„Kein absolutes Recht auf Selbstverteidigung“: Was Sie wissen, wenn Sie sich nach ONT vor Eindringling verteidigen? Mann wird angeklagt
https://www.ctvnews.ca/toronto/article/no-absolute-right-to-self-defence-what-to-know-about-defending-yourself-from-intruder-in-wake-of-ont-man-being-charged/
12 Kommentare
[deleted]
Every few years it seems a case comes up where people find out we don’t live in the USA. If someone attacks you, you have to stop once the threat is neutralized. You can’t kill someone just because you feel scared.
If it’s uncertain if you used reasonable force or not, the cops aren’t qualified to decide—so the courts will. That’s the system working as designed.
As the article stats, these matters are all about the details of what force was used and in what context, and whether or that makes the use of force reasonable.
To take a completely different, but still contentious use of force case, the shooting of Sammy Yatim on a TTC train by police. There were two separate sets of shots fired, and the second set was deemed a criminal act, because the first set had neutralised the threat Yatim presented, and the officer in question should have grasped that, and transitioned to providing first aid, not continued use of force.
The lack of context around how force was used in the incident this article focuses on is rather aggravating, but may be due to it not having gone to trial yet.
Odd how citizens with no training are held to this standard while police use „split second decision making“ and „high stress situation“ to excuse excessive force by officers… keep in mind, these are trained people who go into the day expecting to deal with criminals…. contrast that with; Someone with no training, who is not expecting to deal with a criminal, and who woke up to an intruder. Which would dump cortisol on anyone unless they are a highly trained military person.. and the police expect that person to have a higher degree of control than those trained to enforce the law. GTFO
This is ass backwards. The cops and what ever prosecutor moved this forward should be fired immediately, and charged for behavior unbecoming of a non clown entity.
If this ever happens to you NEVER, EVER say anything to the police. Not one word. If there is anyone else in the house they DON’T say one single word. There is nothing you can say that cannot be said better from your lawyer later.
Why wasn’t the intruder charged with break and entry of a dwelling AT NIGHT?
pop quiz for Canadian redditers to reply with the maximum sentence for that.
Once you get that answer. I think the crown has to accountable to answer why.
Hint about castle law in Canada: its a myth it doesn’t exist, it just hasn’t been codified.
They are trying to kill it with precedent.
Hint: cops don’t want to held accountable when they make a mistake on a warrant because the occupant defended themselves.
So if someone breaks into your home, you’re allowed to defend your family and property.
BUT
You have to wait until they try to use a knife on you before you can use a knife. You have to wait until they shoot at you before you can use a gun. You have to give up every single advantage you might have against AN INTRUDER IN YOUR OWN HOME or you could go to prison.
Cool.
If they don’t resort to any kind of violence and just start calmly collecting your valuables and putting them in a big sack with a dollar sign on it, do you have to just let them? Hope the cops get there before they get anything really expensive?
I’m supposed to use reasonable force in proportion to the weapons the assailant breaking into my house is using?
Since I can’t possibly know if they have consealed weapons, any force I use is reasonable once they break in.
If this homeowner didn’t kill the assailant, I wouldn’t hesitate to nullify if I was a juror. If he did, I’d hesitate a little.
This is a fascinating discussion to me because as I read through it just proves that each case in each circumstance is going to have to be looked at individually and determining what constitutes excessive force in any instance is going to have to go through a court of law. Because excessive force to me is not the same thing as it is to you. When something happens in your home or outside your home and another person gets hurt regardless of the reason there needs to be some accountability and some review.
Everyone is getting up in arms, but as far as I can tell the police have not stated nor have the media published what were the exact circumstances of the alleged crime.
We have no idea what weapon the intruder has vs. what weapon the homeowner had.
Articles say there was an altercation and the intruder had life threatening injuries. We have no description of the altercation. Did the homeowner defeat the intruder and then he kept pounding the guy into a pulp? Did the homeowner get a knife and stab the guy?
I feel like we’re all going to feel really embarrassed about our outrage when it comes out the homeowner clocked the intruder with a baseball bat and then didn’t stop there.
I never realized how many people had a fantasy of themselves brutally murdering some random stranger who breaks into their home in the night and then being celebrated for it. It’s very strange.
To quote Jamie Sarkonak, „People are mad that we charged this guy, but we insist we did the right thing. We won’t tell you why, though.“