I have been assaulted and defended myself multiple times in Canada. It's not how you're describing it where you have some duty of care for the person you're actively defending yourself from. Your right to defend yourself logically does not include the right to counter-assault or murder others. Guarantee this guy could have stopped but didn't. That's 99% of the time what constitutes unreasonable force.

Plenty of people hospitalize their assailants and don't get charged. This story is rage-bait.

[–] lost_faith@lemmy.ca 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yes, hindsight is 20/20. When you are calm you can realize you went too far. In the moment, you are more concerned with survival, the Adrenalin is flowing and if there is no way to escape ie; physically running is not an option, the fight gets overwhelming. Like I said, break into my house and I will defend myself, if it costs you the use of limbs, brain function, or life, that is a choice YOU made breaking into the house. When I was younger I tried the CORRECT thing, assault, loss of more than I could afford to lose as I liked eating at least enough to live, the cops were totally useless and did nothing, several times. Now I am at the stage of, get the thief to leave but there are very useful objects all over the house, can you say trauma????, and I will NOT be a fucking victim again.

[–] Canconda@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

The courts very much factor in if someone is acting in the moment or if they cognitively chose to do something. That's like a huge thing. End of the day if someone can't stop themselves from ground and pounding an unconscious person to death, than they are also a problem. The inability to control yourself or a violent situation are risk factors for anyone who doesn't train martial arts.

[–] lost_faith@lemmy.ca -5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

We will agree to disagree

[–] Canconda@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 weeks ago

I mean sounds to me like you're conflating your experience with cops to how judges interpret the law; which is simply not true.

It's not a matter of clashing opinions.