Could Alberta Ever Get a Castle Law?

[phil98z24]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Thats exactly what i was saying. They dobt get to be arrested and then chiose to leave

No they don’t, but if I’m understanding your response to the hypothetical, you believe you can just use as much force as necessary to stop them from fleeing - including the hypothetical gun.

What I’m saying is it isn’t that simple, as neither you as a citizen (not authorized by this section), nor the police or peace officers who are authorized by the section, allowed to use as much force as necessary to the point of lethal force on a fleeing felon unless required as per 4(d).

Edit: What gwill is saying is you’re trying to stop them or arrest them, where use of non lethal force isn’t the question. He is adding the gun because that is a totally different use of force, and you’re quoting something else from the CC that doesn’t apply and doesn’t answer answer his question as easily as you think. Hope that made sense.

[revelations]

Folks, with these 'what if' scenarios - you need to be very specific to the type of hypothetical situation if you want solid answers.

For eg.

Woman alone in a house with kids at night; intruder breaks in, intruder is not armed with a gun but gets shot by woman - no issues (case law).

[dirtsniffer]

Man almost killed by people trying to steal his truck.

http://calgaryherald.com/news/crime/...ime=1527120641

[J-hop]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Man almost killed by people trying to steal his truck.

http://calgaryherald.com/news/crime/...ime=1527120641

Not that I think the outcome would be different but being accurate in these cases is important, he was a bystander, wasn’t defending his property

[revelations]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not that I think the outcome would be different but being accurate in these cases is important, he was a bystander, wasn’t defending his property

You can still enact a citizens arrest if the perps are obviously stealing someones shit.

[ExtraSlow]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You can still enact a citizens arrest if the perps are obviously stealing someones shit.

Yeah but the argument behind a castle law and defending your own property being equivalent to self defense doesn't really apply if you are a non-involved third party and you choose to insert yourself into that situation.

[revelations]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yeah but the argument behind a castle law and defending your own property being equivalent to self defense doesn't really apply if you are a non-involved third party and you choose to insert yourself into that situation.

The circumstances can quickly change from defense of property to defense of person. In this case, the victim had rights to defend themself, once these shit heads turned on him - esp if they had weapons on them like crow bars, etc.

[dirtsniffer]

Damn I can't even stir the pot properly

[J-hop]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You can still enact a citizens arrest if the perps are obviously stealing someones shit.

Again though as @ExtraSlow mentioned this is not a case where castle law would come into effect. Citizens arrest sure, I get what you’re saying about that, but that is distinct from castle law

[ExtraSlow]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...pped-1.4716423
Charges dropped against rural Alberta homeowner accused of shooting trespasser.

[Darell_n]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...pped-1.4716423
Charges dropped against rural Alberta homeowner accused of shooting trespasser.

He was charged with careless use of a firearm? Careless as in the thief lived. Good that all the charges were dropped. Hopefully the crowd funding pays for all the legal expenses the guy had.

[gwill]

wow didn't see this coming. I guess it's open season to shoot anyone for any reason....

[firebane]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

wow didn't see this coming. I guess it's open season to shoot anyone for any reason....

I would say this could perhaps set a precedent in that to protect your land or home is OK if justifiable means are there. Just to randomly shoot someone... yeah.

[phil98z24]

They assault charge was dropped because the ballistics report supported his defence that it was a ricochet, not because what he did was legally defensible. I’m surprised at the firearms charges going away; it would be interesting to hear why, especially as a person was struck by a ricocheting round.

I’m not yet going to buy into the idea this will set precedent in terms of property defence rights, as we don’t know the totality of what happened and why the crown dropped it. Hope we hear more on this one!

[HiTempguy1]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He was charged with careless use of a firearm? Careless as in the thief lived. Good that all the charges were dropped. Hopefully the crowd funding pays for all the legal expenses the guy had.

[Darell_n]

So a ricochet is ok? I guess if you put enough rounds near the thief there is bound to be some splash damage. Good thing to keep in mind.

[revelations]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

They assault charge was dropped because the ballistics report supported his defence that it was a ricochet, not because what he did was legally defensible. I’m surprised at the firearms charges going away; it would be interesting to hear why, especially as a person was struck by a ricocheting round.

I’m not yet going to buy into the idea this will set precedent in terms of property defence rights, as we don’t know the totality of what happened and why the crown dropped it. Hope we hear more on this one!

Phil, the horeshit mass media, as usual, is not reporting a couple of key things:..... do you know the answer to these:?

- was the home-owner ever threatened ?
- were the shit heads also armed with guns? (ie was he returning fire)

[gwill]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Phil, the horeshit mass media, as usual, is not reporting a couple of key things:..... do you know the answer to these:?

- was the home-owner ever threatened ?
- were the shit heads also armed with guns? (ie was he returning fire)

that was never stated anywhere. Maurice' s friends were posting a lot of places saying it was a ricochet... If what Phil said is true it would match a lot of what I read from the guys friends and families.

I'm actually surprised the charges were dropped... ricoccovhet or not hes basically admitted to shooting someone by being careless with his guns.

This is a perfect example of why our gun laws need to be clarified and changed.

[phil98z24]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So a ricochet is ok? I guess if you put enough rounds near the thief there is bound to be some splash damage. Good thing to keep in mind.

That is why I’m so confused about the firearms charges. The law is pretty clear that whoever fires the round is responsible for it, accidental or not.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Phil, the horeshit mass media, as usual, is not reporting a couple of key things:..... do you know the answer to these:?

- was the home-owner ever threatened ?
- were the shit heads also armed with guns? (ie was he returning fire)

I wish I knew. I know as much as the media is reporting. Those questions are among many that would give us all some context here.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

that was never stated anywhere. Maurice' s friends were posting a lot of places saying it was a ricochet... If what Phil said is true it would match a lot of what I read from the guys friends and families.

I'm actually surprised the charges were dropped... ricoccovhet or not hes basically admitted to shooting someone by being careless with his guns.

This is a perfect example of why our gun laws need to be clarified and changed.

Yup. This is, on the face of it, confusing as all hell.

[gwill]

if the prosecutors won't prosecute a gun an owner for a ricochet in one town then why would others bother with it anywhere else in alberta?

IMO it sets a very wrong example that it's ok to shoot at someone and it's ok if your careless with your guns.