REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum

stereo12 · 01-29-2012, 04:13 PM

Did a search and the following post is the best result

http://www.revscene.net/forums/58481...g-weapons.html

but it doesnt really answer anything.

If there is an intruder in your home, you have your PAL, and firearms registration, restricted/non-restricted dont matter.

you have your weapon for self defense, can you shoot them in the leg or arm (non headshot)to deter trying to go for the non lethal route? if they have a knife/bat/gun. Armed intruder of course.

worrying about the safety of yourself and family as a reason to.

will i get in trouble for this?

Thanks

gretzky · 01-29-2012, 05:02 PM

what if there were 5 masked men without weapons (unless hidden on them somewhere), can you still shoot them? i mean like 5 vs 1 and your a dead man especially if they find your registered fire arm... might have no choice but too shoot one of them and to scare the rest off?

stereo12 · 01-29-2012, 05:13 PM

easy to just plant a weapon too.

But in real life situation, if some 1 was breaking into, or has been in your home, are we allowed like our friends down south to blast and ask later?

Soundy · 01-29-2012, 05:15 PM

Remember: a dead intruder can't sue you.

gretzky · 01-29-2012, 05:28 PM

home invasions do happen, even to innocent people, some times these guys hit the wrong houses thinking there is a grow op in it or something... i remember this happening to someone a while back, the victim ended up getting a hold of the armed robbers gun and shot him dead..

found the article http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...vancouver.html

from the article
The woman, Nazreen Dean, said her two brothers were inside the house at the time. Her brother Aleem Mohammed, 19, was shot and wounded in the chest, she alleged.

Her other brother, Amir Mohammed, 18, then chased one of the gunmen down the street and tackled him, she said. That fight ended with one of the attackers dead, she said.

Police have said only it was a targeted shooting but have not confirmed any of the reports.

Witnesses reported seeing a body that has since been covered with a tarp by police.

stereo12 · 01-29-2012, 05:36 PM

cool, lets wait for more feed back here.

jtanner_ · 01-29-2012, 06:21 PM

Someone broke into my house and my dad fired off a single round at him in the dark (and missed)... And then held him at gun point until police showed up.

All the police asked were whether or not the gun was locked up, to which my dad replied no, and the officers suggested he say yes it was, and that it wasn't loaded (after he admitted it was) lol. My dad even showed up at the intruders court date and asked him if he remembered him... To which the intruder said no, and my dad walked away saying next time he wouldn't miss. My dad is pretty scary though lol.

I guess that was actually pretty pointless and a bit off topic... Oh well.
Posted via RS Mobile

tmc22 · 01-29-2012, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soundy

Remember: a dead intruder can't sue you.

A dead intruder can't sue you, but you can still be charged because what if the intruder wasn't carrying a weapon?

Soundy · 01-29-2012, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmc22

A dead intruder can't sue you, but you can still be charged because what if the intruder wasn't carrying a weapon?

A dead intruder can't tell his side of the story, either.

vafanculo · 01-29-2012, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stereo12

easy to just plant a weapon too.

But in real life situation, if some 1 was breaking into, or has been in your home, are we allowed like our friends down south to blast and ask later?

You can go as far as you can to protect yourself, without using excessive force. If you need to kill them, and can prove it, I don't see why you have to worry much.

However, unlike the states, you can't just shoot someone for walking into your house. You gotta remember, here, they can also sue you for slipping on your floor probably.

stereo12 · 01-30-2012, 12:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vafanculo

You can go as far as you can to protect yourself, without using excessive force. If you need to kill them, and can prove it, I don't see why you have to worry much.

its so vague, protect yourself without using excessive force, who and what determines excessive force, when that person is not present to determine the threat, its a split decision thing.

ninjatune · 01-30-2012, 01:03 AM

You're better off running out of the house and calling the police.

dlo · 01-30-2012, 01:09 AM

Fuck that lol if someone has a weapon and break into my house, imma fuck him up pree good, I won't kill him or attempt to, but ill try hard not to

Posted via RS Mobile

melloman · 01-30-2012, 08:27 AM

Break both legs, so the intruder can't run away.. then call police.

Simnut · 01-30-2012, 08:53 AM

You are allowed to use "sufficient" force to protect yourself and your family.

Did you know that a thief, snooping around the outside of your house and falls into an unmarked hole and breaks a leg, can sue you? Canadian law eh?

zulutango · 01-30-2012, 10:44 AM

...and the level of "sufficient force" will be desided in court probably years later by people who have had those years to come up with reasons that you should not have resisted...as opposed to you who were there and had seconds. Good luck in guessing what they wanted so that they don't charge you. Sounds unreal or unfair? Welcome to how Cops are treated in court every day when they had to use force "legally" and are forced to justify it.

In Canada, deciding to use force to protect yourself, your family or your property often means the defender is charged and the criminal is not. It was only very recently that 1 court case decided that you did NOT have to run away when confronted in your own home.

originalhypa · 01-30-2012, 12:16 PM

Adding to what Zulutango said, the Tories have tabled their new crime bill which includes this little tidbit.

Quote:

A citizen's arrest and self-defence act — to clarify the self-defence and defence of property rules under the Criminal Code.

It's only a matter of time before the Tories can undo the criminal freedoms given by the Liberals over the last decade and a half.

nsmb · 01-30-2012, 03:44 PM

in for answers

tiger_handheld · 01-30-2012, 04:00 PM

+1 for answers.

stereo12 · 01-31-2012, 02:07 PM

so theres really no definitive answer of a yes you can or no you cant.

god damn, flip a freakin coin.

Glove · 01-31-2012, 02:37 PM

I wouldnt even care if I got charged, fucking shoot him, he is in your home where your children and wife are sleeping.

Not really racist! · 01-31-2012, 02:42 PM

^ you do care.

TheNewGirl · 01-31-2012, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vafanculo

You can go as far as you can to protect yourself, without using excessive force. If you need to kill them, and can prove it, I don't see why you have to worry much.

However, unlike the states, you can't just shoot someone for walking into your house. You gotta remember, here, they can also sue you for slipping on your floor probably.

I'm pretty sure as a single woman with a child that there's nothing I could do to an intruder (shy of torture) that I couldn't validly argue was self defense or defense of my child so long as I could convince a court that I felt I was unsafe.

sho_bc · 01-31-2012, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zulutango

It was only very recently that 1 court case decided that you did NOT have to run away when confronted in your own home.

Except if you're a police officer and someone who is not mentally stable charges at you with a pipe and a crowbar. Then you're supposed to run away. Or fire a "warning shot".

zulutango · 01-31-2012, 07:28 PM

You can't win. Get into a pursuit of a criminal, he crashes and the Cops are at fault, break off the same pursuit and he crashes and the Cops are at fault. Both rulings made here by BC court judges.

Police are supposed to let themselves be injured or killed by violent suspects that were called in because of their violent bahaviour...because they have to use violence to stop the suspects and that would not be right.

They are supposed to talk to violent mentally ill people to convince them to stop the violence, in spite of the fact that the violent mentally ill people are incapable of understanding the communications....but let them continue the violence because they are mentally ill, the public gets injured and the Cops get roasted & charged because they did not stop them.

Would someone in charge please tell Cops what they want done? Just a suggestion...what you want actually has to work, has to cause no injury or damage to anyone or anything, must look great on u tube, must be supported by all the armchair quarterbacks with no experience (BCCLU, Pivot, various agendized community support groups), must be fully supported by the media, university study groups and professors, ethnic and minority advocacy groups, prisoner's right groups, "experts" in the use of force with no actual experience in using force in life or death situations, bloggers, save the whales supporters, lawyers trolling for income, family members of the person who was "just beginning to turn their life around", and various left-wing politicians in Provincial and Federal government think tanks.

When you folks come up with a 100% fool-proof set of cast-in-stone templates that deals with every possible emergency situation,...please let the Cops know. They would love to be able to deal with the situations as well as you can. In the meantime they will choose to avoid every possible violent or unpleasant contact so they won't offend any sensibilities. If I have offended some here maybe it's because of my prejudices because of my dealings with violent people who wanted to kill and injure me. After all what do I know about facing down someone with a knife who wanted to kill me ?...oh wait,....I do. I survived so obviously I did something wrong. That was what the media and the family members said about us.