They ALWAYS get charged. They almost never get convicted. You have the right to self defense.
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Not true
Don’t argue with me. Take your disagreement to Justice Canada.
https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/other-autre/rsddp-rlddp/p5.html
You’re citing a law, I guarantee that thier are innocent self defense people in jail.
A personal guarentee you say? I’d prefer a reference.
You’re giving me the same guarantee the government is. You’re on the side of .gov saying they don’t do anything wrong. I’m not believing a boot licker.
You don’t get invited to many parties, do you?
I know you don’t. You say a lot of stupid shit that’s not well thought out.
Removed by mod
David Milgaard served 23 years in prison as an innocent man. The attorney general is not some all knowing clairvoyant.
Ya, he just doesn’t give a fuck. Just like changing the law.
Not that I’m (dis)agreeing with anyone here but I’m curious if people actually do get charged most of the time even if it looks blatantly like self defense.
I suppose that’d be very hard to find a source on though and might require some more complex sleuthing. Regardless, I know here in the USA a lot of times people won’t even get charged if it looks like self defense.
To be fair to you and the guy you replied to it’s kind of a hard thing to actually ferret out.
I think one could definitely argue either way on the merits of charging someone vs not when it comes to a self defense situation.
These are pretty high profile cases and always get reported on. Convictions are rare and only when obvious egregious examples like chasing the crook down the street then assaulting them or shooting them in the back.
Anyone who follows these types of cases knows. Sorry I don’t have a lawyer handy to dig up a statistical analysis of Canadian court cases. Google Fu works reasonably well if you are inclined to put in the effort.
Meh it’s random shit on the internet, my Google Fu says fuck that noise lol
I get what you’re saying though. Suppose you can’t just let someone get away with murder.
I think maybe on some level I kind of just feel like it’s okay to kill a person breaking into a house regardless of their motivation and actions. Like, idk if I’d say I’m that bloodthirsty or unforgiving but I almost feel it to the level where if you just straight execution style murdered a person breaking into your house that would be a okay. Which, admittedly, is fucked up on my part and I’m not that callous, I know it’s a bad take, but something about the violation of personal sanctify and trust just makes me go “eh fuck that person, remove them from our society.”
deleted by creator
They aren’t even necessarily intending to kill. Shooting center mass in a panicked situation against a moving target has the highest likelihood of landing a hit due to center mass being the largest area. There also happens to be a ton of important organs there. You could try to aim for a leg or arm to be non lethal, but if you miss several shots the intruder could close the distance and harm/kill you.
You can kill someone during self defense and still have it not be intentful murder. Some people take 6 rounds to the chest and can walk away from the hospital, some die to 1 shot. An intruder can break their neck and die after falling during a physical struggle, is it fair to say the defender intended to murder them?
Removed by mod
The law in Canada was written so you can’t do that under many circumstances. A drunk neighbour who opened the wrong unlocked door and crashed on the wrong couch doesn’t deserve to get blasted.
A knife, or similar beweaponed intruder who broke into your home and doesn’t leave when they are confronted with residents both deserves to get blasted and the resident will be charged but not convicted.
The key is proportionality to the threat. A drunk mistakenly at the wrong door poses little threat. A 911 call, solid yelling at, and even a push out the door is fine.
The armed intruder who doesn’t immediately retreat when confronted takes one step towards you gives a reasonable person a legitimate fear of greivous bodily harm or death and proportional self defense is warranted.
E.g. he had a knife. He adanced towards me. I feared for my life, as most people would under the circumstances and I used the most expiditous means at my disposal to end the imminent threat. (Bat, gun,knife,frozen salmon, table lamp, ming vase, whatever.
If they run, you let them go. It’s the police’s problem. Easy peasy.
And apparently you also have the right to get harassed and dragged through the mud in a long and unfair criminal case, even if you get off in the end.
The trial is the punishment.
If someone intrudes are you just supposed to let them?
Removed by mod
The article specifically states that the intruder was charged with possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose. Its likely the victims use of force prevented the weapon being used against the victim.
Removed by mod
So if somebody breaks into your home with a weapon, you should just assume they’re just there for a friendly chat or what? What a braindead take. Have a nice funeral.
And investigations are launched in those incidents to determine things like whether it was actually a deadly weapon or an inhaler that the cops lied about.
How does that help when someone breaks into your home with a weapon? That comes after the event, not during.
Removed by mod
Ad hominim. What are you to do if someone breaks into your home with a weapon then?
Huh? How does the text not support this being likely?
Removed by mod
We can absolutely conclude what was likely
Now that’s a disingenuous situation. Let’s say she attacks you with a knife and in that lunge you grab her hand and make her stab herself. You still lose that.
I get your example, and you should probably resist killing your ex. Any other rando appearing inside your house should be dealt with.
Removed by mod
I am advocating to do what I need to do to neutralize a home intruder. If they happen to end up dead, I don’t want to be blamed for it. Self defense is not an exact science and I think making homeowner considering the wellbeing of the intruder is ridiculous.
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Well, it is a police matter right?
But the best case scenario is 5 min response, and you’re facing a meth addict with a gun. What the heck are you supposed to do, besides defend yourself and family with whatever is at hand? Lunacy.
When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.
No, it’s fine. You can trust the state’s monopoly on violence. No way that could ever be used against you.
In Canada it is illegal to not offer intruders beer in evenings or coffee in the mornings.
Lesson here is don’t call anyone, as your families safety is not important.
Also, don’t talk to the police under any circumstances, even if you think you are the victim. They are not your friends, and they can and will fuck you over. Call a lawyer and keep your mouth shut.
deleted by creator
Wow, that is insane.
deleted by creator




