A bit shocking - Canadian Forces base commander charged

[Apoc]

You dont have to retreat in your own home, not as it sounds anyway. If someone intends to do seriously bodily harm, you CAN kill them in self defence.


But, shoot someone, say robbing your home, who doesnt have a weapon/isnt trying to harm you, and your going away for a while.

[Papa_Complex]

The Supreme Court of Canada would beg to differ.

[karl_1052]

Originally Posted by Apoc

You dont have to retreat in your own home, not as it sounds anyway. If someone intends to do seriously bodily harm, you CAN kill them in self defence.


But, shoot someone, say robbing your home, who doesnt have a weapon/isnt trying to harm you, and your going away for a while.

Your wrongage could get you raped in prison.

Criminal Code, Sections 34-37

34. (1) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted without having provoked the assault is justified in repelling force by force if the force he uses is not intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm and is no more than is necessary to enable him to defend himself.

(2) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grievous bodily harm in repelling the assault is justified if
(a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence with which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes; and
(b) he believes, on reasonable grounds, that he cannot otherwise preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm.

35. Every one who has without justification assaulted another but did not commence the assault with intent to cause death or grievous bodily harm, or has without justification provoked an assault on himself by another, may justify the use of force subsequent to the assault if
(a) he uses the force
(i) under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence of the person whom he has assaulted or provoked, and
(ii) in the belief, on reasonable grounds, that it is necessary in order to preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm;
( b) he did not, at any time before the necessity of preserving himself from death or grievous bodily harm arose, endeavour to cause death or grievous bodily harm; and
(c) he declined further conflict and quitted or retreated from it as far as it was feasible to do so before the necessity of preserving himself from death or grievous bodily harm arose.

36. Provocation includes, for the purposes of sections 34 and 35, provocation by blows, words or gestures.

37. (1) Every one is justified in using force to defend himself or any one under his protection from assault, if he uses no more force than is necessary to prevent the assault or the repetition of it.
(2) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to justify the wilful infliction of any hurt or mischief that is excessive, having regard to the nature of the assault that the force used was intended to prevent.

[goof2]

Some states have a requirement that a victim's response be proportional to the threat against them. I figure if someone breaks in to my house they have forfeit that expectation. Fortunately the state where I live has some sense and agrees with me.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Kaneman

What is that, like you have to go to the farthest room in your house from the intruder and wait for him to breach that room before you kill him?

jersey is like that. Doesnt mean i wont clear my house if something feels hinky.

[Kaneman]

Those laws are insane.

[Fleck750]

Originally Posted by Kaneman

Those laws are insane.

Sounds like they're French based to me. Retreat, post a white flag on the door of the farthest room.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by Fleck750

Sounds like they're French based to me. Retreat, post a white flag on the door of the farthest room.

Sure, if the French were the sort to get backed into a corner and then fight light rabid wolverines (35.c).

[Apoc]

Originally Posted by karl_1052

Your wrongage could get you raped in prison.

Criminal Code, Sections 34-37

34. (1) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted without having provoked the assault is justified in repelling force by force if the force he uses is not intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm and is no more than is necessary to enable him to defend himself.

(2) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grievous bodily harm in repelling the assault is justified if
(a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence with which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes; and
(b) he believes, on reasonable grounds, that he cannot otherwise preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm.

35. Every one who has without justification assaulted another but did not commence the assault with intent to cause death or grievous bodily harm, or has without justification provoked an assault on himself by another, may justify the use of force subsequent to the assault if
(a) he uses the force
(i) under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence of the person whom he has assaulted or provoked, and
(ii) in the belief, on reasonable grounds, that it is necessary in order to preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm;
( b) he did not, at any time before the necessity of preserving himself from death or grievous bodily harm arose, endeavour to cause death or grievous bodily harm; and
(c) he declined further conflict and quitted or retreated from it as far as it was feasible to do so before the necessity of preserving himself from death or grievous bodily harm arose.

36. Provocation includes, for the purposes of sections 34 and 35, provocation by blows, words or gestures.

37. (1) Every one is justified in using force to defend himself or any one under his protection from assault, if he uses no more force than is necessary to prevent the assault or the repetition of it.
(2) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to justify the wilful infliction of any hurt or mischief that is excessive, having regard to the nature of the assault that the force used was intended to prevent.

All it says there, is use reasonable force. Someone comes in your home with a gun, attemptint to kill/harm you, you have every right to shoot them, and it will be ruled self defense. Its not as strict as you guys are making out. I dont need to wait for someone to shoot me in my home, before I can fire back.

Its not like this country jails people for defending themselves, they just dont allow the use of excessive force. Meaning you cant shoot someone for punching you in the face. But you can shoot them to prevent them from shooting you, in your own home.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by Apoc

All it says there, is use reasonable force. Someone comes in your home with a gun, attemptint to kill/harm you, you have every right to shoot them, and it will be ruled self defense. Its not as strict as you guys are making out. I dont need to wait for someone to shoot me in my home, before I can fire back.

Its not like this country jails people for defending themselves, they just dont allow the use of excessive force. Meaning you cant shoot someone for punching you in the face. But you can shoot them to prevent them from shooting you, in your own home.

And in many American States you can shoot someone for stepping into your home. In Canada you first have to try and make it out the back door. I'm trying to put it in perspective.