I love my country (Canada), but some of our laws are just silly

[OVerLoRDI]

Originally posted by: Ronstang

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Wow... that's one of the dumbest laws I've ever heard of. Up here, once the guy is in your house you're allowed to use whatever fource you deem necessary to protect your life, the life of your family and your property.

(That means you can shoot the SOB and bill his estate for the new carpet)

Texas takes it one step further. You can use lethal force OUTSIDE to protect your propery, but I think the only stipulation is it has to be night time. We can shoot them in our driveways breaking into our cars. The only reason I didn't shoot the Black guy that broke into my car was because he was about 10-12 years old. Had him in the sights, would have been within my rights, but I couldn't shoot a kid....even a useless one. In hindsight I am probably responsible for more people being robbed. In the future I will take this into consideration if the situation ever arises again.

We need more people like you in the world IMO.

*puts on flame suit*

 

[FoBoT]

if i was an American burglar, i would work in canada

 

[GZeus]

Originally posted by: FoBoT
if i was an American burglar, i would work in canada

You would need a visa to work in Canada but that shouldn't be a problem - they probably have a visa category for that too.

 

[SoundTheSurrender]

Seems like all these England decent countries other than U.S. stick to the same old laws?

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: Gatecrasher3

Originally posted by: chambersc

Originally posted by: Gatecrasher3

You see in Canada you do not have consent to harm anyone who breaks into your house, you?re asked to call for the police and wait for them to arrive.
If you shot and killed a burglar, you will be charged with manslaughter or maybe even murder (depending on the situation)

Ya i don?t really believe you have the right to blow a 16 year olds head off if he breaks into your house.
i don?t think you have the right to kill anyone who if they are not really a threat.
but for this guy, i feel he was totally in the right to do what he did and i think the cops should have shook his hand afterwards.
but i guess a law is a law.

Lookup Florida's "Make my day" law. If someone looks at you crooked, you're allowed to use whatever force appropriate 'till they're not a threat.

ok i think thats a little to much....

Legislation like that is spreading. We passed it up here 10 minutes after Florida did. (exaggeration...) And it's not that they have to look at you crooked... You have to be able to prove that you reasonably felt that you were in danger. That's the catch. If you shoot a guy for looking at you crosseyed you'd better be able to prove why you felt you were in danger.

It's more a law designed to prevent you from having to get beat down/killed by a group of guys coming after you before you can act in self defense (at which time it would pretty much be too late anyway).

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Legislation like that is spreading. We passed it up here 10 minutes after Florida did. (exaggeration...) And it's not that they have to look at you crooked... You have to be able to prove that you reasonably felt that you were in danger. That's the catch. If you shoot a guy for looking at you crosseyed you'd better be able to prove why you felt you were in danger.

It's more a law designed to prevent you from having to get beat down/killed by a group of guys coming after you before you can act in self defense (at which time it would pretty much be too late anyway).

Look at this: Text The shooter here shot a guy in the back and killed him when the victim got back in his car was driving away from their altercation. He was found not guilty.

Looks like some States are going back to the Wild West mentality.

 

[sandorski]

If he's charged and the story holds up, he'll be acquited.

 

[chambersc]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: Gatecrasher3

Originally posted by: chambersc

Originally posted by: Gatecrasher3

You see in Canada you do not have consent to harm anyone who breaks into your house, you?re asked to call for the police and wait for them to arrive.
If you shot and killed a burglar, you will be charged with manslaughter or maybe even murder (depending on the situation)

Ya i don?t really believe you have the right to blow a 16 year olds head off if he breaks into your house.
i don?t think you have the right to kill anyone who if they are not really a threat.
but for this guy, i feel he was totally in the right to do what he did and i think the cops should have shook his hand afterwards.
but i guess a law is a law.

Lookup Florida's "Make my day" law. If someone looks at you crooked, you're allowed to use whatever force appropriate 'till they're not a threat.

ok i think thats a little to much....

Legislation like that is spreading. We passed it up here 10 minutes after Florida did. (exaggeration...) And it's not that they have to look at you crooked... You have to be able to prove that you reasonably felt that you were in danger. That's the catch. If you shoot a guy for looking at you crosseyed you'd better be able to prove why you felt you were in danger.

It's more a law designed to prevent you from having to get beat down/killed by a group of guys coming after you before you can act in self defense (at which time it would pretty much be too late anyway).

I exagerated, of course.

The law is such that if you can demonstrate that someone posed a serious threat to your safety, you are allowed to use whatever force against em. Furthermore, you can't be charged criminally or civilly.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: Dean

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Legislation like that is spreading. We passed it up here 10 minutes after Florida did. (exaggeration...) And it's not that they have to look at you crooked... You have to be able to prove that you reasonably felt that you were in danger. That's the catch. If you shoot a guy for looking at you crosseyed you'd better be able to prove why you felt you were in danger.

It's more a law designed to prevent you from having to get beat down/killed by a group of guys coming after you before you can act in self defense (at which time it would pretty much be too late anyway).

Look at this: Text The shooter here shot a guy in the back and killed him when the victim got back in his car was driving away from their altercation. He was found not guilty.

Looks like some States are going back to the Wild West mentality.

When the criminals are afraid of the average citizen, we all win.

As for your link, they conveniently left out the reasoning used by the defendant to shoot the guy. Obviously there was more going on that what was presented in your link otherwise the guy wouldn't have been found not guilty.

 

[Googer]

Guy with wife and 2 kids goes down to his basement at 1am on sunday night
sees a young kid (16) dressed in all black in his basement
kid know he?s busted, so he tries to attack Guy
Guy beats the snot out of kid
Guy might be charged with assault.

You see in Canada you do not have consent to harm anyone who breaks into your house, you?re asked to call for the police and wait for them to arrive.
If you shot and killed a burglar, you will be charged with manslaughter or maybe even murder (depending on the situation)

From your signature.

Dear Canada,

Please get well soon.
Love America.

Time for you to move south of the border. Preferrably to Texas where you can legaly shoot someone to defend your property.

 

[Eeezee]

I'd beat the crud out of that kid too, but he should have just slugged him once and held him down.

 

[Locut0s]

Laws are silly everywhere.

:thumbsdown: for dissing Canada, my home country too.

 

[JS80]

wouldn't this like...encourage more home robberies?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: Dean

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Legislation like that is spreading. We passed it up here 10 minutes after Florida did. (exaggeration...) And it's not that they have to look at you crooked... You have to be able to prove that you reasonably felt that you were in danger. That's the catch. If you shoot a guy for looking at you crosseyed you'd better be able to prove why you felt you were in danger.

It's more a law designed to prevent you from having to get beat down/killed by a group of guys coming after you before you can act in self defense (at which time it would pretty much be too late anyway).

Look at this: Text The shooter here shot a guy in the back and killed him when the victim got back in his car was driving away from their altercation. He was found not guilty.

Looks like some States are going back to the Wild West mentality.

When the criminals are afraid of the average citizen, we all win.

As for your link, they conveniently left out the reasoning used by the defendant to shoot the guy. Obviously there was more going on that what was presented in your link otherwise the guy wouldn't have been found not guilty.

No you don't, you just get worse criminals.

 

[Pepsi90919]

where in that article does it say the homeowner was charged with anything?

 

[theprodigalrebel]

Ronstang,
I can't believe you think it's acceptable to shoot someone breaking into your car from your bedroom window (overlooking the driveway). If you are in a sniping position, you probably aren't in mortal danger. And if you aren't in mortal danger, I don't see where self-defense comes in.

:shocked:

 

[DaTT]

I also live in Burlington.....that guy lives right near where I grew up and my parents still live. Neat.