Smith & Wesson Forum

Advertise With Us Search
Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > General Topics > The Lounge

Notices

The Lounge A Catch-All Area for NON-GUN topics.
PUT GUN TOPICS in the GUN FORUMS.
Keep it Family Friendly. See The Rules for Banned Topics!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-22-2011, 11:47 AM
bitstream's Avatar
bitstream bitstream is offline
Member
No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself  
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: San Tan Valley, Arizona
Posts: 737
Likes: 109
Liked 143 Times in 58 Posts
Angry No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself

This is what comes of liberalism gone wild. A man is woken up to his house being FIRE BOMBED, he grabs his S/W out of the safe, scares off the bombers, and guess who gets all his guns confiscated and is charged with crimes?

Man faces jail after protecting home from masked attackers | Features | National Post

Do we have some Canadian S/W owners who can give some insight; will the trial set him free? will he get his guns back?
__________________
"... shall not be infringed."
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-22-2011, 11:51 AM
Pondhill Pondhill is offline
Member
No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself  
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Cohasset, Ma
Posts: 197
Likes: 61
Liked 24 Times in 11 Posts
Default

Not good at all. It;s sad really
__________________
Steve
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-22-2011, 11:56 AM
Bullseye 2620's Avatar
Bullseye 2620 Bullseye 2620 is offline
Member
No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself  
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tierra del encantamiento
Posts: 3,479
Likes: 6,321
Liked 6,553 Times in 910 Posts
Default

Very sad, indeed, especially under a Conservative government in Ottawa. Let's hope this man is freed by the Canadian courts and has his guns and license returned post haste.


Bullseye
__________________
Five screws and 3-1/2 inches.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-22-2011, 11:59 AM
Faulkner's Avatar
Faulkner Faulkner is offline
Member
No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself  
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Arkansas Ozarks
Posts: 6,266
Likes: 7,266
Liked 34,025 Times in 3,681 Posts
Default

Bummer . . . but, hey, America will be just like that in 20, 30 years.
__________________
- Change it back -
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-22-2011, 12:29 PM
feralmerril feralmerril is offline
Absent Comrade
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: utah
Posts: 13,059
Likes: 2,547
Liked 7,201 Times in 3,064 Posts
Default

What the ----? Why would the populace put up with that? Dont people vote there? Unbeliveable!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-22-2011, 01:02 PM
Steve in Vermont Steve in Vermont is offline
Member
No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself  
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,969
Likes: 256
Liked 1,383 Times in 522 Posts
Default

This is why I renewed my membership to the NRA. There are people in our government who would adopt similar legislation if they could. While I don't remember the details (perhaps someone recalls better than I) but some liberals in Congress once wanted to pass a law that would require homeowners, who are armed, to retreat from any threat, even to the point of leaving their home. The homeowner could only use deadly force if he/she was literally trapped by the intruder and could no longer retreat. It appears some people are not as interested in us defending ourselves as they are in making sure we do it in a politically correct manner. I'm sure if any of us caught someone firebombing our house we'd show them what "politically correct" means.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-22-2011, 01:15 PM
crease-guard crease-guard is offline
Member
No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

This is exactly why I live in Texas and don't ever plan on moving.

Jay
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-22-2011, 01:54 PM
Qball's Avatar
Qball Qball is offline
Member
No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself  
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 6,902
Liked 4,981 Times in 1,417 Posts
Default

It's just as bad here in Sweden.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-22-2011, 08:04 PM
scooter123 scooter123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Metro Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 6,926
Likes: 179
Liked 4,301 Times in 2,112 Posts
Default

I suspect that there is more of a back story in this case than what is being reported. Quite simply it sounds like an ongoing fued and the area prosecutor has decided to file charges on everyone within reach.

I'll also point out that in most states Castle Doctrine stops at the threshold of your doors, do any shooting from the front porch and charges may result. Not saying that it's right, but it is the way these laws work in most states. Basically, had he just opened a window and fired from that position, he may have avoided any charges. As soon as he stepped outside he went from defending his life to defending his property, which currently is only allowed in Texas.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-22-2011, 08:16 PM
ace22's Avatar
ace22 ace22 is offline
Member
No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself  
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 369
Liked 1,223 Times in 386 Posts
Default

just for the record, even if the castle doctrine is in effent where you live, depending on the situation you can still be charged for protecting your home or family. odds are you have a better chance of beating those charges or having them dropped than a canadian resident but it's not a right or wrong issue. where laws, prosecutors, and lawyers are involved, there are always grey areas.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-22-2011, 08:21 PM
judge judge is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 610
Likes: 194
Liked 128 Times in 66 Posts
Default

Just another reason never to live in Canada. Nice place to visit, however the laws do not favor the citizen. The folks that vote for these politicans, and the laws they produce, leave a lot to be desired. I'll stick to good old Florida where you know the law of self defense applies. Lucky to be here!
__________________
Martin Co,FLA(finally made it)
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-23-2011, 02:20 AM
swDC's Avatar
swDC swDC is offline
Member
No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself  
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 81
Likes: 5
Liked 30 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Wow...what is this world coming to when a man is charged for defending himself from men doing this to his home? While there may be a history of neighbors who dislike one another and it is true that an article alone does not give us the whole backstory on this situation one cannot ignore the visual evidence here. I hope everyone who condemns this man watches his security camera tape! I was shocked... after watching his security video of those guys firebombing his house I truly cannot believe he has to stand trial for this. If I was put in that situation and it was my house... My family and I are inside and masked men are firebombing the house over and over... Well... I guess the most civil way to write how i would react would be this... "I live in Texas."
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-23-2011, 02:47 AM
Hermann's Avatar
Hermann Hermann is offline
Member
No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself  
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: West-Germany, close toRAB
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 2 Posts
Default

This could happen here in Germany, too.
Stupid laws and lawmakers (= politicians) here as well as in Canada, which I consider a nice place to visit for the nature, but besides wouldn't want to live there.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-23-2011, 02:51 AM
wraco wraco is offline
Member
No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself  
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 655
Likes: 293
Liked 190 Times in 77 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullseye 2620 View Post
Very sad, indeed, especially under a Conservative government in Ottawa. Let's hope this man is freed by the Canadian courts and has his guns and license returned post haste.


Bullseye
The Conservative governnment in Ottawa, lead by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, is currently a minority government. Meaning it does not have a majority of seats in the house to reverse all those years of liberalism. Harper's Conservatives are a right wing party, pro-gun, pro-self defence. But first they have to gain around 12 seats in the house. As the polls presently show, this is now possible. The next federal election is just around the corner and Harper is playing it pretty cool as not to scare off the eastern liberals who are ready to vote conservative. Us guys out west here are die hard conservatives but the east has a majority of seats.

This guy that has been charged for defending his home will get off. You have to understand, he's in the liberal east. Out west here it'd be a different story. A year or so back, on Vancouver island, a jewellery store owner shot and killed, with his handgun, a robber and was acclaimed a hero.

Things are changing in Canada and will be baby steps until the Conservatives gain a majority. It's coming and long over do.

Rod
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-23-2011, 09:41 AM
oldman45 oldman45 is offline
Member
No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself  
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 3,973
Likes: 95
Liked 336 Times in 138 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter123 View Post
As soon as he stepped outside he went from defending his life to defending his property, which currently is only allowed in Texas.
You are partially correct. Under many circumstances a person can protect & defend their property in Louisiana as well. We were the first with a Shoot the Burglar Law and then the first with a Shoot the Carjacker law. However shooting someone not on your property is a charge waiting to be filed. Had a man fatally shoot a man running away from a home invasion. The man drove up and saw guys leaving through his open front door. He shot. He was arrested.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-23-2011, 10:20 AM
shooboy's Avatar
shooboy shooboy is offline
US Veteran
No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself No castle doctrine in Canada; S/W owner charged for defending himself  
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 1,646
Likes: 8
Liked 394 Times in 129 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Faulkner View Post
Bummer . . . but, hey, America will be just like that in 20, 30 years.
Uhh...NOT ! It will totally be up to mother China what we do in 20 or 30 years, right after their military crushes us down to the woosified, fat, lazy, quarter-pounder eating liberal controlled cesspool we will become. And we can't stop it because they took away all of our guns first, and then came back and took away all of our knives..... Shoo
__________________
"Get Hammered By a Shooboy!!"
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
bullseye, military, nra


Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is there really no Castle Doctrine in NV? wildenout Concealed Carry & Self Defense 6 06-30-2013 09:25 AM
Castle doctrine & Stand your ground in Texas RedBaronRX7 2nd Amendment Forum 4 07-20-2012 09:52 PM
When No Knock meets Castle Doctrine McBear Concealed Carry & Self Defense 60 06-13-2012 07:13 PM
PA gets expanded Castle Doctrine! HB 40 USAF385 2nd Amendment Forum 8 06-30-2011 06:45 AM
PA Residents!...Castle Doctrine to committee pace40 2nd Amendment Forum 4 11-13-2009 04:23 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:23 PM.


Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)