cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/45036971
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is calling on the federal government to amend the Criminal Code so that use of force is presumed reasonable against a person who illegally enters a house and poses a threat to those inside.
“After 10 years of Liberals, the system treats victims like criminals and criminals like victims,” Poilievre said during a news conference outside a home in Brampton, Ont.
Under current law, Canadians are not guilty of an offence if they believe on reasonable grounds that force (or the threat of force) is being used against them or another person.
Their act of defence must also be for the purpose of defending or protecting themselves and must be reasonable in the circumstances.
In determining whether the act of defence is “reasonable,” courts consider nine factors — including the nature of the threat, the physical capabilities of the parties to the incident, the history of the parties to the incident and whether any party used or threatened weapons.
The Conservative leader said Canadians who are defending their homes “don’t have time to think about nine conditions” and it’s wrong for the law to apply “a complicated, indecipherable legal doctrine when you were only doing what is right.”
Poilievre also said the federal government can implement his “stand on guard” principle or else a Conservative MP will push the idea forward in a private member’s bill.
‘Your home is your castle’
said “your home is your castle” — a reference to a legal principle called the castle doctrine, which says homeowners have the right to protect themselves from an intruder.
The Conservatives’ press release highlighted Cameron Gardiner, a man from Collingwood, Ont., who shot and killed two masked men who zip-tied and held him at gunpoint in a chaotic home invasion in 2019.
The Crown charged Gardiner with manslaughter, but then withdrew the charges in 2021.
“This was yet another case of the Liberals’ two-tier justice system: where monsters get sympathy and endless second chances, while Canadians defending their families are treated like criminals,” the Conservatives’ press release said in reference to Gardiner.
A more recent case in Lindsay, Ont., has sparked widespread reaction and debate over Canada’s self-defence laws. Jeremy David McDonald, 44, has been charged with aggravated assault and assault with a weapon after a man allegedly broke into his home wielding a crossbow.
A fight ensued after the break-in. Police said the alleged intruder, Michael Kyle Breen, 41, was so badly injured that he had to be airlifted to a Toronto hospital, located about 100 kilometres away.
Legal experts have clarified that self-defence is legal in Canada, and some have expressed concern about misinformation over the case in Ontario.
More homeowners with firearms likely mean intruders are encouraged to bring firearms for self-defense further escalating the danger.
More homeowners with firearms also means more stolen firearms on the black market, with everything that implies.
So a hunter should just give up their rifles in hopes that intruduers brings bats and knives instead of a gun in the event of a break in?
You see the results of your logic in the US.
Is this what you want for Canada? Armed robberies, kids getting murdered for knocking on the wrong door, guns everywhere and all the implications of that?
But, home intruders already bring firearms to home invasions? Home owners don’t want to see their family taken hostage and rather not have their only option be stand around for police to show up, which if you live out in the prairies can be nearly an hour away.
An armed homeowner could also more effectively scare off an armed intruder.
If someone breaks into a home and the owner has nothing and the intruder has a gun, all the power is in the intruders hands. If the home owner is armed, the intruder may decide this isn’t the right house to rob and leave before things escalate.