Crime and Punishment




        What comes to mind with that phrase? Hardened  people breaking the rules of civil society for their own gain? or Victor Hugo's Jean Val Jean punished for trying to feed his family? In this section I would like to address the "Paper Criminal" versus the "street thug".

Miscreants and N'rr Do Wells


         I think we can all agree that the "street thugs" are parasites preying and feeding off of the hard working honest citizen. They are a scourge that need to be dealt with, not coddled and returned to the streets from whence they came.  Street thugs have little regard for your rights. In fact to their way of thinking you owe them if anything, Society owes them.

        An analogy one could liken them to, is that of predators in nature or in this case predators let loose in the human zoos (cities). Some organize into packs (gangs) and set out territories. Some remain solitary with loose social networks of like minded people. The common thread of both is the unwillingness to make an honest living like the rest of society.

        Gangs I would liken to criminal companies. Their goal is profit and creating cash flows. The main business of the average gang is drug trafficking. The preferred drugs are those which are addictive like crack cocaine, heroin, and crystal meth, drugs that create return business and a client base. However they are not limited to that. Another cash stream for them is auto theft. Like corporations gangs will network with one another and trade goods and services. They are territorial and will lay claim to areas of cities as their property and not allow another criminal enterprise in. Disputes are always settled with extreme violence as is gang discipline. They will operate in plain sight and use intimidation of the populace to prevent them from going to the authorities. A criminal record is considered a badge of honour and in our lenient Judicial system they know prison time is minimal. They will recruit young and use these youths to commit there worst crimes as again they know the Youth Offenders Act is laughable. Through experience they learn how to play the system and exploit its weaknesses. There are higher forms of organized crime but for the purposes of this page I will omit them.


        The lone wolf criminal on the other hand hides amongst us and may well lead an ordinary life to all appearances. They are the wild cards of society and their crimes are wide and varied. On the low end they may be drug addicted and commit crimes to feed their habits. On the higher end they can be the most dangerous of our society willing to commit the worst crimes in our society. I made mention of these solely to identify that not all thugs are street thugs and "gang bangers". That these are the most dangerous because they are opportunist predators that will stalk their prey. Some will kill to cover their crimes to avoid apprehension.


        I think we can agree that these members of our society are the problem. For the most part they lead criminal existences and do not belong in our society. Failing their removal they are the ones we need to guard ourselves against.



The Scourge of Canada

                                                                The Paper Criminal


        "The paper criminal" a term that entered our lexicon in the nineties. They are not  computer hacker or a fraud artists. In fact in day to day life they are not even criminals. Nor do they have the intent to be criminals.  They might be a friend, a neighbour, your boss at work, the church organist, or even the crossing guard at your child's school. Just plain ordinary people who for one reason or another didn't file the paper work on their property in time. The Canadian Firearms Act created this new class of criminal. Their heinous crime? Their license expired. They have become the easy target of law enforcement because criminality is not their stock and trade. Innocent of the workings of the legal system some have have had their homes raided by the Tactical Squads of the local Police service.(First they came for the guns)(Who will Protect us from our protectors) As though they(the Police) were taking down a drug lord or hardened criminal. Imagine if the same tactics were employed when your drivers license expires.


        If We were in any other Country than Canada We wouldn't be surprised by tactical assaults. But We are not in any other country we are in the kinder gentler Nation of Canada.



        As Sir William has out lined that we have methods and rights as to how we may oppose laws that are egregious to our rights. Through petitioning Parliament, petitioning the Monarch and as a last resort civil disobedience. Or in the Words of Sir William "The right of natural resistance". One such act of disobedience is before the Courts now. The first level the Superior Court of Ontario is complete and a prisoner of conscience was created but this is not the end of this case. There are still two higher courts yet to hear this case. The case I shall now presently mention is the case of Regina versus Montague. (R v Montague)





        Mr Montague is an ordinary man with a family trying to make a lawful living in his trade. He is a gunsmith, that is to say that he repairs firearms. He as a law abiding citizen disagreed with the proposed firearms act then bill C-68. as pictured he is at a rally speaking against the proposed legislation. He is not alone many people disagreed with the proposed act, as it treated ordinary people as criminals. People who had not seen the inside of a Police station as a customer let alone a prison cell. Mr Montague stepped up to the plate to stop a bad law from being passed. Well long story short their efforts failed bill C-68 became law. But Mr Montegue was not dissuaded by this he along with others decided to exercise their right of civil disobedience in the effort to bring this matter to the Courts. His story can be found here at Why fight a bad law


Mr Montague has put it all on the line. everything! lock, stock, and barrel.(incidentally that common phrase refers to a firearm) But let us not let my own words tell the story, nor let our prejudices colour our views on Mr Montague








        The Attorney General of Ontario Michael Bryant at the time of Mr Montague's trial invoked the Proceeds of Crime Act to place a lien on Mr Montague's property. This Act was designed to fight organized crime. It does not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Nor does it require a conviction. All that is required is for an A.G. of a Province to make an application and on a balance of probabilities. Mr Montague was a fully licenced Gunsmith, lawfully conducting his business. In fact local Police and OPP officers used to get their sidearms and other firearms serviced by Mr Montague. Which then begs the question how is Mr Montague's lawful profession and the house in which he worked out of the "Proceeds of Crime"? But still the defendant must then prove a negative. That in fact his home is not the result of the Proceeeds of crime. This was political skulduggery on the part of the A.G. because this restricted Mr Montague's ability to finance his challenge to the courts. It can cost  $100,000 plus to bring a case to the Supreme Court of Canada. Michael Bryant and Dalton McGuinty do not wish the law to be challenged and used "So Called" legal means to prevent it. Bear in mind this same law was designed to combat drug dealers, and gang members. I personally find their actions objectionable and befitting a "Banana Republic" not an impartial Crown. While it may be argued that Mr Montague has no right to challenge the Law then the same argument must be used against others like Dr Morgentaler. He has been inducted to the Order of Canada for doing the very thing Mr Montague is doing now fighting a bad law