- Reaction score
- 18,744
- Points
- 1,160
Is it the police or Crown that lay charges in Manitoba?
The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0
- Thread starter Jarnhamar
- Start date
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 22,861
- Points
- 1,260
Both can IIRC.
Haggis
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,485
- Points
- 1,140
For the time being, I'm going to side with the police. Based on available info, he was not at immediate risk of grievous bodily harm or death and did not need to fire at the thieves.
- Reaction score
- 18,744
- Points
- 1,160
4 likley younger adults in the dark, without him knowing if they were armed or more of them. The risk of grievous bodily harm or death to the homeowner is likley very high.
People like to say: "Property is replaceable", actually as you get older, it is not replaceable, money = time and time is in short supply as you get older. Also living in a rural area, statistically calling the police means that they will almost always come after the criminals are gone. If you as a property owner do nothing, then the criminal activity will generally get worse, eventually leading to more deaths and the bankrupting of people and businesses.
It's likley in this case a call was made early on, based on my understanding, which could be completely wrong, it also appears that the 3 adults surrendered to the homeowner and awaited the arrival of the police. Since it also appears he did not hit anyone, it's quite possible his shots were deliberate to get the perps to surrender.
- Reaction score
- 434
- Points
- 810
Did he actually fire AT the thieves?
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 20,245
- Points
- 1,260
We're gonna disagree here.
I couldn't give to shits about the age of the offenders. They are in stolen vehicle(s?), full of stolen stuff, stealing gas...
I prefer the Sheriff Grady method.
Haggis
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,485
- Points
- 1,140
Did no one read the first line of my post? "For the time being". In any use of force incident, more details come out over time and my opinions may change due to that.
"Likely" is scant justification for the use of lethal force to prevent a property crime. If y'all want to go shooting at people/vehicles in the dark without knowing the situational factors, go for it.
Hence the discharging in a reckless manner charge. Tell me again, why you have to be SURE of your target and background?
- Reaction score
- 30,996
- Points
- 1,260
Right or Wrong, Canada has different laws for the use of force than most States.
Here in Virginia for instance Lethal Force cannot be used to protect property by itself (it can if you are in the dwelling, or conveyance, with certain caveats).
A homeowner may arrest or attempt to arrest a person (or persons) who are committing/committed an offense to which is punishable by imprisonment over 1 year, which basically means a Felony, and what constitutes a Felony can be relatively convoluted. Generally Non LEO arrest w/o warrant is rife with danger if one isn’t well versed on the law.
Now here Disparity of Force has been codified, that allows for Lethal Force to be used when one party is smaller/weaker, or outnumbered by their attackers -- but that is in the protection of life arena, not protection of property.
Coercive Force is pretty much the realm of the state, and any individual actions down that path are very very risky.
“Warning Shots” here is a topic that is so problematic that it is hard even for SME’s in Judicial and LEO UoF to agree all the time.
Any discharge of a firearm is lethal force, regardless if there is a person targeted or not. So the only 'saving grace’ for firing a ‘warning shot’ is that one would have otherwise fired into a person (or persons), and that somehow this use of lethal force was reasonable, as it (subjectively) decreased the likelihood of needing to fire into someone. However where did the ‘warning shot’ go, was it aimed fire into a demonstrably safe backstop?
I won’t claim Warning Shots are never appropriate, but they have so many risk factors involved that they should never be a Go To COA.
-----------------------
Secondly this is crossing the streams on Gun Laws, and Use of Force Laws.
- Reaction score
- 12,675
- Points
- 1,360
I wonder if the homeowner called the police? If he did, lesson learned, don't call the police and don't even talk to them
.The crooks aren't going to call the cops, let them scamper off and they will never be back to your house again
Also, get some "protection" dogs. My uncle kept three Rottweilers on chains strung around his millions of dollars worth of commercial fishing equipment. Some thieves learned some hard lessons trying to steal boat motors and other assorted equipment from his operation.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 20,245
- Points
- 1,260
I wonder if the homeowner called the police? If he did, lesson learned, don't call the police and don't even talk to them
The crooks aren't going to call the cops, let them scamper off and they will never be back to your house again
In my neighborhood gun shots don't warrant a bat signal anymore either...
The two are close cousins.
Similar threads
