Magazine legality

[jiffx2781]

don't think THE CROWN has taken it all the way to trial, people have just made deals so far

Fixed it for ya. The Crown has pressured the individuals into taking a plea bargain because they don't want the issue brought before a judge. The Crown knows that legislation hasn't changed (yet).
Regardless I wouldn't want to be the guy bearing the costs of proceeding to trial just to get a couple mags back.

 

[Cameron SS]

Fixed it for ya. The Crown has pressured the individuals into taking a plea bargain because they don't want the issue brought before a judge. The Crown knows that legislation hasn't changed (yet).
Regardless I wouldn't want to be the guy bearing the costs of proceeding to trial just to get a couple mags back.

Highly doubtful any crown would ever risk losing a trial for a couple mags, and a judge looking at a legal non violent gun owner and a couple of mags as low rent not worth the court or the tax payers time.

Crowns have gotten sever tongue lashings from judges for far less.

 

[Brian46]

Fixed it for ya. The Crown has pressured the individuals into taking a plea bargain because they don't want the issue brought before a judge. The Crown knows that legislation hasn't changed (yet).
Regardless I wouldn't want to be the guy bearing the costs of proceeding to trial just to get a couple mags back.

No, if the accused didn't take the deal to forfeit the prohibited device/devices the matter would have gone to trial

 

[Brian46]

Highly doubtful any crown would ever risk losing a trial for a couple mags, and a judge looking at a legal non violent gun owner and a couple of mags as low rent not worth the court or the tax payers time.

Crowns have gotten sever tongue lashings from judges for far less.

If that was the case, why people take a deal over going to court and having a judge put the police and crown in their place? Surely the CSSA would have backed the accused monetarily if the outcome was as guaranteed as you make it sound.

 

[Cameron SS]

If that was the case, why people take a deal over going to court and having a judge put the police and crown in their place? Surely the CSSA would have backed the accused monetarily if the outcome was as guaranteed as you make it sound.

Most peoples risk tolerance for trial is far lower than the crowb. Its a bluff few people are willing to call.

As for the CSSA they were supposed to have launched a formal challenge more than a year and a half ago. They have been called out for an update repeatedly and so far there seems to be little info or progress.

 

[jiffx2781]

If that was the case, why people take a deal over going to court and having a judge put the police and crown in their place? Surely the CSSA would have backed the accused monetarily if the outcome was as guaranteed as you make it sound.

1. $$,$$$.$$

2. The other charges mixed into the bag that seem to the individual as being the more important ones to have dropped against them.

Everyone has to weigh their own personal risk factor. Even the Crown.

 

[Brian46]

1. $$,$$$.$$

2. The other charges mixed into the bag that seem to the individual as being the more important ones to have dropped against them.

Everyone has to weigh their own personal risk factor. Even the Crown.

So you are now making it seem like the outcome is not as guaranteed as you first posted?

If it was a guaranteed win, the CSSA would have stepped in with lawyers to fight rather than gone silent on the 10-22 issue and not even commenting if anything is in the works on the Beowulf issue other than their opinion which means squat in court

 

[Brianma65]

You're 100% right but that won't stop them from charging you and taking away your guns and maybe your truck while you spend thousands upon thousands of dollars and a lot of your time defending yourself. Is it really worth the possible headache just to put five extra rounds in a magazine? So far LAR mags are still good to go and are not mentioned in the bulletin as a problem (yet).

Just remember, they are in a position to make your life a living hell and even if you end up winning the court battle you won't get compensation other than maybe getting your stuff back if they haven't melted it down by that time.

Last I heard,the RCMP,can only lay the charges.
Then it's up to the crown,whether or not to pursue those charges.


I highly doubt the crown is going to press forward,if this isn't written in law.

Also the Crown,cannot take you to court for breaking a law,that do not
exist.

Unless this law already exists

If it's not

 

[jiffx2781]

So you are now making it seem like the outcome is not as guaranteed as you first posted?

If it was a guaranteed win, the CSSA would have stepped in with lawyers to fight rather than gone silent on the 10-22 issue and not even commenting if anything is in the works on the Beowulf issue other than their opinion which means squat in court

Nothing is guaranteed in our convoluted legal system. The mere fact that The Crown, whom has unlimited financial means, hasn't played their cards in a manner that would force some poor individual to have no choice but to deal with it speaks volumes. The fact that the individuals charged or the CSSA haven't taken this all the way to prove a point does not.
Like I said, legeslation hasn't changed (yet). The Crown knows it. They don't want the issue brought before a judge because the outcome may be a hindrance to potential future legislation.
It's just not been worth the $$$ for anyone who has been involved thus far to fight paper crimes.

 

[jiffx2781]

Last I heard,the RCMP,can only lay the charges.
Then it's up to the crown,whether or not to pursue those charges.


I highly doubt the crown is going to press forward,if this isn't written in law.

Also the Crown,cannot take you to court for breaking a law,that do not
exist.

Unless this law already exists

If it's not

Yup. This is exactly what I'm trying to say

 

[GreenBob]

If I was rocking 10/XX magazines in my rifle. I would play it safe and get the 35$/year firearm insurance.

That would give you $150,000 of breathing room.

Cheers,

 

[Brian46]

If I was rocking 10/XX magazines in my rifle. I would play it safe and get the 35$/year firearm insurance.

That would give you $150,000 of breathing room.

Cheers,

Doubtfull it would cover you, can't even plead ignorance with posts on this site about it (not that ignorance is a viable defense)

 

[enefgee]

Last I heard,the RCMP,can only lay the charges.
Then it's up to the crown,whether or not to pursue those charges.


I highly doubt the crown is going to press forward,if this isn't written in law.

Also the Crown,cannot take you to court for breaking a law,that do not
exist.

Unless this law already exists

If it's not

Of course no Crown would pull someone's financials and tell them that they'll make sure that if they don't take the bargain it'll cost them twice their net worth to defend against. That would be wrong, wouldn't it.