Self Defence, or Murder?

Self defence, or murder?

  • Self defence

    Votes: 13 35.1%

  • Murder

    Votes: 14 37.8%

  • Other

    Votes: 9 24.3%

  • Don't know

    Votes: 1 2.7%
  • Total voters
    37
Looks like we got ourselves a clear cut case of murder.

If his defense lawyer is any good, he will make his client take a plea of voluntary manslaughter. If this case goes to trial, he wont stand a chance.
 
The only way he would get away with this is because of where he lives. Even the news lady described it as a "reliable" pharmacy lol.
 
page said:
Depends on where you live.

In Canada the law is pretty clear on these things. We HAVE to let the police protect us from dangers.

If you attack your attacker, you go to jail because the last attacker is the bigger meanie.
Click to expand...

Why did you say that? Now the Americans are going to make fun of Canada again...


Edit: To make up for it, my mother's friend's son did an armed robbery with a plastic gun at 9 years old.
 
Damn, the cashier went B2:BBBB on dat ass.

I could see it as murder if it was someone who was trained in unarming and apprehending criminals, but your ordinary citizen is going to do what they think is right since their concern is for their safety or seize an opportunity to get away with murder. But whatever, that kid should have known better not to commit a robbery without the burner in case you need to blast someone. Now he's dead. Dumbass.
 
Plume said:
Why did you say that? Now the Americans are going to make fun of Canada again...


Edit: To make up for it, my mother's friend's son did an armed robbery with a plastic gun at 9 years old.
Click to expand...

Nothing really wrong with Canada's self defence laws. Some anecdotal evidence offered up by anyone isn't going to change our crime stats, which are actually quite low, especially when compared to the US.

I don't see what your issue is, though. If someone attacks you and you can't run away, then you're within your legal rights to defend yourself as much as is necessary. The only way you can really disagree with that is on the definition of necessary; I think that once you've negated any danger to yourself or others that's it. And just because a person is all jacked up on adrenaline or whatever doesn't excuse anything. The law is based on people being responsible for their own actions, especially on bad days, and if they shoot someone when they could have not shot them, then they should be held responsible.

Also, lolamerica.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top