Stun Baton Flashlight (repost)

[leosnipes]

Have a baton and have a daughter, TAGGED.

[Hhutch]

First thing a judge would ask would be,"what is your purpose for owning such a device?" If your answer is anything other than "cooking hotdogs via electrical discharge while hiking at night", they will deem that the "intent" in owning it is to brandish it as a weapon, making it a prohibited device. The fact that he could cite multiple sections of the criminal code to support his claims is testimony to the ambiguity of our law and the ways in which the establishment exploit it. You have to pick your fights and this is one that if not charged, I'd be inclined to count my lucky stars, take the hit and move on.

[Bad Lieutenant]

First thing a judge would ask would be,"what is your purpose for owning such a device?" If your answer is anything other than "cooking hotdogs via electrical discharge while hiking at night", they will deem that the "intent" in owning it is to brandish it as a weapon, making it a prohibited device. The fact that he could cite multiple sections of the criminal code to support his claims is testimony to the ambiguity of our law and the ways in which the establishment exploit it. You have to pick your fights and this is one that if not charged, I'd be inclined to count my lucky stars, take the hit and move on.

...and that's why we have the ridiculous laws that we do. And also why everyone thinks that Canadians are wusses.

[Bad Lieutenant]

your son needs to keep his mouth shut

and where you live (Vancouver area)
he might even get your house Invaded at a dangerous hour of the night if your son keeps those gums flapping

Surely you realize that people reading your comment are calling you all kinds of terrible names...?

[Darkw]

I don't think anyone who has faced Canadian troops in battle "thinks Canadians are wusses". You might want to re-evaluate that statement.

[Bad Lieutenant]

This former Canadian trooper will take a pass on that request.

(and is rolling his eyes in the process...)

[Johnyy]

Fight The Power ~ Seemz {we} are the Public Enemy.

[Bad Lieutenant]

Fight The Power ~ Seemz {we} are the Public Enemy.

If we allow the gov't to unjustly seize our property and then, not only do nothing about it, but be "grateful" that they didn't further abuse their powers by falsely charging us, then... yes, we are indeed our own enemies.

[ghostie]

I believe the subtext here is... the item was seized... but there were no charges. There will never be charges. The last thing the police want is a real judge looking at what it says in the Regs.

I'm a criminal lawyer working in the Lower Mainland (and sometimes the rest of) BC. They call this a "no case seizure". Perhaps surprising to some here, but all kinds of things are seized off of people by police all the time, including guns and bags of drugs, without charges ever being sworn against anyone.

This kind of thing is, in some ways, as old as the institution of the police itself, but it really gained ground in the 2000's with "Gang Task Force" type policing. Police see a "known gang member" driving a vehicle. Expensive vehicle. Pretty girls. Laws be damned... not in my town. Vehicle is stopped. The occupants of the vehicle are asking why they were stopped? Where are the "reasonable grounds to suspect in all the circumstances that the individual is connected to a particular crime and that such a detention is necessary" (the test for investigative detention: R. v. Mann, at para. 45 http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc.../2167/index.do). The police just laugh and say, "have a seat on the curb, buddy. I think I smell marijuana". The vehicle and occupants are all illegally searched. There is no smell of marijuana. One of the guys has a loaded .45 on him. The police seize it. Tow the vehicle. No charges. No one complains.

This is a real scenario - not something I made up.

Now a lot of citizens, including gun owners like us, don't want roid-rage gangsters carrying around a loaded .45, so we applaud this... or at least let it slide. But the seed is sown. It starts with Gang-bangers driving around in a Hummer H2, who have never worked a day in their lives... but then police get a call from a teacher saying that a student reports that his dad has a stun baton. Think they are going to blush at a no case seizure on that, compared to my scenario? Gee, I wonder.

If there are no charges, you have to initiate the proceedings yourself - an application (to a judge) for the return of things seized. Through that process you can find out whether any of the paperwork was ever done (like a Form 5.2 - Report to a Justice Following a Seizure). I bet you dollars to donuts it was not. When police seize things, they are seizing them on behalf of the court - hence the paperwork requirements and s. 490 of the Criminal Code. If police could simply seize property on their own authority with no review by anyone except the police themselves... well, you get it. That would be banana republic policing.

All this costs money though, unless you are going to do it yourself, which no one ever wants to. People are easily intimidated by the police and the "system" so they come on CGN and vent that way. And I don't blame them.

There are some lawyers out there, like myself, who could help in these situations, but... I also have to spend my work week earning a living. Nobody ever rides in on a white horse and saves you... at least not for free. It is a $49.99 baton. Cheaper to just buy a new one and keep it quiet this time.

[BabySeal]

I bet this "Non Firearms Prohibited Weapons Expert" is the same man who gave a lecture I attended a couple years ago, where I overheard APD members joking that Abby is a Charter Free Zone.

The expert spoke about how anyone who carries a knife of any type is violating a number of laws, as is anyone who carries anything that could be used as a weapon.

He went on to say that ANYTHING a person has in their hand could be used as a weapon, ie a pen, a key, etc etc.

It's a game to guys like this where they are just out to manipulate interpretations of the laws and try to cram their own versions of it all down our throats. They justify it it, saying that they do it so they can get the slippery career criminals that are so hard to nail down. They basically want everything to be an offence so they can jump on you and nail you for anything else they can find. So as you have seen, they creatively read some parts of the law and disregard others.

Thankfully, criminal charges were not laid.

Next time that teacher is fundraising for a club or team, I bet you can think of some ways to repay her kindness.

I'd fight it if you can. Maybe you can get some support from the importer and retailers of the product since they are surely next on the hit list.

After all, they have a precedent now.

Gurpreet Gill or Ken Beatch would be my first choices for local, independent lawyers, especially the latter.

All of that said, OP, I don't know you from Adam. So if there is more to this story than has been shared then that would certainly come out in a trial or hearing. It's ultimately your call on how to proceed and you may have a hundred different reasons for making it than any of us people from the Internet.

Best of luck!