Canadian Castle Laws

This is indeed a touchy subject.
Personally, I believe that castle laws should be reconsidered by our law makers...but there are dangers to consider.
True, there are more and more reports about home invasions where the residents were tied up, beaten, and in a few cases killed.
Having good castle laws in place I am sure would deter a great number of possible offenders, however, you also have to consider the down sides.
Could these same laws also condemn lesser criminals to death?
I know, many will consider that a criminal is a criminal, but think for a moment.
If a group of misguided, but otherwise normal teenagers were to break into a home, believing it to be empty, for the sole purpose of a quick score and thrill be deserving of being shot on site by the owner who had simply turned out all the lights and gone to bed?
On the other side of the coin, we have a recent case in Ontario where a man was charged with all sorts of offences for protecting himself from what was proven to be a real threat to his life. Of course, he was aquited, but not after having spent what I am sure was a small fortune to defend himself in court.
Given that there were multiple assailants, verbally threatening his life while fire bombing his home, and all caught on tape, these charges should never have been filed.
There are valid arguments on both sides of this issue, and as I mentioned, I think this issue needs to be revisited by our lawmakers, but we have to be careful about how these laws would be applied.
Yes, criminals need to be punished, but the punishment needs to fit the crime as well.

I feel the same way. I think.

I believe I mentioned in my opinion piece somewhere about the ability to make the decision that you could leave the situation to allow the criminal an exit. Or something to that effect. By that I meant that if it was reasonable to do so, give the criminal the chance and out to leave the situation.

I would think that most people who rob a house aren't looking for a fight. This is also why many robbers case the house so the owners aren't home. They just want the 'stuff'.

What I would like to see is the ability for the victim in this case to be able to make the decision or be able to make the decision to defend themselves if they feel the criminal has, is showing, or attempting violence and personal harm.

For for an example, I would like to be able to leave a coach gun or pump action shotgun near my bed at night. If someone breaks into my house, and they hear me get up, and they dont' want trouble, they will leave. If they would like to continue with whatever their intent is, I'm hoping just the sound of a shotgun racking will make them reconsider and leave. Third, if they see me with the shotgun and I tell them to get out, they leave, no harm, no foul. If it escalates and they have a gun, weapon or try to attack me, then I shoot.

I'd like the above scenario to play out without me second guessing myself and wondering how many tens of thousands this is going to cost me in the court system, even if I'm not jailed. Plus my reputation and the fact my job requires me to have a clean criminal record.

I'd like to think that any honest, reasonable person would give a criminal an opportunity to exit before shooting, if at all possible, and only shoot if necessary. I'd like to be given that chance to be able to protect myself, that's all.

I read you article at: http://rednecksurvivalist.com/index.php/entry/canadian-castle-laws-and-concealed-carry-this-got-me-thinking

You make some very valid points especially concerning what ifs and possible outcomes. Also there does seem to be a bias towards the rights of the criminal vs. the rights of the law abiding citizen.

Firstly confrontation should always be avoided. In a fight there is a winner and a looser. Therefore given a 50% chance of coming out on the down side are odds that many are not unwilling to take.

However in a similar situation that you describe where there are intruders bent on ill intent the occupants have little choice. They are home so they have nowhere to run to. Even if they could run they would possibly be pursued by younger perhaps more physically fit intruders and definitely not successful in making an escape. If they were lucky enough, and had time, to get a call out to police there is no quick resolution to the situation. The police are a reactive force. It will certainly take a number of minutes for them to reach the scene. Possibly many minutes depending on location. By which time the situation will have probably played itself out and in all probability not to your favor.
In the case of a home invasion I feel there is very little opportunity to avoid confrontation. With elderly people or perhaps female occupant the odds are stacked greatly in favor of the criminal perpetrators. In many cases this being the reason that a location is chosen.

I know I have the right to protect my family, my wife, myself and my possessions inside my home from criminal perpetrators. That is the current law. It is law that anytime an assault takes place or injury is incurred charges are laid by the police against those causing the injury no matter what the circumstances. Also when the police are involved if any other acts that appear to be contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada are committed charges are laid. This is as it should be. Deal with the situation and then let the courts sort out the details. This is the part of our system of checks and balances that balances the rights of the criminal against the rights of the law abiding citizen.

Knowing that to be the case I would not hesitate for a nanosecond to take the action that I thought to be necessary at the time. While knowing that it might possibly lead to a long drawn out legal battle that would undoubted be life changing it would be more than balanced by the knowledge that my family had avoided any catastrophic or devastating events that might have occurred had I failed to act.

Everyone would react in their own way to such a nightmarish situation, that is mine. Would I personally reach for a firearm? No. I know this as a fact as four years ago I was in that situation. Two men tried to break into our house at 3:00 am knowing that my family was all at home. They were considerably younger than me but age was overcome by determination. A little like the Glock advert sans gun and red hair. They were apprehended, charged and convicted, the police only conducting the two latter events.

The lack of self defense rights in Canada is nothing new and isnt likely to change. l dont know that castle law is the right route to take but something definitely needs to be done. The concept of reasonable force is too open to interpretation and is too often used in the defense of the criminal as you stated above. What exactly is reasonable force ? How is that determined during an event that happens so quickly.

As an example of this unfairness - and no disrespect to LEO as they are usually just doing their jobs as mandated - the fault is in the legal system and its regulations.

A family friend walked out of a bar and was confronted by an attempted robber with a knife. The man demanded his money and he refused and tried just walking away, the criminal stabbed him in the back and as he turned around buried the knife in his chest. Our friend hit him ONCE in the face and knocked him down, as he fell he hit his head on the bumper of a parked car and died on the spot. He then called 911 and waited for police and ambulance, the ambulance arrived before the police by the way. He stood there in the parking lot with a knife in his chest and a stab wound in his back waiting for the authorities. For this incident he was sentenced to 7 years in kingston for manslaughter. Stabbed twice - responded with a single punch - 7 years in prison.

What is reasonable force ? Apparently anything which doesnt hurt the offender - l wonder if its still excessive force if you scare him or hurt his feelings while he is commiting crime ? lts ok for them to terrorize your family or you, threaten your life and even cause you injury but you have to fear legal repurcussion more than the criminals themselves - thats a sad state of affairs indeed.

I read you article at: http://rednecksurvivalist.com/index.php/entry/canadian-castle-laws-and-concealed-carry-this-got-me-thinking

You make some very valid points especially concerning what ifs and possible outcomes. Also there does seem to be a bias towards the rights of the criminal vs. the rights of the law abiding citizen.

Firstly confrontation should always be avoided. In a fight there is a winner and a looser. Therefore given a 50% chance of coming out on the down side are odds that many are not unwilling to take.

I agree 100%. If the confrontation can be avoided it should be avoided. That being said, I still believe that you have a short time to make a decision and that the offender should have less rights to avoid physical injury than the person he is trying to hurt.

I'm glad your situation went well without the use of firearms or any unwanted violence. That is the most ideal situation.

A family friend walked out of a bar and was confronted by an attempted robber with a knife. The man demanded his money and he refused and tried just walking away, the criminal stabbed him in the back and as he turned around buried the knife in his chest. Our friend hit him ONCE in the face and knocked him down, as he fell he hit his head on the bumper of a parked car and died on the spot. He then called 911 and waited for police and ambulance, the ambulance arrived before the police by the way. He stood there in the parking lot with a knife in his chest and a stab wound in his back waiting for the authorities. For this incident he was sentenced to 7 years in kingston for manslaughter. Stabbed twice - responded with a single punch - 7 years in prison.

What is reasonable force ? Apparently anything which doesnt hurt the offender - l wonder if its still excessive force if you scare him or hurt his feelings while he is commiting crime ? lts ok for them to terrorize your family or you, threaten your life and even cause you injury but you have to fear legal repurcussion more than the criminals themselves - thats a sad state of affairs indeed.

It's scenarios like this that make it unfair for the law abiding Canadian, and it's stories like this that make people hesitate when they should act to protect their families and themselves from people who chose to do them physical harm. Our politicians, court systems and law makers should be ashamed at this. The judge that scentanced your friend to jail deserves a 20 year sentence of his own, IMHO.

It would be advisable to research what to do and have plans in place to deal with the aftermath of any confrontation. There are two Masad Ayoob videos describing the language to use when reporting any type of self defense (Judicious Use of Force and Aftermath Shooting). He mentions having a close friend, and a lawyers number to call immediately after any incident, basically, having a plan and process in place that will allow a you to do and say the right things as you will probably be in shock after any incident.
Of course it is American but I'm sure that using the proper words to describe your actions and proving intent on the part of the invader should still work on the north side of the border. Legal advise is probably worth the money before you have to decide on an action in the middle of the night.

No mater the laws, I suppose it's better to be on the green side of the grass.

Interestingly enough this topic may becoming much more relevant. On my way home from work tonight the newscast was talking about the huge cuts in all branches of law enforcement. That being the case ,that leaves the everyday Joe to makeup the shortfall and leaves him to his own defence. Less police presence = more bad guy opportunities. Will definately dictate a change to current laws

BEST ADVICE..... IF you have to defend yourself with an amount of force that results in harm or death to your antagonist the ONLY THING TO DO is call your lawyer. The thing to say is NOTHING!!!!! It is not up to you to convince the police of your innocence. The police will arrest you and gather "evidence". The Crown will review the evidence and if they believe they have a "reasonable chance of conviction" they will charge you. THEN it is up to you and your lawyer to prove your innocence ..... or at least a resonable doubt ....to a court of law.

JAB

JAB: You're probably right. With the laws as they are, sad as it may be, it would be best to make it your first call. It is very sad to realize, if your family is safe...you're not going to be there for a while.

Since this is a preparedness website, I would suggest to make your home as uninviting as possible. Make your castle secure, and practice PERSEC. Situational awareness training will teach you that the sooner you recognize a threat, the less chance you have of escalation to violence. If you look and act like a 'mark', you will have to test all your theories and roll the dice with the courts...In this day and age, I don't want to be in prison.

Interestingly enough this topic may becoming much more relevant. On my way home from work tonight the newscast was talking about the huge cuts in all branches of law enforcement. That being the case ,that leaves the everyday Joe to makeup the shortfall and leaves him to his own defence. Less police presence = more bad guy opportunities. Will definately dictate a change to current laws

I doubt the laws will change. All that will happen is the courts will be more active and make more money - the government isn't there for us it seems, it's there as a money making machine.

BEST ADVICE..... IF you have to defend yourself with an amount of force that results in harm or death to your antagonist the ONLY THING TO DO is call your lawyer. The thing to say is NOTHING!!!!! It is not up to you to convince the police of your innocence. The police will arrest you and gather "evidence". The Crown will review the evidence and if they believe they have a "reasonable chance of conviction" they will charge you. THEN it is up to you and your lawyer to prove your innocence ..... or at least a resonable doubt ....to a court of law.

I guess 'innocent until proven guilty' only applies to career criminals, huh?

Since this is a preparedness website, I would suggest to make your home as uninviting as possible. Make your castle secure, and practice PERSEC. Situational awareness training will teach you that the sooner you recognize a threat, the less chance you have of escalation to violence. If you look and act like a 'mark', you will have to test all your theories and roll the dice with the courts...In this day and age, I don't want to be in prison.

Excellent suggestion. So. How DO we make our homes less inviting to the would be theif, rapist, murderer?

"How do we make our homes less inviting".... Usually the simple way is the best way.
1: Keep areas around doors and windows in clear view. Do not provide cover with landscape and fences.
2: Use exterior lighting to 'open up' areas that would otherwise be in darkness.
3: Keep windows and doors closed and locked. If you DO have a window or patio door open provide a means to limit the amount it can be further opened.
4: Have blinds or shades that block the view into your home. Even if it is enough to provide a "shadow view" it is sufficient.
5: If you have ladders outside your home have them secured with a lock and chain. Do not provide anyone with the tools needed to gain entry.
6: Place alarm/security company signs in easily seen areas. Even if you don't have a system... they will be less inclined to test it. Get cheap door alarms for Hotel use.
7: Steel entrance doors with steel frames.
8: Use LONG lag screws to anchor door frames to the house frame. Use long screws in the door hinges for the same reason.
9: If your doors have windows reinforce them with film or metal. Have a peep hole. USE IT !!!
10: Have a means to hand to defend yourself in the instance your home is threatened. Bear spray, baseball bat....
11: Place a lock on your bedroom door.... use it. If someone enters your home it will give you valuable seconds to react. It will be a surprise to the perp to find a LOCKED interior door.

Just a few thoughts

JAB

Some great suggestions JAB.
Just another thought about the front door...
Be sure to use really long screws to attach the lock catch to the door frame.
The need to be long enough to go through the door frame and well into the 2X framing of the house itself.
Most doors when kicked open will fail there.
Also, installing a second dead bolt higher up, say at the 5 foot level will help a lot too...most perps just can't get enough force that high up to break in.

Could these same laws also condemn lesser criminals to death?
I know, many will consider that a criminal is a criminal, but think for a moment.
If a group of misguided, but otherwise normal teenagers were to break into a home, believing it to be empty, for the sole purpose of a quick score and thrill be deserving of being shot on site by the owner who had simply turned out all the lights and gone to bed?

So a group of people are breaking into my house in the middle of the night while my wife and kids are sleeping, but its only for a quick score and a thrill. They want to steal my property that i have worked for to feel like they are badasses. Its not a big deal right?

Maybe its pussified people like you that give these "normal teenagers" the impression that its just not that bad if they only want to steal things...this time, not rape, hurt or murder....this time. What about the next time?

To me, its a big deal. You enter my house without permission in the middle of the night, if i catch you, you're gonna be in trouble.

"Make your home less inviting"? Really? Thats your answer? Or run away?

Why not just put all your money and valuables out in the front yard so that the "Normal Teenagers", dont have to risk breaking your window and cutting themselves to get your stuff or having to hurt you because you "the owner who had simply turned out all the lights and gone to bed?".

I guess to each his own, you can hide under your bed and and call 911, or run out your back door into the dark in yor pj's....sure hope for your sake this time its only "Normal teenagers".

Personally I could not live with myself if anyone in my family was hurt, raped, killed because I failed to act.