Self Defence and Protecting Canadians

[48Highlander]

Case in point a martial artist who was attacked outside a bar in toronto several years ago, was able to defend himself with very minimal force, and was convicted for it.

I'm going to try and find that story but Whiskey may already be familier with the specifics of the case.

Converseley, a martial artist in calgary, after getting attacked with a hatchet, killed his assailant using only his bare hands, and wasn't charged.  Here's an early article reporting the news:

Judo expert: After taking two blows to the head, man slays assailant with his bare hands
http://www.nationalpost.com/home/story.h........d={7356155D-7EA7-45C2-8440-27C77D53EF1B}
Tourist kills campsite assailant

Scott Crowson
Calgary Herald


Sunday, October 27, 2002

Scott Crowson, Calgary Herald
Investigators look over a rented camper truck at the Mountainview Campground east of Calgary on Sunday. Police say a 38-year-old man was killed after attacking the occupant.


Jenelle Schneider, Calgary Herald
An unidentified German man returns his rented camper following a fatal campground encounter.

ADVERTISEMENT


A German tourist visiting Western Canada with his family faces no charges after killing an attacker early Saturday at an RV campground just east of the city.

The couple and their 12-year-old daughter were allowed to fly home on schedule later in the day after two weeks of exploring Alberta and British Columbia. The family refused to talk to reporters and police didn't release their names.

They spent their last night in Canada at the Mountain View Farm Campground, which is about three kilometres east of the city where the Conrich Road meets the Trans-Canada Highway.

Their holiday tour of mountains and prairie was ruined shortly before 5 a.m.

According to police, a 38-year-old man lured the German out of his rented camper on the pretext that there was a problem with the vehicle.

The stranger then attacked the tourist with a weapon and a struggle ensued, said Staff Sgt. Glenn De Goeij of the Strathmore RCMP.

The Mountie wouldn't elaborate on what sort of weapon was involved, other than to say it wasn't a gun.

The tourist was injured during the struggle and the stranger fell to the ground, about three metres in front of the camper, where he died. Police were not releasing the name of the deceased until next of kin had been notified.

The tourist was taken to hospital, where he was treated for his injuries and released.

"We don't know the motive for the attack," De Goeij said. "That's part of the investigation. . . . It appears to be a random incident, a terrible incident."

Several campers heard shouts and screams, but none reported seeing the fight. They said the whole thing was over in seconds.

The first person at the scene was a campground employee, a retired Mountie who is trained in first aid. He summoned paramedics and police.

Henry Braeutigam, 68, who owns the campground, was called at

4:45 a.m.

"Some of the people involved couldn't speak English," said Braeutigam, who is multilingual. "I did some interpreting and then I took the woman and daughter to the campground store."

Police then interviewed the family members separately to see if their versions of events matched.

Braeutigam, who has run the campground for 32 years, tried to comfort the family.

"They were very, very upset, of course," he said. "I didn't think that they would be able to fly home (Saturday). So we had to get in touch with the German embassy because we didn't know what happens in a case like this. Nobody has experience with this type of thing."

Investigators said no charges were pending and there was no reason to ask the tourists to remain in Canada.

"You need certain legal requirements to hold somebody in custody and we would have to meet that test," De Goeij explained.

"There's further investigation to be done before any decision like that is made."

So, obviously, killing someone in self defense in no way means that you will be arrested or charged.  It's the circumstances surrounding the incident that affect how you're treated.  If, for instance, you use a prohibited or unregistered firearm, or if you use a firearm on public land where you had no business to be carrying one, you'll deffinitely be arrested and investigated.  If the circumstances don't clearly indicate that it WAS self defence, you'll be questioned and possibly arrested.  If the police feel you used an unreasonable ammount of force, you'll be charged.

 

[TCBF]

"Secondly, using a firearm to defend what you may think is your property may very well get you charged.  Check out the Wiebo case. "

- You would have to be an idiot to say that you were defending your property.  Weibo (or whoever fired the shot)feared for his life, and rightly so, as a motor vehicle was being used in a dangerous and threatening manner on his land and it almost hit one of his family. 

That is why no one was ever charged or convicted for that act.  He went to jail for his oil well activities.

Tom

 

[Old Ranger]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The criminal has to be inside you house, with a weapon, and there must be evidence of a warning shot to show do diligence in trying to avoid grievous bodily harm or death."

- B_llsh_t.  Pure and utter.  And please don't say "A cop told me."  I will laugh even harder.  

Tom

Tom, that was a story from someone who did time protecting his home and family.

He said the warning shot was advice from the Police after the fact.  Hatchet Man was good enough to quote CC to correct me.

But always happy to make you laugh...."A cop told me."

Cheers,

Ben

 

[Slim]

Okay, your first post said you "can't", now you say "You can, BUT:.." 

I didn't say can't...I said in my origional post that there is no provision for owning a firearm in Canada for self-defense. And that if you cap someone, whether its in the course of your legal duties (police excluded of course due to the Admirals rules the CFO's office enjoys here in ontario) you will probably be charged, you will most certainly be taken into custody and can fully expect to be processed through the legal system prior to being exhonorated.

 

[TCBF]

Ben,

Cool.  I just get frustrated at the continous legislative and regulatory harrassment directed at the RFC (Recreational Firearms Community) caused in part by the apathy of Canadians who niether know or care what rights they actually do have.

I guess it comes down to use it or lose it.

Tom

 

[48Highlander]

Tom, that was a story from someone who did time protecting his home and family.

He said the warning shot was advice from the Police after the fact.  Hatchet Man was good enough to quote CC to correct me.

But always happy to make you laugh...."A cop told me."

Cheers,

Ben

So how did that encounter go exactly?

Burglar walks through the door and stops.

*bang*

STOP!

*bang*

OR I'LL

*BANG*

SHOOT!

As I said, it depends on the circumstances.  If your buddy did time for "defending his family", obviously the cops, the crown, and the judge and jurry all felt he had other options.  A warning shot is not only unneccesary, but a really bad idea.  Shoot you door-frame?  Yep, and when that round busts through and hits some poor guy walking his dog, you'll DEFFINITELY be going to jail.

 

[Old Ranger]

So how did that encounter go exactly?

Burglar walks through the door and stops.

*bang*

STOP!

*bang*

OR I'LL

*BANG*

SHOOT!Sounds like the last time I walked up to a 48 sentry ;D

As I said, it depends on the circumstances.   If your buddy someone I worked with a couple of weeksdid time for "defending his family", obviously the cops, the crown, and the judge and jurry all felt he had other options.   A warning shot is not only unneccesary, but a really bad idea.   Shoot you door-frame?   Yep, and when that round busts through and hits some poor guy walking his dog, you'll DEFFINITELY be going to jail.country residence

Not that any of that matters,

I like Tom's Passion and understanding.

 

[TCBF]

"I didn't say can't...I said in my origional post that there is no provision for owning a firearm in Canada for self-defense. And that if you cap someone, whether its in the course of your legal duties (police excluded of course due to the Admirals rules the CFO's office enjoys here in ontario) you will probably be charged, you will most certainly be taken into custody and can fully expect to be processed through the legal system prior to being exhonorated."

That doesn't mean "You don't have a right to."  Exercising that right will prompt an over reaction from the justice industry to be sure (you are, after all, breaking their rice bowl by removing a major source of their income from the gene pool).  But, once all of the hoops have been cleared, your rights will stand.

You would still be alive.

I do love the way this is sold to women, who foolishly fall for the myth that a dead woman - raped then strangled by her own panty hose - is morally superior to a live woman with a smoking gun standing over the dead body of her attacker.

Points?

Tom

 

[Slim]

I couldn't agree with you more.

 

[The_Falcon]

I didn't say can't...I said in my origional post that there is no provision for owning a firearm in Canada for self-defense. And that if you cap someone, whether its in the course of your legal duties (police excluded of course due to the Admirals rules the CFO's office enjoys here in ontario) you will probably be charged, you will most certainly be taken into custody and can fully expect to be processed through the legal system prior to being exhonorated.

I am hesitant to believe that without knowing the details of the incidents you mentioned.  When I was at Brinks earlier this year, our use of force training was very specific to where and when we were allowed to draw and discharge our sidearms.  99% of the scenarios we were told to just give up the money and get the hell out of there.  There was an incident earlier this year in York Region in which a Securicor truck was held up and the Guard fired warning shots in the air.  Now I don't know what happened to him, but it would not surprise me if he was charged, and if he was I agree with the charge.  I don't know if it is possible Slim, but if you can provide specifics to back up your arguments it would help, as you have requested others from time to time.

 

[TCBF]

"the money and get the hell out of there.  There was an incident earlier this year in York Region in which a Securicor truck was held up and the Guard fired warning shots in the air.  Now I don't know what happened to him, but it would not surprise me if he was charged, and if he was I agree with the charge.  I don't know if it is possible Slim, but if you can provide specifics to back up your arguments it would help, as you have requested others from time to time."

- Righto.  If you are defending the money, it is not self defence.  If the armed bad guy(s), however, convince you that your life is in immediate danger of being snuffed out, and you really do "fear for your life" then a warning shot is both unecessary and in fact counter productive.

Now, if you go to grab the money/property/TV set BACK from the puke, you are using the minimum effort to safeguard your belongings.  If the puke then directs his attention to YOU, and you then feel you reasonably fear for your life, weather you are right or wrong, you will have a somewhat tougher go if you slot the monkey.

Not saying you are not correct in doing so, but it might be easier to let the BBQ go over the fence.

Point is: that would be YOUR call - not the courts, not the pukes.

Is a scuffle triggered by a BBQ worth a life?  Well, not mine, not yours.  Is it worth the puke's life?  That's his call. If he thinks not, he can leave without it.

We're easy.

Tom

 

[TCBF]

My letters to the Editor - feel free to plagarize them 500 times if you must ( ;D):

mailbag@edmsun.com  
Subject Ltr to the Editor

          Show additional options

Sir,

Edmonton Police Association President Peter Ratcliff stated
"Every handgun that killed a person started out legally
somewhere."
Okay, and every prostitute started out as a virgin. And
every cop charged under the police act started out as a good
cop. We could go on. What exactly is his point?

(And...)

letters@thejournal.canwest.com  
Subject (no subject)

          Show additional options

Dear Sir,

This is "Hillbilly Logic": Peggy-Sue is asking Elly-May why
she has a black eye and a fat lip - again.   Elly-May says
that her boyfriend, Billy-Joe-Jim-Bob, beats her daily.
Peggy sue asks her why she doesn't leave him and get a new
boyfriend. Elly-May says "Well, any new boyfriend I get
might beat me too."
Thats Hillbilly Logic - that's Liberal voters.

Tom

 

[mainerjohnthomas]

I have always used a shortsword for home defence.  Three feet of shining steel do a hell of a job of convincing intruders to beat feet (even when they are holding crowbars or other items of greater practical lethality), and if you have to use it, it doesn't punch through walls to kill sleeping neighbors or family members the way that pistol and rifle fire does.  I can't imagine wanting to use a firearm in a townhouse complex, even if my double tap to the chest was bang on, do I want to bet the punk will survive, but the round bouncing off his vertebra will kill the infant across the street, the baby sitter next door, or my eldest's best friend who lives kitty-corner?  Half the people on this list have been under fire, you all know as well as I do that only in the movies do bullets magically stop when the hit their target, we've all had ricochets howl past us, had close calls or injuries from rounds that meandered all over the bleeding place before finding someplace soft and to land.  The last thing I want is my neighbor trying to defend his home with a hail of 9mm that has a greater chance of killing me and mine, than it does his intruder.  I am in favour of keeping handguns out of the hands of amateurs.  I have long favoured an automatic 5 year addition to the sentence of any crime where an unlicensed firearm was used or seized.  Let the guy do sixty days for his million dollar grow op (who cares), but do five years min for having the arsenal (they all do).  If we let you off with a slap on the wrist for robbing the liquor store (because we will), then slap that extra five years on for using a gun to do it, maybe they will switch back to knives (less killing, less empowering for cowards).

 

[R0B]

Well, if you have something like a .25 with JHP bullets, I don't really think you need to worry about stray bullets unless you miss.

I hope your sword will protect you if such a horrible situation would confront you, but a lot of crimianls would not hesitate to try to take it away from you, anyways. Especially if you're intent on detaining them until the police arrive, or if there are two or more of them.

 

[mainerjohnthomas]

Well, if you have something like a .25 with JHP bullets, I don't really think you need to worry about stray bullets unless you miss.

I hope your sword will protect you if such a horrible situation would confront you, but a lot of crimianls would not hesitate to try to take it away from you, anyways. Especially if you're intent on detaining them until the police arrive, or if there are two or more of them.

    Son the police detain people, if I respond to an intruder in my home with my sword, they have until I reach them to flee, for I shall not pursue. If any man stands against me in my home, he will surely die for it, as the army neither trained me to hesitate nor to disable.  If he has a firearm, then the odds are that a single bullet will not kill me, even if it hits me, and before he can get a second, he will be discovering that the killing stroke of the hoplites and the roman legions has lost none of its effect, and I have drilled it into muscle memory using the same techniques that they did.  There were once three intruders, had they fled less swiftly, they would have found that while wheat may outnumber the scythe, the smart money is on the scythe.

 

[Infanteer]

Man, that was like poetry - self-defence poetry.  :cheers:

 

[TCBF]

  "Son the police detain people, if I respond to an intruder in my home with my sword, they have until I reach them to flee, for I shall not pursue. If any man stands against me in my home, he will surely die for it, as the army neither trained me to hesitate nor to disable.  If he has a firearm, then the odds are that a single bullet will not kill me, even if it hits me, and before he can get a second, he will be discovering that the killing stroke of the hoplites and the roman legions has lost none of its effect, and I have drilled it into muscle memory using the same techniques that they did.  There were once three intruders, had they fled less swiftly, they would have found that while wheat may outnumber the scythe, the smart money is on the scythe."

- Churchillian in it's elegance. 
My hat is off to you, sir.



Tom

 

[Infanteer]

I firmly believe that Canada needs a "Castle Doctrine" enshrined into law - this needs to be backed by a clear constitutional protection of the right to private property.   Why should anybody be forced, under the threat of legal punishment, to abandon their hearth and home to a criminal who has unlawfully invaded it?

http://www.snowbirds.org/html/gunlaw.html

On October 1, 2005 a new Florida law came into effect.
Regrettably some anti-gun groups are engaging in a wide-reaching advertising campaign that would give the impression that Florida is no longer a safe tourist destination. This is not true.

Florida believes in the "castle doctrine" which actually dates back to the Middle Ages. The doctrine proposes that a person's home (castle) is a safe haven for him/herself and their family. In Florida, a person acting in self-defence outside of his/her home or workplace has a duty to use every reasonable means to avoid danger, including retreat, prior to using deadly force. In the event that an individual (the victim) chooses to defend him/herself and the attacker becomes injured or killed, the victim could be charged with assault or an even more serious crime.

The new Florida legislation creates a presumption, with certain exceptions, that a person having a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to him/herself or to another person, may use force, up to and including deadly force, in response if:

the person against whom the force was used (the attacker) was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, and
the person who uses defensive force (the victim) knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or an unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.

The Florida law provides that a person, not themselves engaged in an unlawful activity, who is attacked in a place where they have the legal right to be (i.e. a dwelling, residence, occupied vehicle or public place) does not have an obligation to retreat and may meet force with matching comparable force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to him/herself or to another person or to prevent a forcible felony.

Once the incident has been investigated by the police, the Florida law provides immunity from criminal prosecution of, and civil action against, the victim who has used justifiable force in the defence of him/herself or another person. It does not provide immunity where excessive force was used or the victim was in fact lying in wait for his/her attacker.

Florida law defines "forcible felony", in which force may be used as including:

Aggravated assault
Aggravated battery
Aggravated stalking
Aircraft piracy
Arson
Burglary
Carjacking
Home-invasion robbery
Kidnapping

Manslaughter
Murder
Robbery
Sexual battery
Treason
Unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb
Any other felony involving the use or threat of physical force or violence against any person.

Accordingly, snowbird travellers as well as other Florida residents should not be fearful of this new law which received full bi-party support in the Florida Legislature.
It is important to also note that Florida is not alone with this type of legislation. The majority of U.S. jurisdictions do not impose a duty to retreat before a person (the victim) may resort to deadly force if threatened with death or great bodily harm.

October 3, 2005

 

[Kat Stevens]

This little item (and 2 more just like it strategically placed) are my home defence system.  I had the unfortunate need to produce it once.  Druggie home electronics relocation specialist got one clear look at it, peed his kilt, and headed for the high heather.  Power perceived is power achieved.. >

 

[48Highlander]

This little item (and 2 more just like it strategically placed) are my home defence system.   I had the unfortunate need to produce it once.   Druggie home electronics relocation specialist got one clear look at it, peed his kilt, and headed for the high heather.   Power perceived is power achieved.. >

And isn't it amazing how much more often you win at Texas Hold'em when you have an "item" like that sitting right beside you?