Thank you for the question. I am familiar with the position they have lobbied you on. Essentially, what we're talking about is that we entrust police officers with a lot of power and authority in Canada. Section 25 of the Criminal Code gives them essentially the ability to take a life if the situation warrants it. Unfortunately, that life may be taken with the use of a firearm.
Right now judges have very little discretion. If a member of a police service takes a life using a firearm, that is the use of a firearm in the commission of an offence. Should that interaction be deemed criminal in nature by any civilian oversight body, and you go to a judicial proceeding and that member of that police service is found guilty, there is no discretion. A mandatory minimum must be imposed.
The ask to impose some judicial discretion for police officers or corrections officers or those working at the border who are armed, should they end up in a lethal interaction and ultimately end up in a proceeding where they're found guilty, is for the judiciary to have some discretion to not impose a mandatory minimum sentence on that member of that police service. That's what they're asking for.
Yes, I would support that 100%.