The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[Eaglelord17]

The title of that article is preposterous to me.

The fact the home invader was armed as well (charged with possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose) blows my mind that the home owner was charged. There has to be something else going on there such as the home invader running away and getting shot from behind or something, otherwise I can't understand why they would charge the home owner.

 

[brihard]

The fact the home invader was armed as well (charged with possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose) blows my mind that the home owner was charged. There has to be something else going on there such as the home invader running away and getting shot from behind or something, otherwise I can't understand why they would charge the home owner.

He was charged with aggravated assault and the intruder was airlifted with life threatening injuries. This will come down to whether the force he was was lawful, including if it was ‘reasonable’ and ‘necessary’. The law does not expect force used in self defence to be measured with exactitude.

I don’t want to speculate about an active criminal case. I would infer from the charges that police believe the force used by the recent and the injury that resulted exceeded what the law can support. It’ll probably be quite a while before we get much of an idea of just what went down in that apartment.

 

[Haggis]

The fact the home invader was armed as well (charged with possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose) blows my mind that the home owner was charged. There has to be something else going on there such as the home invader running away and getting shot from behind or something, otherwise I can't understand why they would charge the home owner.

There's nothing in the article, or others, including the press release from Kawartha Lakes Police, that mentions a firearm being used/carried by either party.

 

[Halifax Tar]

He was charged with aggravated assault and the intruder was airlifted with life threatening injuries. This will come down to whether the force he was was lawful, including if it was ‘reasonable’ and ‘necessary’. The law does not expect force used in self defence to be measured with exactitude.

I don’t want to speculate about an active criminal case. I would infer from the charges that police believe the force used by the recent and the injury that resulted exceeded what the law can support. It’ll probably be quite a while before we get much of an idea of just what went down in that apartment.

It disgusts me that we would judge a victims use of force in repelling a home invasion.

 

[Halifax Tar]

The fact the home invader was armed as well (charged with possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose) blows my mind that the home owner was charged. There has to be something else going on there such as the home invader running away and getting shot from behind or something, otherwise I can't understand why they would charge the home owner.

Its Canada. Nothing surprises me anymore.

 

[IKnowNothing]

This will come down to whether the force he was was lawful, including if it was ‘reasonable’ and ‘necessary’. The law does not expect force used in self defence to be measured with exactitude.

I don’t want to speculate about an active criminal case. I would infer from the charges that police believe the force used by the recent and the injury that resulted exceeded what the law can support. It’ll probably be quite a while before we get much of an idea of just what went down in that apartment.

How much latitude do investigating officers/crown have in applying defenses, proportionality tests etc. to their decision of whether or not to press charges?

The impression I get is that the prevailing standard for self/home defense cases (especially if a firearm or other weapon is involved) is to charge and let the court decide if it was justified. If my impression is correct- how does that compare to other crimes?

 

[brihard]

It disgusts me that we would judge a victims use of force in repelling a home invasion.

We don’t actually know what happened in that apartment and how the confrontation unfolded. A lot of factors will matter. Unless Canadian law shifts such that the mere act of being in a home unlawfully means your life is freely forfeit, some judgment will be necessary. Inside a residence is not a black hole of law.

How much latitude do investigating officers/crown have in applying defenses, proportionality tests etc. to their decision of whether or not to press charges?

The impression I get is that the prevailing standard for self/home defense cases (especially if a firearm or other weapon is involved) is to charge and let the court decide if it was justified. If my impression is correct- how does that compare to other crimes?

There’s no different standard that I’ve ever heard of for such cases. To charge (or in B.C./Quebec, to recommend charges), police have to have reasonable grounds to believe a person has committed a specific criminal offence. Considerations like self defence (section 34 of the Criminal Code) and lawful use of force to, e.g., ‘citizen’s arrest’ (sections 25 and 494 respectively) should absolutely be taken into considering when deciding whether to lay/recommend charges.

Once charges are laid/recommended, crown own the choice to continue (or in B.C./QC) approve) prosecution based on the likelihood of conviction and the public interest.

I can read some stuff between the lines on this one, but I don’t actually know and neither does anyone else here. We’re probably all going to be stuck waiting in frustration for more info that may not come until an eventual trial.