this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2025
46 points (97.9% liked)

Ontario

3141 readers
2 users here now

A place to discuss all the news and events taking place in the province of Ontario, Canada.

Rules

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 23 points 6 days ago (21 children)

They ALWAYS get charged. They almost never get convicted. You have the right to self defense.

[–] timberwolf1021@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

And apparently you also have the right to get harassed and dragged through the mud in a long and unfair criminal case, even if you get off in the end.

[–] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago

The trial is the punishment.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You have the right to self defense.

And you can use reasonable force to defend yourself. It's not a license to beat a guy who's not a physical threat. People get psycho when they think their violence is justified.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

The guy doing the crime got lesser charges than the guy defending his house. 🤡

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca -2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

You mean a property crime is considered less serious than potential homicide?? Does the Attorney General know about this?!

People get psycho when they think their violence is justified.

Took that personal-like, did ya?

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org -1 points 4 days ago

Bootlicker vibes are strong here, my goy

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] LuxSpark@lemmy.cafe 11 points 6 days ago (3 children)

If someone intrudes are you just supposed to let them?

[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Well, it is a police matter right?

But the best case scenario is 5 min response, and you’re facing a meth addict with a gun. What the heck are you supposed to do, besides defend yourself and family with whatever is at hand? Lunacy.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

[–] WhiteOakBayou@lemmy.world 12 points 6 days ago

No, it's fine. You can trust the state's monopoly on violence. No way that could ever be used against you.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (4 children)

False dichotomy.

Lets say you hear a noise downstairs. You come down and you find your ex girlfriend in the living room. She says, "I'm just here for my phone." You say, "Get out." She says, "Fuck off, I know it's here." You grab a baseball bat and break her elbow with it. Now you're going to jail because that was not a reasonable use of force to defend yourself or your property; she was not an imminent threat and you could have just pushed her out or called the police.

Whatever the situation was, the intruder was nearly killed. That PROBABLY was not a necessary use of force. It looks iffy enough that of course a court or at least the crown needs to take a look at it.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago (9 children)

The article specifically states that the intruder was charged with possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose. Its likely the victims use of force prevented the weapon being used against the victim.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] LuxSpark@lemmy.cafe 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I get your example, and you should probably resist killing your ex. Any other rando appearing inside your house should be dealt with.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I don't think you completely get it. In the example, the home owner doesn't have to "just let them" roam around their house looking for shit. The home owner can even put hands on the person. But there are limits to what can be done, even to someone who has no business being there. It's your right to protect yourself and (to the degree that you don't put human life in danger) your possessions. It's your right to evict people by force. It's not your right to punish people who invade your home with a beating once they are not presenting danger or to inflict needless injuries with excessive force.

Reading it again, "resist killing your ex -- 'deal with' any other rando," it really sounds like you are advocating to use lethal force. Come out and say it if that's what you mean.

[–] LuxSpark@lemmy.cafe 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I am advocating to do what I need to do to neutralize a home intruder. If they happen to end up dead, I don’t want to be blamed for it. Self defense is not an exact science and I think making homeowner considering the wellbeing of the intruder is ridiculous.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

If they ACCIDENTALLY end up dead because you punched them too hard, that's one thing. If you knowingly use lethal force against someone who isn't an active threat, you deserve what you get.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 1 points 5 days ago

Armed person within your property at night is the definition of active threat.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

In Canada it is illegal to not offer intruders beer in evenings or coffee in the mornings.

[–] Jym66@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Lesson here is don't call anyone, as your families safety is not important.

Also, don't talk to the police under any circumstances, even if you think you are the victim. They are not your friends, and they can and will fuck you over. Call a lawyer and keep your mouth shut.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 0 points 5 days ago

We are going to see a lot more of this going forward.

Self defense laws have been slowly eroded over the years outside of crazy shit in the US like Kyle Rittenhouse drama.

The state doesn't cover if you or your family is murdered, dow with that info what you will.

It is your or your families lives. Nothing big here. You should sort out a reasonable response at 3am

Note how intruder got lesser charges 🤡

load more comments
view more: next ›