RCMP charge Okotoks homeowner after shots fired

Printable View

Show 200 post(s) from this thread on one page

March 3rd, 2018, 08:32 PM
trimmer21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gilroy

What happens if the poor guy is a deaf mute. Shame on you,shame on you,No Justice No Peace, deaf lives matter.

Then,I guess he won't hear the shot that kills his dumb a**,will he? By God,there's a Darwin Award if I ever heard one.LOL
March 3rd, 2018, 09:00 PM
Snowwalker

Quote:

Originally Posted by rick_iles

You would have powers of arrest. You also are protected from civil or criminal repercussions if you use only the amount of force necessary to make that arrest.

:confused::confused:I am sorry but I never got the chart that tells me how many KiloNewton's of force to apply to a guys face that I just caught trying to TOUCH my kid. :angry::angry::angry::angry:
Could you post it or email it to me please.:rolleyes:
March 3rd, 2018, 09:21 PM
Snowwalker

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikePal

The confusion here is that very few debating the issue have a clue what 'Castle doctrine' means...

Take a few minutes to read the Wiki article and then come back to the debate with a better understanding of what you're debating...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine

Mike. I "live" ( part of my job) in the US for two to three weeks every month. So I will put it this way because I live with the Castle Doctrine on a daily existence.

A person enters my cab/sleeper, approaches in a threating way well I am in the trailer, the response is very violent. That is my right. I wakeup to find someone breaking into my trailer, I will just call the cops. I would be with in my rights to smash a car into the wall/guardrails if they drove up beside me and showed a gun. I do not have to prove that they were going to rob me or not.
"I saw the car passing on the left side of my truck and there was a person in the back waving a gun. "

Now before people start on about "what if it was a toy gun".
https://pin.it/ketix7p3apmudk
March 3rd, 2018, 09:26 PM
Snowwalker

Quote:

Originally Posted by fishermccann

There is long way between, 'hug a thug', and killing a TV thief, something in the middle might be more appropriate.

I know I know...how about thump a thug? Sounds good to me.
March 3rd, 2018, 09:27 PM
welsh

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

I do not have to prove that they were going to rob me or not.

You don't have to prove that in Canada.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk
March 3rd, 2018, 09:43 PM
Snowwalker

Quote:

Originally Posted by terrym

It's easy to talk and say you would shoot somebody but thankfully most couldn't get it done. The thing about armed defence is you likely don't have to shoot. Cycle a 12ga pump from your dark hallway and the lowlifes will flush like 3yr old grouse. I truly think pointing the weapon would work almost all the time.
I do have a problem with the fact politicians and celebrities have the right to armed security but honest tax paying citizens don't. There is something wrong with that.

You never "brandish". Do or do not. Poop or get off the pot.

Had an idiot( had a hate for "foreign" drivers) come storming around the lunch counters saying he was going to kick my butt and rip my head off. He grabbed me, he grabbed his stomach and fell over. Never saw a blade, but he got to see the inside of a cell for six to eight months for making threats and assault. That is how "Self Defence" laws work in the states.
March 3rd, 2018, 09:51 PM
Snowwalker

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikePal

ergo, because the trespasser did not have a gun, charges were laid....

With Castle Doctrine, that requirement doesn't need to be meet..

The land owner has no way of knowing how the person is or is not armed untill it is too late..
March 3rd, 2018, 09:58 PM
welsh

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

That is how "Self Defence" laws work in the states.

Oddly, making threats and assault are crimes in Canada too. And self defence is a defence for any criminal act.

By the way, self defence laws vary, state by state -- unlike Canada.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk
March 3rd, 2018, 10:05 PM
Snowwalker

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam Menard

My concern about the castle doctrine is that it promotes the use of lethal force in the protection of property. I'm not sure I would value a stack of CD's in a vehicle higher than human life. One may advocate in using a weapon to frighten off an intruder but, as we've seen, the worst outcome can happen

The main benefit of the way it works is this.
If you saw a pile of money sitting on a table surrounded by calf high grass, would you help yourself to some?
Well that is how criminals see your property.
Now lets say you decided to line your pockets and walk towards the table...only to hear a snake or two rattling in the grass.
Well the Castle Doctrine is like a snake rattling in the grass. The criminal knows the snake is there, so if he just moves on the money stays on the table and he lives. If he thinks he can out smart the snake, well maybe he does, maybe the snake gets him.

I am cheering on the snake.:thumbup:
March 3rd, 2018, 10:08 PM
Snowwalker

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gilroy

What happens if the poor guy is a deaf mute. Shame on you,shame on you,No Justice No Peace, deaf lives matter.

You do have a sense of humor I see.

Show 200 post(s) from this thread on one page