Path: utzoo!utgpu!lsuc!hcr!larry From: larry@hcr.UUCP (Larry Philps) Newsgroups: tor.general Subject: Re: Toronto Police Message-ID: <4712@hcr.UUCP> Date: Mon, 23-Jan-89 12:24:58 EST Article-I.D.: hcr.4712 References: <157@aimed.UUCP> <4674@hcr.UUCP> <1989Jan20.201648.20385@lsuc.uucp> Reply-To: larry@zeus.UUCP (Larry Philps) Distribution: tor Organization: HCR Corporation, Toronto Lines: 47 Keywords: Presumption of Innocence & "Criminals" In article <1989Jan20.201648.20385@lsuc.uucp> sean@lsuc.UUCP (Sean Doran the Younger) writes: >In both cases, there is no criminal. The Presumption of Innocence >(Section 2 (f) of Part I of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms >and Section 11 (d) of Schedule B of the Constitution Act, 1982) >should be granted to both the victims in both cases, and it is unwise >to call them criminals. Moreover, it is even less wise to point out >that (referring to the police constables involved) 'Condemnation >any earlier is baseless conjecture', while still labelling and thus >condemning the two dead men as criminals. What people seem to forget is that to the policeman who is being assulted, calling the assulter the "alleged assuaulter" is ridiculous. The court, the members of which were not there at the time, will have to consider the crime "alledged", but the policeman who sees the knife coming towards him cannot consider it an alleded attack, he knows the person is guilty and must defend himself or be injured/killed. >In article <4674@hcr.UUCP> paulg@hcrvax.UUCP (Paul Gooderham) wrote: >> >> - a knife weilding man rushes a policeman who then shoots the man. >... >... They are certainly not allowed to shoot at someone >brandishing a knife (Police Constables are well trained in the use >of truncheons and are all taught how to disarm an opponent who is >using a knife or other weapon), ... > By making it illegal for a policeman to defend himself with a gun while being attacked with a knife, you are assuming that the policeman will always be a much more expert knife fighter than the attacker, and thus is in no danger while he is in the process of disarming the attacker. I am sure this is often not the case, and thus the policeman is risking his life to avoid hurting the attacker. The attacker, on the other hand, if he knows the law, will realize that he is in no danger of being shot while attacking the policeman with a knife, and thus is much more likely to do it instead of giving himself up. The whole thing disgusts me! In my opinion, when a criminal decides to use a weapon (even if that weapon is a moving car) to attack a policeman, I want him to be "trembling in his boots" at the likelyhood that the policeman will shoot and kill him. Right now, a person attacking the policeman, especially if he already knows he has committed a murder, attacks with the knowledge, "I can't make things any worse, so I might as well try it." Larry Philps HCR Corporation 130 Bloor St. West, 10th floor Toronto, Ontario. M5S 1N5 (416) 922-1937 {utzoo,utcsri,lsuc}!hcr!larry