Nicolas ("Nick") Nascimento: Terror of Tiny Township!

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

Another subject - Nicolas "Nick" Nascimento. Nick is the subject of a single reported Canadian decision, which is where I picked him up:

• R. v. Nascimento, 2014 ONSC 2379: http://canlii.ca/t/g6zf3

The case concerns whether a search warrant that ultimately located a MAC 11 SMG (a very easily concealed mini-submachinegun that is highly illegal in Canada) was issued improperly, making the search warrant unlawful. In brief - it wasn't (para. 36), and if it had been glitchy the location and seizure of such a dangerous weapon would still warrant admission of the evidence at trial (para. 38).

So why is this case on our radar? Police alleged Nick was a Freeman-on-the-Land (para. 19), and the data that accompanied the "information to obtain a search warrant" included a general briefing on the nature of the Freeman-on-the-Land movement (para. 21), which the hearing judge concluded was irrelevant to this search warrant (para. 35).

So, the allegation that Nick is a Freeman is just that - an allegation.

Nick otherwise seems an unsavory character. He had a significant criminal record, and criminal associations.

That was all I could locate in the legal databases, so I moved on to news reports, and found a few (http://www.northumberlandnews.com/news- ... chine-gun/). Reporting on the initial raid and arrest indicate there were two persons charged: Nicholas Nascimento, 45, and Kasie Lynn Lussier, 24. Nick faced nine charges, most of which related to firearms. Others were drug related. Other contraband included "ninja throwing knives", switchblades, and lockpicks.

A second news article (http://www.northumberlandview.ca/index. ... &sid=22501) identifies the exact charges and provides a photo of the investigators posing with the items seized:

Nicholas Dominic NASCIMENTO - 45 - Colborne, Ontario
Possession for purpose - Cocaine - CDSA
Unauthorized possession of firearm - 2 counts - CC
Possession of firearm while prohibited - 2 counts - CC
Possession of prohibited or restricted firearm - 1 count - CC
Careless use of firearm - 1 count - CC
Knowledge of unauthorized possession of firearm - 1 count - CC

Kasie Lynn LUSSIER - 24 - Colborne, Ontario
Possession for purpose - Cocaine - CDSA
Unauthorized possession of firearm - 2 counts - CC
Possession of prohibited or restricted firearm - 1 count - CC
Careless use of firearm - 1 count - CC
Knowledge of unauthorized possession of firearm - 1 count - CC

This occurred in "Tiny Township, Ontario" (http://www.tiny.ca/) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiny,_Ontario) which with a population of over 11000 seems to have outgrown its name.

The other report I located indicates that in late May, 2014 Nick was found guilty on all nine charges (http://www.quintenews.com/2014/05/weapo ... ick/65225/). His sentencing is set for September 5, 2014.

So what about Ms. Lussier? Well, here's a rather sad discovery. As I attempted to locate Nick and his co-accused (some reports use "Kacie" rather than "Kasie") I discovered that someone of that name had died on October 4, 2013 (http://www.canadianobituaries.com/kacie ... -2013.html) at the age of 24. The location was in Ontario. Was this the co-accused? Sadly, I believe it was. I explored Ms. Lussier's social network sites and discovered she was friends with a young woman who is the daughter of a "Nick Nascimento". Not conclusive proof, but it supports a strong inference.

I did not find any traces of Freeman-on-the-Land or other OPCA affiliations with Ms. Lussier. Again, sadly, I did learn she had a very young daughter.

I did not locate any separate information to suggest that Nicolas Nascimento is associated with the Freeman or other OPCA movements. If he has an online presence it eluded me. If Nick is affiliated with any of those groups then I suspect that information may emerge on sentencing.

SMS Möwe

[Jeffrey]

Is someone keeping tabs on FMOTL gun-related arrests and cases?

1. Dean Clifford's arsenal 2013.
2. Nick's SMG 2013.
3. Fearn smuggling high-capacity magazines into the country.
4. Keith Thompson armed B&E in 2012(?).

Is there a move towards militarization by FMOTL or not enough cases to draw conclusions yet?

[arayder]

Another subject - Nicolas "Nick" Nascimento. Nick is the subject of a single reported Canadian decision, which is where I picked him up:

• R. v. Nascimento, 2014 ONSC 2379: http://canlii.ca/t/g6zf3

The case concerns whether a search warrant that ultimately located a MAC 11 SMG (a very easily concealed mini-submachinegun that is highly illegal in Canada) was issued improperly, making the search warrant unlawful. In brief - it wasn't (para. 36), and if it had been glitchy the location and seizure of such a dangerous weapon would still warrant admission of the evidence at trial (para. 38).

So why is this case on our radar? Police alleged Nick was a Freeman-on-the-Land (para. 19), and the data that accompanied the "information to obtain a search warrant" included a general briefing on the nature of the Freeman-on-the-Land movement (para. 21), which the hearing judge concluded was irrelevant to this search warrant (para. 35).

So, the allegation that Nick is a Freeman is just that - an allegation.

Nick otherwise seems an unsavory character. He had a significant criminal record, and criminal associations.

That was all I could locate in the legal databases, so I moved on to news reports, and found a few (http://www.northumberlandnews.com/news- ... chine-gun/). Reporting on the initial raid and arrest indicate there were two persons charged: Nicholas Nascimento, 45, and Kasie Lynn Lussier, 24. Nick faced nine charges, most of which related to firearms. Others were drug related. Other contraband included "ninja throwing knives", switchblades, and lockpicks.

SMS Möwe

I can get a Cobray semi auto here in Kentucky since it is marketed just down the road from me: http://www.centerfiresystems.com/cobray-m11.aspx

It's made in North Dakota.

What's unsettling is that Nascimento converted the Cobray, or had it converted, to fully automatic, which is a crime even in gun friendly parts of the U.S. Such a conversion requires skills and tools. If Nascimento had someone convert it for him, that someone is the unsavory sort who doesn't mind breaking federal law.

I'd bet the Canadian authorities investigated the conversion of this auto pistol!

[Fmotlgroupie]

Is someone keeping tabs on FMOTL gun-related arrests and cases?

1. Dean Clifford's arsenal 2013.
2. Nick's SMG 2013.
3. Fearn smuggling high-capacity magazines into the country.
4. Keith Thompson armed B&E in 2012(?).

Is there a move towards militarization by FMOTL or not enough cases to draw conclusions yet?

Since you've started a list I'd add a few:
5. Daren McCormick
6. Sawyer Robison - unclear exactly what happened as of yet but he's charged with attempting to murder two police officers who were shot, and he is bound by a bail condition not to associate with freemen

[Burnaby49]

An update. Nick received a six year, two month sentence:

http://www.quintenews.com/2014/09/colbo ... ars/71612/

I could not find a reported decisions on this result. So long Nick...

[Judge Roy Bean]

Just for us southerners, what the heck is "Careless use of firearm" in Canadian-speak? Almost sounds like yet another "here, hold my beer and watch this" kinda things.

[Burnaby49]

Just for us southerners, what the heck is "Careless use of firearm" in Canadian-speak? Almost sounds like yet another "here, hold my beer and watch this" kinda things.

Direct from The Criminal Code of Canada;

86. Careless use of firearm, etc.

Careless use of firearm, etc.

86. (1) Every person commits an offence who, without lawful excuse, uses, carries, handles, ships, transports or stores a firearm, a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device or any ammunition or prohibited ammunition in a careless manner or without reasonable precautions for the safety of other persons.

Contravention of storage regulations, etc.

(2) Every person commits an offence who contravenes a regulation made under paragraph 117(h) of the Firearms Act respecting the storage, handling, transportation, shipping, display, advertising and mail-order sales of firearms and restricted weapons.

Punishment

(3) Every person who commits an offence under subsection (1) or (2)

(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment

(i) in the case of a first offence, for a term not exceeding two years, and

(ii) in the case of a second or subsequent offence, for a term not exceeding five years; or

(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 86; 1991, c. 40, s. 3; 1995, c. 39, s. 139.

I don't know much about Canadian gun laws (wife would divorce me if I brought one in the house) but I'll hazard a guess that this probably related to how he stored the weapons. Strict laws here on that. Ammunition locked up, guns locked up unloaded etc. He doesn't sound like the type of guy who would be very scrupulous about following the letter of the law. Might seem trivial to you Americans but there have been numerous cases of Canadians convicted on this charge without any other related charges so it can be serious for hunters and other gun owners who just get careless.

[arayder]

Is someone keeping tabs on FMOTL gun-related arrests and cases?

1. Dean Clifford's arsenal 2013.
2. Nick's SMG 2013.
3. Fearn smuggling high-capacity magazines into the country.
4. Keith Thompson armed B&E in 2012(?).

Is there a move towards militarization by FMOTL or not enough cases to draw conclusions yet?

Since you've started a list I'd add a few:
5. Daren McCormick
6. Sawyer Robison - unclear exactly what happened as of yet but he's charged with attempting to murder two police officers who were shot, and he is bound by a bail condition not to associate with freemen

McCormick was the guy in Nova Scotia who threatened the police while he was carrying, cowboy style, a reproduction cap and ball revolver. He had bragged about his quick draw and, if memory serves, he tried to argue that the cap and ball revolver wasn't covered by Canadian gun laws.

Just for us southerners, what the heck is "Careless use of firearm" in Canadian-speak? Almost sounds like yet another "here, hold my beer and watch this" kinda things.

The article used the term "careless storage". I take it to be that Nascimento didn't have the firearm (which was prohibited anyway) in a safe, or locked in a case in his trunk. The latter, I think, is allowable in Canada if you are on the way to a shooting range or on the way to a hunt.

When Nascimento was stoped alarm bells must have gone off in the cop's heads. He had cocaine in the car and a full auto machine pistol the fills the same firearm role as a 1920 gangster's tommy gun.

Nascimento's profile is only slightly more gangster than that of Dean Clifford who had only slightly less ominous weaponry, but has expressed a willingness to kill cops.

Deaners should realize that the Nascimento case is a harbinger of what's in store for their guru.

[arayder]

. . .I don't know much about Canadian gun laws (wife would divorce me if I brought one in the house). . .

Ah, the diversity of Quatloosians. . .my wife just got through quizzing me on which target pistol she could put under the tree in order to get me ready for the next year's pistol competition.

[JamesVincent]

Interesting part about the charges, to me anyway, is that he had a fully automatic SMG. In the States, as Arayder pointed out, it is legal to own a semi-automatic SMG, unless it is one of the banned ones. Having a fully automatic anything is a huge no-no without a firearms permit. All kind of agencies get bent out of shape, all the way from the local constabulary up to the Secret Service and you can bet at least two of them will have you up on charges toot de suite. And if it was a converted weapon they will be grilling you to found out who did the conversion. As lax as American laws may seem to other countries there are limits and they are well stated. Several GCAs prohibit the possession of a fully automatic anything without the permit. And, since they are banned under Federal law, whatever charges the locals bring you up on the Feds will add a bunch of others right on top of. It almost seems like the Canadian law doesn't differentiate between the two, just a banned or not banned weapon.

[Burnaby49]

And, since they are banned under Federal law, whatever charges the locals bring you up on the Feds will add a bunch of others right on top of. It almost seems like the Canadian law doesn't differentiate between the two, just a banned or not banned weapon.

Not an issue I know anything about. Since I have no interest in guns I haven't bothered to learn about Canadian gun laws. The last time I saw a gun here in Canada (apart from police holsters) was in the mid 1980s. The last time I held one or fired one was in 1970 when I had to carry a rifle for self protection when I worked in the bush in Grizzly country. Happily never had to use it.

Open carry is an alien concept up here which, while possibly legal in some areas, is considered dangerous because of the inevitable police response. Anyone carrying a gun around openly in Canada is going to trigger 911 calls.

I have a gun story I love. A friend went to Texas fairly recently and visited the Alamo. There was a pro-gun rally going on out front that he watched. The speaker, very pro guns of course, was ranting away about the lawlessness that would ensue if the populace couldn't arm themselves. He gave an example saying something along the lines of (not verbatim);

"How would you like to live in a country that outlaws guns for peaceful people and puts them at the mercy of the criminals? A country like Canada? How would you like to live in a crime ridden city where people aren't allowed to carry guns at all to defend themselves, a city like Vancouver?"

Well I like it fine.

http://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/comm ... in_canada/

[JamesVincent]

Yeah, it makes you wonder sometimes. Here, the areas with the most draconian firearm control laws are often the ones with the highest crime rates. In my neck of the woods pretty close to 75% or so of the population carries, open or concealed, have had one murder in two years and very, very few robberies. We actually had a "chain" of home invasions last year, all three of them. Started a panic. The "murder" was actually part of one of the home invasions. All 5 of the ones committing the crime are in jail. Biggest thing around here is prescription pill abuse. When we lived in MD. murders, while not commonplace, were still common. Baltimore itself is over 1-2 per day. Way stricter firearm control laws then here. I don't think Canada, as a whole, has ever had the crime or drug base that a lot of other countries have. Even the U.K., with it's stricter weapon laws, has a higher total violent crime rate then the U.S. And lets not even get into countries like Mexico or the Central American countries.

[JamesVincent]

McCormick was the guy in Nova Scotia who threatened the police while he was carrying, cowboy style, a reproduction cap and ball revolver. He had bragged about his quick draw and, if memory serves, he tried to argue that the cap and ball revolver wasn't covered by Canadian gun laws.

Here having a black powder revolver, with the cylinder removed, is not a firearm. Even if the cylinder is fully charged it is still not considered a firearm. Pop the cylinder in, however, and it is considered a firearm in every legal sense. Something I learned a long time ago when I was.... ummmm.....errrrr..... weaponally challenged? Yeah, that's it.

[arayder]

I am struck by the freeman's inability to grasp the real morality of the use of force, including the use of firearms, to protect one's self.

It's one thing to put your hand on your pistol (i.e. brandish a firearm) when some unsavory sorts come into your West Memphis liquor store and quite another thing to threaten the Nova Scotia police for no particular reason other than, like Mr. McCormick, you think you have the right to play Wyatt Earp.

It's one thing to carry a knife or a pocket pistol for personal protection and quite another to put a full auto machine pistol in your car to protect your coke stash, or in the case of Dean Clifford, store an SKS semi auto rifle in your house to protect your grow op.

[notorial dissent]

As you say, the logic here isn't. But then since it is all about me, me, me, then it doesn't make pretty good sense, after a fashion.

[Burnaby49]

Well, I'm embarrassed. My Texas quote was entirely wrong. I said;

I have a gun story I love. A friend went to Texas fairly recently and visited the Alamo. There was a pro-gun rally going on out front that he watched. The speaker, very pro guns of course, was ranting away about the lawlessness that would ensue if the populace couldn't arm themselves. He gave an example saying something along the lines of (not verbatim);

"How would you like to live in a country that outlaws guns for peaceful people and puts them at the mercy of the criminals? A country like Canada? How would you like to live in a crime ridden city where people aren't allowed to carry guns at all to defend themselves, a city like Vancouver?"

Turns out the speaker wasn't talking about our inability to defending ourselves from criminals, he was warning about our inability to repel foreign invaders! The speaker was Jay Stang, Texas president of the Oath keepers and he was speaking at an Open Carry rally at the Alamo on October 29, 2913. I know this because my friend, dismayed at the gross inaccuracy of my reporting, sent me a You Tube video of the rally.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uy2nqH_ ... .be&t=5m4s

The comments about Canada come at 5:06 where Stang says;

Think about the Canadians. Thirty-three million people in a country larger than this. What would happen if a foreign enemy were to land on the shores of Vancouver? Are they going to throw a beer at em'? That would be a waste of a beer, right? The Canadians are screwed. The Canadian military is 33,000 people. How are they going to defend the whole country of Canada? They're probably betting that nobody is going to invade them.

He's entirely right about that! Complacency abounds here in Vancouver about the possibility of enemy troops landing at Kits beach.

Then he went to to what seemed to be the point of dragging us into his talk. He said that the purpose of the second amendment wasn't to allow Americans to carry guns to defend themselves against criminals but to allow them to fight foreign enemies by organizing in already armed militias. He claimed that there used to be a Texas law that made every Texan a militia member but, sadly, that law was gone. So he suggested that the audience form their own militias under the command of the county sheriffs.

I suppose we were used to show what happens when you don't have second amendment rights. An apathetic unarmed populace just ripe for a sea borne invasion from, from, . . . . Yikes! As far as I can tell only you Americans are close enough to have a reasonable shot at it. A suggestion. We've got a 3,000 or so mile unguarded land border. A lot easier just to drive a few tanks over that than to re-create D-Day in English Bay. Vancouver is a poor place to start an invasion of Canada anyhow. Easy to take but then what? Hundreds of miles of forest and mountains to the north and east and you Americans to the south. It would be like invading Norway. But, if you really have to invade Vancouver, just come up through Blaine. You don't have to worry about the tricky tides in first narrows.

I'll note that Stang didn't say "What would happen if a foreign enemy were to land on the shores of Montreal?" That would imply European invaders while Vancouver fits very nicely into a scenario about an invasion from China or from Russians heading here from Vladivostok.

[arayder]

American gun right activists like to read history to be that the Japanese didn't invade the U.S. mainland because they feared "a rifle behind every blade of grass".

I find the argument a little self serving.

Something has to be said for the reality that the Japanese wanted the western Pacific as their fiefdom and realized the practical, military and logistical problems involved in an island nation going all the way across the big ocean and then having to fight their way over the Rocky Mountains and the western pararies just to get to St. Louis.

The folly of attempting such a course of action reminds me of the right wing militarists I knew in my childhood who said the western powers should have sent NATO forces through the Fulda Gap into East Germany and then into Moscow before the Soviets got the bomb.

I can remember wondering if these guys had even read about Napoleon's and Hitler's attempts to invade Russia. I remember thinking, "Oh, yeah we can make it 0-3 against the Russians. And if we 'win' we get to occupy a place on the globe a gozillion Russians left just to come to the west".

[JamesVincent]

The folly of attempting such a course of action reminds me of the right wing militarists I knew in my childhood who said the western powers should have sent NATO forces through the Fulda Gap into East Germany and then into Moscow before the Soviets got the bomb.

I can remember wondering if these guys had even read about Napoleon's and Hitler's attempts to invade Russia. I remember thinking, "Oh, yeah we can make it 0-3 against the Russians. And if we 'win' we get to occupy a place on the globe a gozillion Russians left just to come to the west".

Patton is usually credited for saying that we shouldn't have stopped at Germany, but kept rolling right on through and taking Russia before they became a problem. Out of any other General in modern times I wouldn't believe it but..... Patton. There are good points and bad points to the argument (and, yes, it's been an argument for 70 years now).

Yamamoto is credited with the "rifle behind every blade of grass" line. In essence, after Pearl Harbor, the Japanese did indeed give thought to the invasion of the West Coast and Yamamoto talked them out of it. I agree 100% with your mentions of the logistical nightmare it would have been but, then again, I don't the Japanese were thinking real well when they decided to attack Pearl Harbor. We were the only nation in the world that actually had the power and manufacturing capability to fight a true two front war, and yet they didn't think we would or could.

[Pottapaug1938]

I remember reading a book, some years back, which devoted a chapter to the premise that if Patton had tried to keep on going, he wouldn't have gotten very far. Aside from the fact that he would have been facing not a weakened, disintegrating German army but a large, battle-hardened Soviet army; he would have been dealing with supply lines which grew as he advanced -- supply lines which extended clear across the Atlantic. In the end, it's unlikely that anyone could have prevented the Soviets from continuing on clear to the Atlantic coast.

[Pottapaug1938]

American gun right activists like to read history to be that the Japanese didn't invade the U.S. mainland because they feared "a rifle behind every blade of grass".

This brings to mind what I like to call the "Lexington/Concord Fantasy". People like this are convinced that the thirteen colonies won the Revolutionary War because of an armed, Minuteman-style populace who, starting with the battles at Lexington and Concord, were always victorious. They quite forget that the colonial militias, as in the Battle of New York, also turned in terrible performances; and it was the formation of a Continental Army, organized and trained to fight in the European fashion, which carried the main American burden of fighting. Add to that the need for financial and military support from France and Spain (remember, the French fleet and French soldiers were key elements of the victory at Yorktown); and you have a bunch of unpleasant facts which the activists are quick to dismiss. Yet, the activists see themselves, standing romantically in the morning mists on Lexington Common or at the Old North Bridge, ready to repel the ebil forces of gummint tyranny.

I had at least two ancestors in that fight. One was a New Jersey militiaman who helped to cover the Continental retreat through New Jersey in 1776, and also saw action at Monmouth in 1779, but beyond that he never left New Jersey. Another ancestor was in the Continental Army -- and during the Siege of Boston, he was likely stationed close to where I now live. A first cousin of the militiaman, by the way, became a British sergeant; and he was among the founders of Saint John, New Brunswick. The militiaman had the skills to do what needed to be done, in a support role, when the fighting came his way; but I doubt that he or many other part-time soldiers could have kept the British regulars at bay for long. By the time that the Civil War came along, it was clear that war was an art in which professionals -- not part-time soldiers toting firearms brought from home -- needed to bear the brunt of fighting. Militias could act, most of the time, in support or garrison roles; but that's it.