Hunter who fatally shot another after mistaking him for an elk sentenced to 7 months

Sharter said:
Clearly the shooter was poaching! He shouldn't be shooting after sunset for starters.
Click to expand...

As has already been pointed out, it depends on how long after sunset. Many provinces, including SK, have regulations that allow hunting 1/2 hour after sunset. In BC, where you are, it is a full hour (other than for migratory birds.)
 
Cameron SS said:
Right, except that he had originally been charged with criminal negligence causing death,
Criminal Code.



So if criminal negligence is the charge that the police laid after their investigation, which carries a minimum of 4 years prison, 7 months seems a bit light.

Especially considering that being convicted on a charge of careless use readily gives way to a conviction on a charge of manslaughter as well. And on conviction of manslaughter is by implication guilty of Section 85 of the code, using a firearm to commit manslaughter, which nets an additional one year minimum which MUST be consecutive.



This is a fallacious argument because you can't be convicted of a gun crime if you didn't actually use a gun.

The fact is that LICENSE holders convicted of the same sentences as NON-LICENSE holder appear to get lighter sentences, despite all the hysteria here that gun owners will go to jail for all manor of paper crimes.

My quick google fu found 8 cases of accidental shootings in the last 20 years. I obviously didn't find all of them so take this as anecdotal at best.

None of the trial reports or news articles I found even indicate whether or not the gun owner was licensed.

2 of the cases were gang related. 3 were at the home. 3 were hunting related. Asides from the hunting cases, all resulted in homicide convictions, either manslaughter or 2nd degree murder, and the minimum sentence received was 5 years. In all of the hunting cases, it seems no charges were ever laid.

So this particular case seems to be an outlier for two reasons, for people charged, the sentence seems low given the circumstances. On the other hand, it seems inconsistent that he was charged at all.



Do we know all the factors? A news paper article most certainly would not have covered them all. DO you have a link to the trial judgement?
Click to expand...

Hi, yes I agree with your position.

CV has been on my block list for two-years now; he is a troll. DON'T FEED THE TROLLS!!
 
Sharter said:
Clearly the shooter was poaching! He shouldn't be shooting after sunset for starters. And he obviously didn't make sure that he was shooting a legal animal! It was a disgraceful act and he got off easy IMO. Condolences to the family
Click to expand...

Do you even hunt? If you did, you would know that the legal hunting time extends past sunset in many provinces. As to the rest of your post, I agree 100%, there is no excuse for mistaking a human for a legal big game animal.
 
Thomas D'Arcy McGee said:
CV has been on my block list for two-years now; he is a troll. DON'T FEED THE TROLLS!!
Click to expand...

Lol. I suspect your problem with me is that I am guilty of calling out your BS. No doubt, your assessment of me is invaluable to the membership, I am sure. Cheerz, TDM. :p (Btw, more careful reading of Cameron SS's post might have revealed to you that we don't necessarily disagree.)
 
CV32 said:
Where's the actual proof of that? Any statistics that perpetrators of gun crime receive lighter sentences than those not involving guns?

Edit: A lifetime firearms prohibition has apparently been imposed, as well.
Click to expand...

Just his opinion...
Much better than the clip and paste artist that hasnt had anything to say ...other than to clip and paste newspaper articles and that really isnt an opinion.
But, what do I know?
Rob
 
FLHTCUI said:
Just his opinion... Much better than the clip and paste artist that hasnt had anything to say ...other than to clip and paste newspaper articles and that really isnt an opinion. But, what do I know? Rob
Click to expand...

Perfectly okay to have an opinion. I am curious why people have an opinion, and what that opinion is based upon.
 
CV32 said:
Lol. I suspect your problem with me is that I am guilty of calling out your BS. No doubt, your assessment of me is invaluable to the membership, I am sure. Cheerz, TDM. :p (Btw, more careful reading of Cameron SS's post might have revealed to you that we don't necessarily disagree.)
Click to expand...

:dancingbanana:
 
Last edited:
CV32 said:
Plea bargaining to a lesser charge(s) is quite ordinary. The agreed statement of facts is the tip off. And, of course, the judge is only going to impose a sentence for the charge(s) for which the accused has actually been convicted, rather than what was originally charged. This sentence falls within the range for such offences.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%



The belief or perception that gun crime offenders receive relatively light sentences is not grounded in reality. Probably a function of information gathering from media articles rather than actual sentencing decisions.
Click to expand...
Again you are mischaracterizing what was said. Its not that gun crimes are treated lightly compared to non gun crimes, its tha legal owners are treated lightly compared to non legal owners.

But your right, most claims for and against are supported by cherry picked google results. To do a proper study is tine consuming and tedious and I have yet to find skmeone inclined to do it, just to win an internet debate. Myself included.
 
Trimmer 905 said:
Not the same thing by a long shot. Stan Jonathan took a shot at a deer across a field in failing light,missed and hit a hunter on a watch inside the tree line out of sight.
Click to expand...

He shot the hunter at like 7 in the morning. The only thing failing was the investigation.
 
Wow .... 7 months for killing someone!!

it is like saying .... feel free to shoot at any shadow out there ... the worst will be just 7 month in prison!!

Who cares about positive target identification ... etc. ... just shoot ... the worst that can happen is 7 months!!!

:-(
 
When I go out with the bow I worry about my camo being good enough to get within 30 yards of a deer. Reading articles like this makes me think I should worry about being visible to idiots 200 yards away instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom