Householder arrested after suspected burglars shot

[MapleDog]

Petros, we've been around this block before. It seems you do not understand the basics of individual rights.

No charges should be laid unless there is clear evidence a crime has been committed

Self-defense is NOT a crime, so.....unless there is some evidence that the homeowner had stepped way out of line, no charges should be laid.

Charges could always be laid after an investigation.....but not as an automatic thing.

Too bad the quebec "in"justice system is not like that,no matter what,if you shoot an intruder "in your house" you are automatically accused of atempted murder.

 

[PoliticalNick]

Too bad the quebec "in"justice system is not like that,no matter what,if you shoot an intruder "in your house" you are automatically accused of atempted murder.

If I shoot someone inside my house I am not worried about any possible charges. I will get off on self-defense in front of any jury. The key is to empty the clip to ensure he can't testify any different.

 

[L Gilbert]

No problem understanding that.

What I have a problem with is that it flies fully in the face of the traditions of English Common Law.

Your home is your castle. Those who violate that sanctity should do so at their own risk. THAT is English common law, going back hundreds of years.

I agree. But do we know all the particulars of the issue? I doubt it. Either way, I think the charges against the property owner would likely be dropped.

BTW, in Canada, you are NOT allowed to use lethal force to defend property. If you are in danger of death or grievous bodily harm, lethal force is acceptable, including the use of firearms.

I know.

If I shoot someone inside my house I am not worried about any possible charges. I will get off on self-defense in front of any jury. The key is to empty the clip to ensure he can't testify any different.

I wouldn't bet my freedom or life on that.

 

[PoliticalNick]

I wouldn't bet my freedom or life on that.

Oh go on.....give it a try so we can see how it works. ;-)

 

[Niflmir]

Self-defense is NOT a crime, so.....unless there is some evidence that the homeowner had stepped way out of line, no charges should be laid.

You've kind of missed the point.

The question is not, "Is self-defense a crime?" Eveyone agrees, no.

The question is, "Is self-defense a defense leading to acquittal or a defense leading to a non-public judgement by the police as opposed to a judge and jury?" The answer to the first question doesn't automatically answer the second.

 

[L Gilbert]

Oh go on.....give it a try so we can see how it works. ;-)

lol Your suggestion, so you should get first swing at the pinata.

 

[shadowshiv]

If I shoot someone inside my house I am not worried about any possible charges. I will get off on self-defense in front of any jury. The key is to empty the clip to ensure he can't testify any different.

They might get a tad suspicious if the guy has a whole clip's worth of bullets in him.

 

[TenPenny]

If I shoot someone inside my house I am not worried about any possible charges. I will get off on self-defense in front of any jury. The key is to empty the clip to ensure he can't testify any different.

Even if it's your wife, friend, drinking buddy, son, or daughter that you shoot?

 

[MapleDog]

Even if it's your wife, friend, drinking buddy, son, or daughter that you shoot?

You know he means the intruder.

 

[earth_as_one]

The OP references an incident where a person apparently used a firearm to defend their property, not defend themselves (or someone's life). Defending property from burglars is not "self" defense.

Anytime someone shoots someone with a firearm, they should be detained for questioning. They should be released without charges if the evidence supports self defense or charged with an offense if the evidence is inconclusive or disproves self defense. Let the court decide if the shooting was legal self defense. The accused is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

 

[taxslave]

Are you saying that if the police were contracted by victims instead of by society, this would never happen? It seems to me it would just happen more often, as the courts would also be private, and the "victims" could just contract for "Wanted: dead." Non-socialist justice is better known as vigilantism.

It seems that this is how self-defense works in England. It is a defense against conviction, not a defense against going to court. This sort of conservative attitude ensures that the whole Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman controversy would not happen as the evidence is to be outlined in public in court.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-defence_in_English_law

No. I'm saying that if the police and the courts did their job properly we wouldn't have this problem in the first place.Our revolving door just us system is run by do-gooders that are more concerned about criminal's rights than law abiding taxpayers.

 

[MapleDog]

No. I'm saying that if the police and the courts did their job properly we wouldn't have this problem in the first place.Our revolving door just us system is run by do-gooders that are more concerned about criminal's rights than law abiding taxpayers.

Damn right,if it had not been for some of these morons,little Livernoche would still be alive today.

 

[taxslave]

The OP references an incident where a person apparently used a firearm to defend their property, not defend themselves (or someone's life). Defending property from burglars is not "self" defense.

Anytime someone shoots someone with a firearm, they should be detained for questioning. They should be released without charges if the evidence supports self defense or charged with an offense if the evidence is inconclusive or disproves self defense. Let the court decide if the shooting was legal self defense. The accused is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

But who should pay? The crown has an endless supply of cash to harass you with but you will wind up hocking your house to defend yourself. And if you can afford to get found innocent there is no way to recoup your costs.