Garbage Journalism

[u/drakkosquest]

Sent a message and considering emailing the journalist personally. Read the title, read the article, look at the photo. This is the kind of garbage journalism that leaves uninformed Canadians supporting Gun Grab policies. Its not just the CBC.

[u/aoteoroa]

I don't blame the journalist. This idiot makes the rest of us law abiding gun owners look bad.

He was driving erratically and pulled over for suspected imparement. Had the loaded magazine in his pocket, and a box of ammo next to the driver's seat. The article doesn't say where the gun was, but it's a minivan so it wasn't locked in the trunk. Most reasonable people would at least have a trigger lock or a case if they're transporting. If my TM22 gets banned it's going to be because of guys like this.

Source article:
https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/semi-automatic-rifle-ammo-found-in-central-saanich-traffic-stop-11933145

[u/Emergency_Rooster511 → u/aoteoroa]

Why would most reasonable people have a trigger lock or case when the legal requirement is simply for the firearm to be unloaded?

The only piece of the article worth reporting was that the driver was suspected of impairment, the remainder were irrelevant details, however factual. The author is being disingenuous and it is shit journalism.

[u/aoteoroa → u/Emergency_Rooster511]

I agree. It is legal to transport in a vehicle, while it's unloaded.

Having the magazine in your pocket, and spare ammo next to the driver seat, and no case or trigger lock is bad because crown can easily argue that the gun is "ready for use". At that point the gun is no longer being transported. It is being carried. If you had a gun next to you, and a loaded magazine in your pocket, how long would it take to fire...probably less than five seconds.

[u/Emergency_Rooster511 → u/aoteoroa]

I completely understand where you’re coming from, but the point here is that the firearm can be legally transported in that state. “Not ready for use” is nowhere to be found in the requirements. Your point about the crown arguing it’s carried rather than transported, while wrong, is also missing the point, as that’s not illegal either. The NR firearm was unloaded, that’s all it needed to be. If it were brandished in a threatening manner that would be a different story. To go above and beyond, no matter how much safer it makes you feel with regard to evading prosecution, is unnecessary. No different than people trigger locking their NR firearms while having them locked in a safe, it’s a personal choice. I’m 100% for responsible ownership, but we do ourselves no favours by acting like there was any wrongdoing here based on anything other than the alleged impairment. The remainder is deliberate misrepresentation of fact just to be inflammatory, and ought to be condemned as such.

[u/prosper_0 → u/aoteoroa]

You've clearly grown up in the city. This is 1000% normal in most of the country. There is always a box of 22's in basically every glove box, and in pockets during hunting season. 'Truck guns' are a thing. Hell, what do you think 'ranch rifle' means?