Could Alberta Ever Get a Castle Law?

[Seth1968]

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

Lol, I have? News to me, Seth!

Don’t worry, if you call 911, despite me having given up, I’ll still come.

Here's the thing Phil. You want to kill all those motherfuckers, but you're powerless to do so

[phil98z24]

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

Now we're getting somewhere.

Bending over just means they'll do it again, and the difference is, the next rape won't include a condom.

Everyone else is wrong, so what would YOU do?

[phil98z24]

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

Here's the thing Phil. You want to kill all those motherfuckers, but you're powerless to do so

I find it both terribly fascinating and horrifying that you think that I or anyone else would have given up "serving and protecting" because I'd rather take some extreme action against people that don't deserve it and the system won't allow it. Come on.

That isn't my mindset, and after this many years, it certainly isn't headed that way. Whether you are speaking in a literal sense or using hyperbole, I think the idea of throwing in the towel because it would be easier to just get rid of people who continue to commit crimes against good people just isn't going to serve anyone.

[killramos]

Well at least I don’t seem like as much of an asshole anymore

[Buster]

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

Well at least I don’t seem like as much of an asshole anymore

It's still early if you want to make a comeback.

[Seth1968]

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

Well at least I don’t seem like as much of an asshole anymore

Fair enough, let me take over from here.

[CUG]

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

I find it both terribly fascinating and horrifying that you think that I or anyone else would have given up "serving and protecting" because I'd rather take some extreme action against people that don't deserve it and the system won't allow it. Come on.

That isn't my mindset, and after this many years, it certainly isn't headed that way. Whether you are speaking in a literal sense or using hyperbole, I think the idea of throwing in the towel because it would be easier to just get rid of people who continue to commit crimes against good people just isn't going to serve anyone.

We're missing the deterrent effect of our legal system. The Bouchie case is interesting in that there is so much outcry regarding his manner of death. He's not around anymore, and that's a deterrent. Another aspect is that the poor job market is turning otherwise lawful citizens into high-need offenders who wouldn't have gone that route if they were gainfully employed.

When do we have the right to protect ourselves and our property, reasonably, and what exactly is the deterrent to the criminal if that's not a going concern? Not advocating either way, just spitballing.

[gretz]

All I know is if someone breaks into my house and walks backwards towards me, there is almost nothing I could legally do to stop them
Not using force on me, how can I use force on them
cant shoot them
Options

[dirtsniffer]

allow them to get between you and a child. shoot them in the back.

[killramos]

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

All I know is if someone breaks into my house and walks backwards towards me, there is almost nothing I could legally do to stop them
Not using force on me, how can I use force on them
cant shoot them
Options

If you aren’t being attacked you can call the police?

Unless this comes back to the I want to defend my stuff?

[revelations]

Where do you guys come up with these wild assumptions?

If someone is uninvited anywhere on your property, you can remove them with equal force. If some clown is walking backwards towards you in your own home after theyve broken in, you can push him away and perform a citizens arrest. If you are confronted with a deadly weapon, you can shoot the idiots.

Why is this rocket science?

[colsankey]

Appropriate force, not equal. If some tries to kill you with a knife, it doesn't have to become a crocodile Dundee knife fight.

[gwill]

I saw an interesting hypothetical. If you come home to thieves loading up their truck with your belongings. You pull your gun out to get them to stop.. while calling rcmp the thieves know you won't shoot them so they go to leave.

What do you do?? They aren't threatening you but they aren't going to stand still and wait for the rcmp.

[colsankey]

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

http://thestarphoenix.com/news/crime...duplex-policex

Size makes no matter. The last thing you will be doing at 3am is trying to measure someone in the house in the dark.

If you as a woman are alone in a dwelling, you have the right, and (most importantly) backing case law, to use deadly force against an intruder. Obviously shooting them in the back isnt what you want though - but basic weapons training is a good thing too.

You'd be allowed to arrest them should you be willing, using reasonable levels of force. Going hands on 2vs 1 isnt a smart call. But if they ignore you do have a firearm, you better have a well reasoned plan B that probably defaults to taking excellent note of their appearance and vehicle to report to the RCMP.
I imagine as a private citizen you would have a very tough time convincing a judge and or jury that firing a firearm was appropriate defense of a your tv, jewelry and personal effects.

[revelations]

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

I saw an interesting hypothetical. If you come home to thieves loading up their truck with your belongings. You pull your gun out to get them to stop.. while calling rcmp the thieves know you won't shoot them so they go to leave.

What do you do?? They aren't threatening you but they aren't going to stand still and wait for the rcmp.

I know some people would stand in front of the vehicle with their loaded weapon trained on the driver, who is also trained with their deadly weapon. Mexican standoff.

[Gestalt]

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

I know some people would stand in front of the vehicle with their loaded weapon trained on the driver, who is also trained with their deadly weapon. Mexican standoff.

Yes. You've arrested them and can use reasonable means to detain. Hopefully they escelate and try and leave bad enough to where its reasonable to save tax payers a lot of trouble and money.

[Gestalt]

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

I saw an interesting hypothetical. If you come home to thieves loading up their truck with your belongings. You pull your gun out to get them to stop.. while calling rcmp the thieves know you won't shoot them so they go to leave.

What do you do?? They aren't threatening you but they aren't going to stand still and wait for the rcmp.

Easy. Canadian common law version of the fleeting felon rule. They don't get to chose to leave

A peace officer who is proceeding lawfully to arrest, with or without warrant,
any person for an offence for which that person may be arrested without war-
rant, ... is justified, if the person to be arrested takes flight to avoid arrest, in
using as much force as is necessary to prevent the escape by flight, unless the
escape can be prevented by reasonable means in a less violent manner.

[gwill]

but your guns in your hands.. how do you propose stopping them when they leave?? You can't shoot them or you end up in jail.

[phil98z24]

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

Easy. Canadian common law version of the fleeting felon rule. They don't get to chose to leave

A peace officer who is proceeding lawfully to arrest, with or without warrant,
any person for an offence for which that person may be arrested without war-
rant, ... is justified, if the person to be arrested takes flight to avoid arrest, in
using as much force as is necessary to prevent the escape by flight, unless the
escape can be prevented by reasonable means in a less violent manner.

A) you don’t know what common law is;

B) you should read or quote the entire section. You’re skipping 4(d), which justifies use of deadly force.

Just sayin.

[Gestalt]

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

A) you don’t know what common law is;

B) you should read or quote the entire section. You’re skipping 4(d), which justifies use of deadly force.

Just sayin.

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