More justice Cuckedanada style.

[ReconWilly]

Another Canadian had the audacity to defend their property and is now a victim a second time,this time it's the system that wasn't there to protect them that is making them out to be a criminal.

Double dipping victims is the Canadian way!

What's new?

https://youtu.be/FaZYsjyXTAQ

[Husty]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saska...sion-1.4967803

They found a small amount of coke on the guy who 'defended' himself, probably a drug dealer and the people breaking in thought he may of had cash or drugs on him would be my guess..maybe owed them money. Sure he was defending himself, but certainly more going on in this story.

[bobtodrick]

Yeah, the fact that he was charged with unsafe storage and not having a license all point to this being drug or gang related problem.
Just as I never take what the CBC reports at face value...neither do I have complete faith in Rebel Media to be unbiased.

[Trochu]

Originally Posted by bobtodrick

Yeah, the fact that he was charged with unsafe storage and not having a license all point to this being drug or gang related problem.
Just as I never take what the CBC reports at face value...neither do I have complete faith in Rebel Media to be unbiased.

Not sure how that's relevant. Additionally, the Rebel clearly made mention of possible other issues going on.

However, if armed individuals break into your house, you shouldn't be allowed to defend yourself if you are in a gang?

[bobtodrick]

Originally Posted by Trochu

Not sure how that's relevant. Additionally, the Rebel clearly made mention of possible other issues going on.

However, if armed individuals break into your house, you shouldn't be allowed to defend yourself if you are in a gang?

The Rebel mentions 'possible issues'...the CBC states exactly what the issues are. Big difference.
And if two rival gangs decide to have a shootout on your street, no matter who starts shooting they all get charged with murder.
They have there day in court, just as this guy will.

[ren008]

Not exactly the preferred poster child for firearms/self-defense rights from the looks of it....

Losers killing each other.

[Trochu]

Originally Posted by bobtodrick

The Rebel mentions 'possible issues'...the CBC states exactly what the issues are. Big difference.
And if two rival gangs decide to have a shootout on your street, no matter who starts shooting they all get charged with murder.
They have there day in court, just as this guy will.

So gang members having a shootout on the street and armed men breaking into buddies house while he's watching TV and threatening him with a gun are pretty much the same scenario, got it.

[CaberTosser]

Originally Posted by ren008

Not exactly the preferred poster child for firearms/self-defense rights from the looks of it....

Losers killing each other.

<--- This x 2.

Given the same argument that drug dealer might well try the same when police are executing a warrant on his place. I agree with self defense for the law abiding, though I really don't care about what happens to drug dealers, in fact for them I prefer serious consequences. When a dealer gets offed its a net positive. I always consider the downstream effect of a drug dealer, the ruined lives and the constant theft of cars and from residential B&E's that results from junkies trying to afford their next hit.

Absolutely zero time for firearms advocacy should be spent defending drug dealers, they're the bloody prime reason that firearms have a bad image in the first place. This is the enemy, treat them as such. No quarter.

This stance rates a fail Recon. A hard fail.

[bobtodrick]

Originally Posted by Trochu

So gang members having a shootout on the street and armed men breaking into buddies house while he's watching TV and threatening him with a gun are pretty much the same scenario, got it.

You really like to try and read between the lines, don't you.
I specifically said that in these scenarios everyone gets charged...AND IT GOES TO COURT.
Tinfoil hat needs to be loosened a bit there Trochu.

[CaberTosser]

Originally Posted by Trochu

So gang members having a shootout on the street and armed men breaking into buddies house while he's watching TV and threatening him with a gun are pretty much the same scenario, got it.

When gangs have shootouts on the street it’s usually because one gang was ambushing the other or a drug deal went bad. The only difference here was location because it was still bad guys versus bad guy. Dude was not licensed for a firearm, he should not garner any sympathy from self defense advocates or the firearms community. As a drug dealer he’s pretty much the poster-child of why we have to defend ourselves both as normal citizens with families and property to defend as well as firearms owners wanting to defend that right.

[fish_e_o]

Originally Posted by ren008

Not exactly the preferred poster child for firearms/self-defense rights from the looks of it....

Losers killing each other.

it's too bad they have the same rules for everyone

[ReconWilly]

Originally Posted by CaberTosser

<--- This x 2.

Given the same argument that drug dealer might well try the same when police are executing a warrant on his place. I agree with self defense for the law abiding, though I really don't care about what happens to drug dealers, in fact for them I prefer serious consequences. When a dealer gets offed its a net positive. I always consider the downstream effect of a drug dealer, the ruined lives and the constant theft of cars and from residential B&E's that results from junkies trying to afford their next hit.

Absolutely zero time for firearms advocacy should be spent defending drug dealers, they're the bloody prime reason that firearms have a bad image in the first place. This is the enemy, treat them as such. No quarter.

This stance rates a fail Recon. A hard fail.

What stance?
Everyone should be allowed to defend themselves in their own home.

[bat119]

The scuttlebutt on coffee row in Weyburn is he knew they were coming and was laying in wait.

Just a rumor it could explain why he was charged the same day usually if there's some controversy charges come out later. The CBC article is poorly written the coke was found on the 23 year old home invader not the home owner.

[Trochu]

Originally Posted by ReconWilly

What stance?
Everyone should be allowed to defend themselves in their own home.

Agreed.

Even if they are a member of the Rotary or got a speeding ticket the day prior.

[Trochu]

Originally Posted by bat119

The CBC article is poorly written the coke was found on the 23 year old home invader not the home owner.

But I thought the CBC article stated "exactly what the issues are"?!?

[CaberTosser]

Sticking up for this guy as a home defense advocate is akin to Bill Cosby or Harvey Weinstein campaigning for young actresses issues. It’s not a winning approach from the outset.

[ReconWilly]

Originally Posted by CaberTosser

Sticking up for this guy as a home defense advocate is akin to Bill Cosby or Harvey Weinstein campaigning for young actresses issues. It’s not a winning approach from the outset.

No one is sticking up for him, it's good this incident brought to light his transgressions and they will now be dealt with.

I am sticking up for his rights,not his poor behavior prior to the incident,one bad guys dead and another is busted, he should be held accountable for everything they have on him but he should still have the RIGHT to defend himself against danger in in his own home.

[Drewski Canuck]

For most of Rural Alberta, it does not matter if you dial 911, or 912, or 913 ...

You are on your own and you should know that.

Response times to Calling Lake can be the very long if a the Constables on duty are tied up down by Clyde Corner on an accident. Yes Athabasca is only 65 km away, but that does not mean any available Officers are in Athabasca at the time. Even if there is someone available in Athabasca, no matter how fast they drive, it can easily be 20 minutes or more.

There is this underlying theme of "let them just take what they want it's just stuff". But for Colton Bushie, he was threatening people with a vehicle, and the line has to be drawn somewhere.

How does anyone perceive what the intentions of someone are once you open the door, and offer to help load your property in their vehicle? Maybe it is not property that the intruder is really after.

Should you just undress and get yourself into a comfortable position for the forced sexual intercourse? Should you call your Priest for Tele Last Rights?

Do not get distracted by a bunch of people of apparent "Swedish Decent" that where settling a score over some illegal activity.

For the rest of the Citizens, there is a real concern about Rural Safety that Parliament has to wake up to, and which Government cannot facilitate.

Drewski

[buckbrush]

Originally Posted by Drewski Canuck

For most of Rural Alberta, it does not matter if you dial 911, or 912, or 913 ...

You are on your own and you should know that.

Response times to Calling Lake can be the very long if a the Constables on duty are tied up down by Clyde Corner on an accident. Yes Athabasca is only 65 km away, but that does not mean any available Officers are in Athabasca at the time. Even if there is someone available in Athabasca, no matter how fast they drive, it can easily be 20 minutes or more.

There is this underlying theme of "let them just take what they want it's just stuff". But for Colton Bushie, he was threatening people with a vehicle, and the line has to be drawn somewhere.

How does anyone perceive what the intentions of someone are once you open the door, and offer to help load your property in their vehicle? Maybe it is not property that the intruder is really after.

Should you just undress and get yourself into a comfortable position for the forced sexual intercourse? Should you call your Priest for Tele Last Rights?

Do not get distracted by a bunch of people of apparent "Swedish Decent" that where settling a score over some illegal activity.

For the rest of the Citizens, there is a real concern about Rural Safety that Parliament has to wake up to, and which Government cannot facilitate.

Drewski

Well said. Time to wake up.

[JDK71]

Originally Posted by Drewski Canuck

For most of Rural Alberta, it does not matter if you dial 911, or 912, or 913 ...

You are on your own and you should know that.

Response times to Calling Lake can be the very long if a the Constables on duty are tied up down by Clyde Corner on an accident. Yes Athabasca is only 65 km away, but that does not mean any available Officers are in Athabasca at the time. Even if there is someone available in Athabasca, no matter how fast they drive, it can easily be 20 minutes or more.

There is this underlying theme of "let them just take what they want it's just stuff". But for Colton Bushie, he was threatening people with a vehicle, and the line has to be drawn somewhere.

How does anyone perceive what the intentions of someone are once you open the door, and offer to help load your property in their vehicle? Maybe it is not property that the intruder is really after.

Should you just undress and get yourself into a comfortable position for the forced sexual intercourse? Should you call your Priest for Tele Last Rights?

Do not get distracted by a bunch of people of apparent "Swedish Decent" that where settling a score over some illegal activity.

For the rest of the Citizens, there is a real concern about Rural Safety that Parliament has to wake up to, and which Government cannot facilitate.

Drewski

100% right

[270person]

However, if armed individuals break into your house, you shouldn't be allowed to defend yourself if you are in a gang?

If you're in a gang the main thing allowed is for us to not give a rat's rear end when things like this happen.

[Silvercreek]

The RCMP and government have lost control over this issue in rural Canada and are aware of the fact that if Canada was to adopt a "Castle Law" type system that a large number of these types of crimes would reduce drastically and quickly.

The clowns that do this type of crime are going to be fairly hesitant to invade your property if they know there is a real good chance they will be shot.
They are well aware that the current laws seem to protect the violator rather than the victim.

Thus these types of crimes will then reduce which will cause great embarrassment to the RCMP and government when they have to admit that they were wrong all along.

As the RCMP seems to be much more concerned with image rather than preventing or solving crimes anymore, they could not allow it to happen that you could legally defend your property.

[CaberTosser]

Even if we had a castle law that would not stop some, keep in mind how many of these perps have instigated insane police chases and tried to run over officers. Its what has instigated most of the last 5 years worth of police shootings, probably more. Those people know the police are armed and ready and yet they continue. Of course I'm an advocate for a castle type law and the right to self-defence both of ones self, family and property, I'm just saying that with some junkies it won't make much of a difference. Hence the importance of being able to defend yourself, these people are insane, aggressive, irrational and desperate.