a significant portion of his case on the belief that a revolver automatically ejects it’s shell casings qualifies him for a “Crap for Brains” mention.—Joe]
The whole Crown Prosecution office, not just Mr. Mahler, is seriously ignorant – or stupid. Surely if the case had been discussed at all, even over drinks after work, this hilarious stream of lunacy would have disappeared.
Prosecution claim: the firearms were in the bedsdie table, and already loaded.
Expanding on this: if the guns were in the bedside table, the prosecutor in this situation would have shot through the window rather than going outside.
Problem: eedjut has just shown that he does NOT believe the guns were in the bedside table, that the defendant more likely had to retrieve them from elsewhere and load them as he was moving to get a clear shot.
On and on… I certainly hope not all Canadian prosecutions are based on grounds of gelatin. Perhaps they are deliberately throwing the case, but that would lay them open to charges and possible expulsion from the profession: why not just drop the remaining charges?
Wow. Canadian gun laws are even worse than our worst states. If the victim in this event had lived 50 miles east in upstate NY, I doubt the prosecution would even entertain the idea of charging him.
In America the prosecutor is not merely charged with winning the case, he (or she) is charged with seeking justice, and that might entail dropping a case where, as here, the only charges they might be able to manipulate a jury to convict on are completely anti-liberty, or since it is Canada, anti Peace, Order and Good Government. No one who doesn’t have Crown Attorney for brains believes that it is peaceful, orderly, or a sign of good government to allow people to throw firebombs with impunity, and require that those around such wrongdoers, take the injury and seek to be made whole after the fact. It certainly is not supportive of a liberty interest in the United States.
He should be fired, and prosecuted for misuse of his office.
After which he’ll cross the border and be hired as an assistant to Eric Holder.