# Welcome to Canada - This is why I have nice signature



## sig (Dec 13, 2010)

Man faces jail after protecting home from masked attackers

Ian Thomson moved to a rural homestead in Southwestern Ontario to lead a quiet life investing in a little fixer-upper. Then his neighbour's chickens began showing up on his property. He warned his neighbour, then killed one of the birds.

The incident began six years of trouble for Mr. Thomson that culminated early one Sunday morning last August when the 53-year-old former mobile-crane operator woke up to the sound of three masked men firebombing his Port Colborne, Ont., home.

"I was horrified," he said. "I couldn't believe it. I didn't know what was happening. I had no idea what was going on."
So Mr. Thomson, a former firearms instructor, grabbed one of his Smith & Wesson revolvers from his safe, loaded it and headed outside dressed in only his underwear.

"He exited his house and fired his revolver two, maybe three times, we're not sure. Then these firebombing culprits, they ran off," said his lawyer, Edward Burlew.

His surveillance cameras caught the attackers lobbing at least six Molotov cocktails at his house and bombing his doghouse, singeing one of his Siberian Huskies. But when Mr. Thomson handed the video footage to Niagara Regional Police, he found himself charged with careless use of a firearm.

The local Crown attorney's office later laid a charge of pointing a firearm, along with two counts of careless storage of a firearm. The Crown has recommended Mr. Thomson go to jail, his lawyer said.

His collection of seven guns, five pistols and two rifles was seized, along with his firearms licence. Mr. Thomson said he lives in fear that his attackers will return and has taken to arming himself with a fire extinguisher.

"I don't have enemies," said the soft-spoken man, who now studies environmental geosciences full-time at Brock University after being injured in a workplace accident. "I don't know that many people. I'm a quiet man. I just want to go back to my life and be able to live out my days in relative peace."

Mr. Thomson's is the latest in a series of high-profile cases in which people have been charged after defending their homes and businesses against criminals. Central Alberta farmer Brian Knight became a local hero after shooting a thief who was trying to steal his ATV. He pleaded guilty to criminal negligence earlier this month. In October, Toronto shopkeeper David Chen was acquitted of forcible confinement charges after he tied up a repeat shoplifter and demanded he stop raiding his grocery store.

Their cases are renewing calls for Canada to introduce a version of the "Castle Doctrine" found in many U.S. states, which allows citizens to defend their property with force.

"I hear some people, some being police officers, some being Crown attorneys, some being ordinary people, say we don't want vigilantism, to which I can only give an emphatic pardon me?" Mr. Burlew said. "When you're under attack, it's not a vigilante act. Vigilantism talks about vengeance and retribution. This is about saving your life and saving your property.

"I'm sure that will be recognized at trial, but why would a citizen, where it's so obvious that what he was doing was protecting himself during a continued attack, be put to the expense of a trial? It's demeaning."

Canada allows people to claim self-defence for using force, including guns, to protect their life as long as the force is reasonable and they believe they have no other options.

"If the public are wondering can you run out of your house and [fire a handgun at an intruder], the bottom line is, according to the laws of Canada, no, you can't," said Constable Nilan Dave of the Niagara Regional Police Service, which charged Mr. Thomson. "That's why the courts are there, to give a person an opportunity to explain their actions."

Mr. Burlew, a Toronto-area lawyer whose practice mainly consists of firearms-related charges, said he is trying to hire a psychiatrist to prove that Mr. Thomson feared for his life when he grabbed his revolver. A target shooter and hunting-safety instructor, Mr. Thomson had the skill to shoot his attackers if he'd wanted to, Mr. Burlew said, but missed on purpose.

Police said no one was injured in the shooting and the attackers got into a car and sped off. They charged Randy Weaver, 48, of Port Colborne, and Justin Lee, 19, of Welland, with arson in December, alleging the men and a third suspect "intentionally set the home on fire while the homeowner was inside."

Mr. Thomson's neighbour, who had received a suspended sentence for uttering threats against Mr. Thomson in 2007, has not been charged in connection with the attack on his house.

Mr. Thomson said he has added extra security to his home after the firebombing and hardly sleeps anymore. The charges, he said, have destroyed him.

*"This is just an absolute nightmare, this whole thing," he said. "People need to know that this is what can happen to you and which side of the victim line do you want to stand on? Lying down dead or in court? That's the way it seems it has to go."*

Read more: http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/0...ing-home-from-masked-attackers/#ixzz1C5p5Vce5

*100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3*


----------



## Sunstar (Jul 29, 2008)

Personally charging the person who has been attacked in that manner is idiotic. I am all for defending one's turf. Someone invades my home, I'm gonna club them.


----------



## sig (Dec 13, 2010)

*"From now on, we have decided to stress the rehabilitation of individuals rather than the protection of society." - Solicitor General Jean-Pierre Goyer, 1971*

When are people finally going to get it? Governments don't care about crime rates. They know criminals will always get guns. They're objective is to disarm the masses. Crime victims are just collateral damage.

*100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3*


----------



## AquaNekoMobile (Feb 26, 2010)

Man all my U.S friends always comment about Canada this and that and I gotta agree with them that it seems in Canada it's a criminals haven in a way. I mean.... 'hug a thug'. Grrr... people are too scared to defend themselves thinking they'll get thier butts sued/arrested/jailed/etc right off for injuring the criminal. I hope some criminal trips while leaving the property and cuts themself up badly on the window THEY broke to enter the property. 

-fuming over OP post-


----------



## Joeee (Apr 3, 2010)

There's something about the constitution which is a bit funny;

When Trudeau proposed the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (what allows free speech, freedom of religion, conscience, and thought, and security of person [all that awesome stuff]), a premier proposed that they provinces should be allowed to opt-out, and a few other premiers (including Quebec, Levesque [I think], considered it a legitimate right for provinces).


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

Being *charged *is different from being *convicted*. Remember that our justice system operates on the principle of "innocent until proven guilty". Would you be outraged if those hooligans were charged? Yet, until it is actually proven in court that those hooligans committed a crime, they must be treated equally as the man claiming self-defense.

Put another way, that means, until it is proven in court that he acted in self-defense, that man must be treated the same (under the law) as those hooligans.


----------



## Jorg (Jan 14, 2011)

That would all be fine if the courts reimburse him for his legal fees if found not guilty.


----------



## sig (Dec 13, 2010)

Jorg said:


> That would all be fine if the courts reimburse him for his legal fees if found not guilty.


and also for moral damage, guns prohibition and confiscation

*100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3*


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

Jorg said:


> That would all be fine if the courts reimburse him for his legal fees if found not guilty.


There are deep flaws in the system, and I don't believe it's unique to Canada.

First, the law enforcement agents are usually more interested in digging for evidence that supports their charges and any exculpatory evidence, thus creating a tunnel-vision prejudice.

Second, the costs of going to court are exorbitant, and out of the reach of most citizens. Further, there is no question that good (i.e. more expensive) attorneys have a better chance of defending their client, meaning Justice is NOT blind: rich people can get away with more than the average citizen.

It's an unfortunate reality, but there are no easy answers. This case might, and does, sound outrageous, but it is outrageous because the law enforcement agents followed the letter of the system, though not its spirit.


----------



## sig (Dec 13, 2010)

There is easy answer:

*Self defense is not a judge given right, nor is it government given. It is God given, it is inalienable, and it is universal with all that this implies! 
*

also change this approach

*"From now on, we have decided to stress the rehabilitation of individuals rather than the protection of society." - Solicitor General Jean-Pierre Goyer, 1971
*



solarz said:


> .
> 
> It's an unfortunate reality, but there are no easy answers. This case might, and does, sound outrageous, but it is outrageous because the law enforcement agents followed the letter of the system, though not its spirit.


 *100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3*


----------



## Holidays (Apr 18, 2010)

I agree with the victim, he is defending himself as he is being harassed and his home is trespassed. But, he should be careful firing his weapon in an open air like that, the bullet might accidently hit some innocent person. I think it's a different story if the 2 guys were attacking him or charging at him or have assaulted him. 

Anyway, I am not sure what I'd do though, I do own a riffle.


----------



## Jorg (Jan 14, 2011)

Holidays said:


> I agree with the victim, he is defending himself as he is being harassed and his home is trespassed. But, he should be careful firing his weapon in an open air like that, the bullet might accidently hit some innocent person. I think it's a different story if the 2 guys were attacking him or charging at him or have assaulted him.
> 
> Anyway, I am not sure what I'd do though, I do own a riffle.


They were throwing molotov cocktails at his home while he was inside I think that can be called an attack


----------



## Holidays (Apr 18, 2010)

Jorg said:


> They were throwing molotov cocktails at his home while he was inside I think that can be called an attack


True, it is an attack, I guess in Canada we can't fight fire with fire or we just have to be sure that the fire doesn't hurt other innocent people.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

sig said:


> There is easy answer:
> 
> *Self defense is not a judge given right, nor is it government given. It is God given, it is inalienable, and it is universal with all that this implies!
> *


What are you saying here? That if someone claims self-defense, the *police* should not arrest him and/or press charges?

Remember that unless proven in court, everything is just allegation.


----------



## Holidays (Apr 18, 2010)

Really hard to judge, when you're under attack like that all rationales go out of the door


----------



## sig (Dec 13, 2010)

solarz said:


> What are you saying here? That if someone claims self-defense, the *police* should not arrest him and/or press charges?
> 
> Remember that unless proven in court, everything is just allegation.


what do you mean " someone claims self-defense". If facts are correct it is not a claim, it is obvious

*100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3*


----------



## sig (Dec 13, 2010)

Definitions of self defends-section 34 of the criminal code provides

34. (1) *Every one who is unlawfully assaulted without having provoked the assault is justified in repelling force by force if the force he uses is not intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm and is no more than is necessary to enable him to defend himself.*

Extent of justification

(2) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grievous bodily harm in repelling the assault is justified if

(a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence with which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes; and

(b) he believes, on reasonable grounds, that he cannot otherwise preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm.

1.	Q. Can I defend my life, in my own home, by whatever means I find available?

1. A. Absolutely

2. Q. Is it legal to defend myself in my home with a pistol?

2. A. It depends on whether you accessed it while it was stored in compliance with the law. If you did get to your safe, unlocked it, got the pistol out, unlocked the trigger, unlocked your ammo, loaded your pistol and then shot the intruder, the tool you used for self-defence is no longer an issue. The only remaining issue will be whether or not you were justified to use deadly force.

Here are the four possible outcomes, if you defend yourself with your pistol in your house.

1. You are justified in using deadly force and use your legally stored pistol: 
-not guilty on both counts.

2. You are justified in using deadly force and use your illegally stored pistol:
-not guilty in using deadly force, guilty of firearms act violation. That could result in losing your license and your guns, at least temporary.

3. You are not justified in using deadly force and use your legally stored pistol: 
-guilty of manslaughter, not guilty of any firearms act violations other then by extension. That will probably earn you at least a few years of jail time and a permanent prohibition from licensing and firearms possession.

4. You are not justified in using deadly force and to top it all you use your illegally stored pistol.

Guilty, guilty. You're probably going away for a bit.

http://www.nfa.ca/content/view/261/199/

*100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3*


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

sig said:


> what do you mean " someone claims self-defense". If facts are correct it is not a claim, it is obvious


Facts must be proven in a court of law. There are times when the "obvious" is wrong.


----------



## fury165 (Aug 21, 2010)

Careful here, that definition does not cover all things associated with legal hand gun ownership... Do not read into it that you can obtain you license and buy restricted handguns and be 'automatically' justified in an event of self defence. Even amongst the legal gun community, there is geat division about what rights we have and what the laws really mean.

This poor guy will most likely be made an example of, but hopefully his NFA or CSSA membership is paid up and he will have proper legal representation and not some legal aid lawyer.


----------

