That's how our laws work to, just you'd need a license to have that gun. You can beat someone's ass in self defense but if you lay the boots in after they're out cold that's its own crime.

Guarantee that's the situation here. The fact that the RCMP are withholding details indicates they have a serious case against the guy.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

just you’d need a license to have that gun

There is no legal way to have a gun and ammunition that accessible in Canada. In the time it would take you to retrieve both and then load a legally stored gun your home invader could have had a coffee.

Also keeping some other weapon nearby, like a bat by the door, constitutes some kind of premeditation to using it as a weapon.

Self defence laws in Canada are extremely restrictive given the increase in car jacking and home invasions to steal cars.

[–] Canconda@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

There is no legal way to have a gun and ammunition that accessible in Canada.

Have you met an RPAL carrier? "Better tried by 12 than carried by 6" is kind of their mantra. I can think of 3 off the top of my head that I know 100% have loaded guns stashed in their residence (no kids).

Also keeping some other weapon nearby, like a bat by the door, constitutes some kind of premeditation to using it as a weapon.

My baseball bat is always in the hallway with my baseball and glove. How you articulate your actions matters. If you incriminate yourself by saying you carry a tool for self defense that's on you. That's why lawyers constantly tell you to never talk to the police. What you say can and will be used against you. They are not your friend just because you perceive yourself to be the victim.

Self defence laws in Canada are extremely restrictive given the increase in car jacking and home invasions to steal cars.

Self =! cars and property. Your right to defend yourself or others doesn't give you the right to assault someone taking your ps5. Can you see how extending self defense rights to property would be a very slippery slope?

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Have you met an RPAL carrier? “Better tried by 12 than carried by 6” is kind of their mantra. I can think of 3 off the top of my head that I know 100% have loaded guns stashed in their residence (no kids).

I have, they keep their firearm and ammo locked up, they never transport their firearm anywhere but to and from the range and they never load or discharge it anywhere but at the range.

Having to make the decision between jail time or death is a failure on the part of Canada. The police can kill you because they felt "their life or the lives of other officers were in danger," a person in their home should be held to the same standard.

Can you see how extending self defense rights to property would be a very slippery slope?

For sure but I was talking about the increase in criminals attacking people directly, in their vehicle or home, in order to get that vehicle. You have no option to backoff when you are part one of their two part plan.

If someone breaks into your house and starts cramming your home theater into a sack then no, you should not be free to kill them but you should be able to threaten or use violence to remove them from your home. The police will not come in time, if at all. Telling people that they have to just sit there and watch the thousands of hours they burn at work get taken from them without recourse is insane.

[–] Canconda@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 weeks ago

have, they keep their firearm and ammo locked up, they never transport their firearm anywhere but to and from the range and they never load or discharge it anywhere but at the range.

They don't trust you.