Glanbrook homeowner charged with second degree murder!
- Thread starter Skully
- Start date
Motorcycle Mike
Well-known member
Do you know the circumstances Caboose?
How do you know he wasn't investigating a noise he heard outside? Maybe he has had a problem with coyotes raiding his chicken coop, heard a noise, and went outside to investigate the noise along with his shotgun -- you know, to protect himself from the coyote. Then he gets outside, sees someone breaking into his truck, thief attacks, bam.
Now... that likely is not what happened -- I have no idea what happened, but I suspect you don't either.
How do you know he wasn't investigating a noise he heard outside? Maybe he has had a problem with coyotes raiding his chicken coop, heard a noise, and went outside to investigate the noise along with his shotgun -- you know, to protect himself from the coyote. Then he gets outside, sees someone breaking into his truck, thief attacks, bam.
Now... that likely is not what happened -- I have no idea what happened, but I suspect you don't either.
What did I write? Something about justifiable self defence? Would that not apply if the "thief attacks" as you describe?
Come on.
Motorcycle Mike
Well-known member
You're the one that said 'stay inside'... but you don't know what lead him outside.
Perhaps if he knew 100% that his truck was being stolen, he would have been better off to call the cops... but like I said, you don't know what lead him outside... or what lead him outside with a gun, do you?
You are suggesting he created a confrontation... but perhaps he wasn't.
Come on.
Actually you probably can quite legally use the threat of firearms to defend both yourself and your property it would be up to you to prove if that threat was legitimate (in the case of a protection of self a previous pattern of violence would likely meet that burden)like you said, however catching someone in the act of breaking into your truck would likely met that requirement. If required however its the leap to actually shooting them. All this goes with the caveat of whats reasonable and whats legal are different things.
Im basing this of the actual text of the defence of property law.
Defence of personal property
38. (1) Every one who is in peaceable possession of personal property, and every one lawfully assisting him, is justified
(a) in preventing a trespasser from taking it, or(b) in taking it from a trespasser who has taken it,
if he does not strike or cause bodily harm to the trespasser.
Nothing in a law would preclude the use of a weapon for this purpose as long as injury does not come to the perp. Now with firearms and other "weapons" there are other factors to consider such as value of the property , Safe and legal operation of a firearm etc. Obviously its not reasonable for you to bring out you boom stick if someone is taking your news paper.
Would I use a firearm in this case possibly not if you do you escalated the point were if you threaten and don't shoot it will be an ineffective threat and secondly if they try and assault you as stated in the next section of the defence your options are shoot them or re-treat if your re-treat fails they could then have a Gun (possibly loaded) and a truck (the hillbilly deuce). I would likely have the Firearm on hot standby with my wife and confront at a distance with a verbal warning of a firearm that way i could retreat into the house and if required use the firearm defensively this gives you allot more options and chances not to have to shoot someone. But of course im not in that situation currently so my thinking isn't impaired by the Various factors that it would be in that situation.
Assault by trespasser
(2) Where a person who is in peaceable possession of personal property lays hands on it, a trespasser who persists in attempting to keep it or take it from him or from any one lawfully assisting him shall be deemed to commit an assault without justification or provocation.
Its not analogous and would likely not meet the criterial for a reasonable use of force or the likely the factors that are set out in the defence of property act.
I know he's banned i'm hoping its a Temp caboose is a good guy.
Last edited:
This is what happens when gender neutral, kool-aid drinking common sense lacking, mentally and physically castrated individuals who have been conditioned, form an opinion.
They elect to call MEN "morans" for being MEN!!!
Yep its a goddamn sad state of affairs when you're called a moron and a retard for wanting to protect what's yours. This is the most fundamental characteristic of being a man.
The bleeding hearts will, by default, jump to the conclusion that this guy went out there with a gun to 'threaten and intimidate' the criminal and play vigilante. Instead, its much more likely that this man took a gun out there to protect himself in case of attack during a crime in progress.
God forbid you confronted someone stealing your **** and then put up a defense when they attack you...
yodude
Banned
5 pages of blah blah so far,
one quick look and here's the deal
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamil...-defence-if-the-force-is-reasonable-1.3437343
crystal ball arguments in a forum mean nothing,
not much to go by here other than evidence gathered on the scene and the shooters story which will only play out in any meaningful way, in court, when the time comes, and certainly not here,
stuff here is mostly a joke, for jokers
no rules guaranties mostly an anything by anyone goes bs session, at best
one quick look and here's the deal
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamil...-defence-if-the-force-is-reasonable-1.3437343
crystal ball arguments in a forum mean nothing,
not much to go by here other than evidence gathered on the scene and the shooters story which will only play out in any meaningful way, in court, when the time comes, and certainly not here,
stuff here is mostly a joke, for jokers
no rules guaranties mostly an anything by anyone goes bs session, at best
Last edited:
Oh yeah man because insurance generally covers the full replacement cost of a stolen vehicle, and they pay in a timely manner.
Hide in your closets, folks.
blah blah professor-at-large uses romper room tactics to diss romper room content blah
Free Tim!
The conversation was so pointless he had to make a comment.
He'd probably be in trouble if it was a coyote he shot as well... obviously not as much. Without checking bylaws... I'm guessing it would be illegal to dispatch predators attacking kept animals on his particular property.
