Author Topic: Canadian Gun registry hits rough waters (Read 1823 times)

lazs2 · « **Reply #75 on:** December 13, 2002, 12:33:51 PM »

worse... Lott was considered to be a liberal professor before his paper was published.. He has fallen from favor with liberals because he dared to do an honest study.
lazs

Gman · « **Reply #76 on:** December 13, 2002, 12:59:02 PM »

Quote

The "safest" thing to do if someone enters your home,is NOT to confront the intruder...Call police if you can..collect family,lock/barracade room door and bail out the window if possible...DO NOT go looking!!!

This is actually true, even in CCW courses in the USA, you always HAVE to (legally) retreat if the option presents itself.

I will say I enjoy also having the option to defend myself, as Canadian storage laws aren't applicaple if you are at home (they need not be locked up if you are not away from firearms). I only have 2 entrances to my house which are both on the ground floor, and jumping 40 feet from my window at my size is probably going to be fatal, not to mention I'd never talk the wife into that.

If I ever get home invaded (someone 6 houses down got hit a couple years ago, stupid Asian kids thought they could find a drug grow there, when it was actually the house behind them), I'll just lock the bedroom door and call the cops. However, should someone try to force that door, I will unload on them if they break through. I don't even think or worry about this, as the odds are very slim here in Canada, but the 15000 or so people who get hurt in robberies/invasions probably wished they had some way to stop the person attacking them, and that's why I do.

PS. Don't start crying about how some kid can get at a loaded and hurt themselves, I keep mine in the same finger key coded quick open/action safe that all the cops here in town do, and I'm the only one who can get into it without a cutting torch.

Having moved out of downtown, I've yet to be accosted by anyone on the street, where it was a weekly occurance before.

Dune · « **Reply #77 on:** December 13, 2002, 01:14:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gman
This is actually true, even in CCW courses in the USA, you always HAVE to (legally) retreat if the option presents itself.

Actually, this is not true. In several states there is NO legal duty that you even make an attempt to retreat.

For instance, in Arizona, here are the two statutes dealing with Justification of Self Defense of Yourself or a Third Person: 13-404, 13-405 and 13-406:

Quote

13-404. Justification; self-defense

A. Except as provided in subsection B of this section, a person is justified in threatening or using physical force against another when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful physical force.

B. The threat or use of physical force against another is not justified:

1. In response to verbal provocation alone; or

2. To resist an arrest that the person knows or should know is being made by a peace officer or by a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction, whether the arrest is lawful or unlawful, unless the physical force used by the peace officer exceeds that allowed by law; or

3. If the person provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful physical force, unless:

(a) The person withdraws from the encounter or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely withdraw from the encounter; and

(b) The other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful physical force against the person.

13-405. Justification; use of deadly physical force

A person is justified in threatening or using deadly physical force against another:

1. If such person would be justified in threatening or using physical force against the other under section 13-404, and

2. When and to the degree a reasonable person would believe that deadly physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly physical force.

13-406. Justification; defense of a third person

A person is justified in threatening or using physical force or deadly physical force against another to protect a third person if:

1. Under the circumstances as a reasonable person would believe them to be, such person would be justified under section 13-404 or 13-405 in threatening or using physical force or deadly physical force to protect himself against the unlawful physical force or deadly physical force a reasonable person would believe is threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and

2. A reasonable person would believe that such person's intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.

and here is the important part, 13-411(B)

Quote

13-411. Justification; use of force in crime prevention

A. A person is justified in threatening or using both physical force and deadly physical force against another if and to the extent the person reasonably believes that physical force or deadly physical force is immediately necessary to prevent the other's commission of arson of an occupied structure under section 13-1704, burglary in the second or first degree under section 13-1507 or 13-1508, kidnapping under section 13-1304, manslaughter under section 13-1103, second or first degree murder under section 13-1104 or 13-1105, sexual conduct with a minor under section 13-1405, sexual assault under section 13-1406, child molestation under section 13-1410, armed robbery under section 13-1904, or aggravated assault under section 13-1204, subsection A, paragraphs 1 and 2. (FYI, this is serious physical injury and use of a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument)

B. There is no duty to retreat before threatening or using deadly physical force justified by subsection A of this section.

C. A person is presumed to be acting reasonably for the purposes of this section if he is acting to prevent the commission of any of the offenses listed in subsection A of this section.

PS - For those who don't know, I am a prosecutor in AZ.

Gman · « **Reply #78 on:** December 13, 2002, 01:33:58 PM »

Well, the state I took CCW in (Idaho, and one in Neveda, can't remember which) it is the law that you retreat if YOU are the one being threatened. If another party is involved and you are coming to aid, you do not. At least, that is how the instructor expalined it, and here in Canada, bet every dollar you have that retreat is your ONLY option if you want to avoid any legal BS.

Of course it stands to figure that AZ has laws that make sense in this regard, ~~on being a prosecutor, god's work IMO, the only really decent lawyers around.~~

Dune · « **Reply #79 on:** December 13, 2002, 01:36:11 PM »

Oh, I agree, some states do have a "reasonable attempt to retreat" policy. Just not all.

ra · « **Reply #80 on:** December 13, 2002, 01:50:05 PM »

Dune,

How does one find out which states have ""reasonable attempt to retreat" policies?

ra

Thrawn · « **Reply #81 on:** December 13, 2002, 01:50:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
thrawn... crack? LOL... Target shooting with a handgun likened to crack addiction?

Yes, you see, it's called an analogy. If shooting hand gun is illegal and smoking crack is illegal, then it doesn't matter if you had fun doing it, they are both sill illegal.

Toad · « **Reply #82 on:** December 13, 2002, 02:02:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by beet1e
Mr. Toad! I'm trying to get hold of Bowling for Columbine. Is it out on DVD yet?

I saw it in a theater, so I don't think it's in DVD/VHS yet. You could search the Blockbuster website. They'd have news of that first, I think.

It really wasn't that good a documentary no matter which side of the issue you favor.

It seemed like Moore filming his own unanswered questions begin asked to others that have no answers.

My .02

Gman · « **Reply #83 on:** December 13, 2002, 02:05:54 PM »

http://www.packing.org for state to state CCW regs etc, for the person who asked which states require retreat, etc.

Vermillion · « **Reply #84 on:** December 13, 2002, 02:14:30 PM »

In my state, WV, justification for use of lethal force comes down to "fear of serious bodily injury". At least thats what I was taught by a police chief who taught the CCW class.

How many of you have been in situations where you seriously thought you could be killed by an intruder? I'll clue you in. Once it happens to you, you'll become a gun loving right wing nut in an instance.

When I was 12, my parents had just divorced. And since my mother hated guns, she made my father take all them from the house. So one afternoon just home from school, me and my 8 year old brother hears someone pounding on our front door (we're alone, latch key kids).

Its broad daylight, 4:00PM. And realize that this is a very nice neighborhood in an expensive subdivision.

This pounding turns into some guy kicking in the front door, breaking the windows to the house and all the time, yelling and screaming how he's going to "rip your hearts out", and "drink your blood". It turns out he was pissed at someone, very drunk and on cocaine, and attacked the wrong house. He didn't care. He was in a berserker rage, and anyone who got in his way, was going to get hurt.

Now realize that at the time, there was a State Police Station less than 3 miles from my house. We called 911. So do you think the police showed up and saved us? Its the Number 1 fallacy of the "we dont' need guns, because the police will protect us crowd". The cops took 45 minutes to show up, even with two children screaming into the phone with 911 operators to "come save us".

So at 12 years old, scared so bad that I'll remember that exact moment for the rest of my days. Me a very small skinny 12 at that, I'm standing there with a baseball bat, determined to save my brother and myself. From a large burly redneck construction worker who was coked up out of his mind and looking to hurt someone. I don't think I could forget how he was looking thru the windows telling me how he was gonna kill me.

Well.... Thank God (literally), God was with me and my brother that day. Because the Cops and "Society" sure wasn't. If that guy would have gotten his hands on us, we would have been dead. And thats straight from the Cops mouth who investigated the whole incident.

As the door came apart at the frame, from his last kick, the "perp" stumbled back, fell over a bush beside our front porch and broke his femur. Muther fudder got at least some payback. So did the cops then showup and arrest him? Nope, his buddies showed up, threw him in the back of a pickup truck and drove him away. He was finally arrestted several months later. Did he go to jail? Nope he got probation.

So you want to tell me that owning a gun is not going to help me in a situation like that? diddly THAT !:mad:

I've been there. I've lived it. And its a figure of speech, but I feel like I've "Danced with the Devil in the pale moonlight". And I'll never ever forget what it was like.

I'm keeping my guns. Because I know the truth. Not had it "told to me" by some bleeding heart liberal who wants to run others lives.

lazs2 · « **Reply #85 on:** December 13, 2002, 04:30:03 PM »

Ah... thrawn I see... an analodgy.. I also speeded in your country and I enjoyed that. Was that the same as smoking crack too? maybe I just don't get the whole anolodgy thing...

fear for your life allways takes precedence if there is any proof at all of a real threat involved. Dune no doubt knows a lot more about it tho than I do. I still would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
lazs