Front page cover story of Saturday's National Post. Three good articles you'll want to check out.

 

You’re supposed to know and interpret the law within milliseconds, in your underwear, half asleep, rocked with adrenaline and make perfect choices all while potentially defending yours and or your families lives.

Then after it happens, ready to spend $250k on a lawyer to have your every action analyzed and picked apart.

Seems like the perfect Canadian logic to me.

Whats weird is that if you ask mostly everyone in our society, they don’t agree with this, yet for some reason we are still governed by these rules.

 

Oh ya the Canada of 15-20 years ago is not the Canada of today either…

”Canada’s worsening public safety was made evident again today through a Fraser Institute report into crime trends between the United States and Canada. Between 2014 and 2022, the violent crime rate in Canada increased by 43.8 percent to 434.1 violent crimes per 100,000 people.This means Canada’s violent crime rate is 14 percent higher than that of the United States’, which only recorded 380.7 violent crimes per 100,000 people.”

 

Judged by 12 or carried by 6

take your pick

 

We are a world joke.

 

"At least you can wait 2 years for a CT scan for free tho." Very true but oh man, brutal reality.

 

I read that the ON intruder didn't have charges as a few days ago and only the victim had charges registered...

 

I can kill dead anyone dumb enough to try to break into my home on Marco Island.

Canada is a sad joke.

I went to school with all these crazy lefties 45 years ago and now they’re crazy lefty judges. Except for the 9th richest guy in Canada who gave me the tools to pass constitutional law in first year the day before the final.

 

 

https://globalnews.ca/news/11345655/...rights-lawyer/

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...ice-1.6701315A man killed on Friday evening in Halifax's north end was involved in a home invasion when he was fatally stabbed, Halifax

Regional Police say in a news release.

They identified the victim as Anthony Robert Herritt, 26, and said he died at the scene in the 3100 block of Robie Street.

The Nova Scotia Medical Examiner Service conducted an autopsy and ruled his death was a homicide, the release said.

Herritt and another man entered the house and were confronted by an occupant, which led to the stabbing, Halifax police spokesperson Const. John MacLeod said at a news conference on Monday afternoon.

Two people were arrested at the scene but were later freed, the release said.

No murder charges expected

Investigators aren't considering charges in Herritt's death, the release said without elaborating. MacLeod said police were still gathering evidence.

The other person involved in the home invasion fled the scene but later turned himself in, police said.

They identified him as Tyler Jayson Saulnier, 28. He is due to appear in court on Tuesday on charges of breaking and entering, possession of a dangerous weapon, wearing a disguise and breach of probation.

Investigators believe Saulnier and Herritt had been to the address before, MacLeod said.

The occupant of the house was uninjured, he said.

 

too many unknowns so far in the lindsay case. was the perp just there to commit robbery or burglary or was his intention to attack the victim. as a home dweller you can't just confront and stab someone who is trying to steal your tv, but you can use reasonable force to prevent it or detain the suspect. that doesn't mean that you can beat the crap out of them.
personally I would either let him take the tv or just run away. it will probably come down to what weapon if any that the perp brought to the scene. if the perp gets charged with having or using a dangerous weapon I can't see how the victim can be convicted for using the same to defend himself.

 

I'll add some thoughts about the basic premise of self defence.
It is only to be used to stop what threat is imminent, period. once the threat is ended you must also end your defence.
sometimes the threat is ended when you point your weapon at the intruder and they then run away like little girls. mission accomplished, no more defence allowed, you can't chase after them and mow them down. statistics in the u.s. show that the vast majority of incidents that are subsequently defused happen when the victim simply shows that they are armed and the perp backs off immediately.
sometimes the threat isn't ended until the perp is lying on your expensive floor bleeding to death with your 3 round burst in his chest. threat ended, call 911.
these actions are only valid for personal attacks on yourself or others present in the household. they are illegal for defence of property and possessions.

 

Clear as mud...

Self-Defence (Section 34 of the Criminal Code)

• You have the right to defend yourself and others from force.
• You must believe on reasonable grounds that force is about to be used against you or someone else.
• The action you take must be reasonable in the circumstances.

Property Defence (Section 35 of the Criminal Code)

• You can use force to protect your property or prevent someone from committing a criminal offense against it.
• You can prevent someone from entering your property without entitlement.
• You can prevent someone from taking, damaging, or destroying your property.
• The force used must be reasonable in the circumstances.

 

^ The word reasonable is not clear, what is reasonable to one might not be reasonable to others.

Protecting my $300k+ car and hammering someone over the head seems reasonable to me, but unlikely to most others who view a car as a replaceable mode of transportation.

 

I think you are missing part of s 34. There is a second half to it.