Hornady RAPiD Safe! In stock now!

[Dweano]

Why are people excited? Its not like you can actually use guns to defend yourself in Canada...which we all know is what people are thinking haha

[rodregier]

Case laws says you can defend yourself w/firearms in Canada, but it's virtually certain a protracted court fight will be part of the experience.

The process is the punishment :-(

[25mm]

Why are people excited? Its not like you can actually use guns to defend yourself in Canada...which we all know is what people are thinking haha

Under Section 40 of the Criminal Code, which deals with the defence of dwellings, "everyone who is in possession of a dwelling house is justified in using as much force as necessary, to prevent any person from forcibly breaking into or entering the dwelling house without lawful authority."

[Dweano]

What does the law say about someone already being in your house? I am not trying to be a smart aleck, I am actually wondering as I always was under the impression one was not legally allowed to use guns to defend themselves

[MCP]

TAKE NOTE of sec 34(2) the first sentence that states " the court shall consider....."
If you use force to defend yourself or property, you most likely will be arrested and charged. Then it is up to the court system to determine wether or not you were justified.

SELF-DEFENCE

34 (1) A person is not guilty of an offence if

(a) they believe on reasonable grounds that force is being used against them or another person or that a threat of force is being made against them or another person;
(b) the act that constitutes the offence is committed for the purpose of defending or protecting themselves or the other person from that use or threat of force; and
(c) the act committed is reasonable in the circumstances
34 (2) In determining whether the act committed is reasonable in the circumstances, the court shall consider the relevant circumstances of the person, the other parties and the act, including, but not limited to, the following factors:

(a) the nature of the force or threat;
(b) the extent to which the use of force was imminent and whether there were other means available to respond to the potential use of force;
(c) the person’s role in the incident;
(d) whether any party to the incident used or threatened to use a weapon;
(e) the size, age, gender and physical capabilities of the parties to the incident;
(f) the nature, duration and history of any relationship between the parties to the incident, including any prior use or threat of force and the nature of that force or threat;
(f.1) any history of interaction or communication between the parties to the incident;
(g) the nature and proportionality of the person’s response to the use or threat of force; and
(h) whether the act committed was in response to a use or threat of force that the person knew was lawful.
34 (3) Subsection (1) does not apply if the force is used or threatened by another person for the purpose of doing something that they are required or authorized by law to do in the administration or enforcement of the law, unless the person who commits the act that constitutes the offence believes on reasonable grounds that the other person is acting unlawfully.

DEFENCE OF PROPERTY

35 (1) A person is not guilty of an offence if

(a) they either believe on reasonable grounds that they are in peaceable possession of property or are acting under the authority of, or lawfully assisting, a person whom they believe on reasonable grounds is in peaceable possession of property;
(b) they believe on reasonable grounds that another person
(i) is about to enter, is entering or has entered the property without being entitled by law to do so,
(ii) is about to take the property, is doing so or has just done so, or
(iii) is about to damage or destroy the property, or make it inoperative, or is doing so;
(c) the act that constitutes the offence is committed for the purpose of
(i) preventing the other person from entering the property, or removing that person from the property, or
(ii) preventing the other person from taking, damaging or destroying the property or from making it inoperative, or retaking the property from that person; and
(d) the act committed is reasonable in the circumstances.
35 (2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the person who believes on reasonable grounds that they are, or who is believed on reasonable grounds to be, in peaceable possession of the property does not have a claim of right to it and the other person is entitled to its possession by law.

35 (3) Subsection (1) does not apply if the other person is doing something that they are required or authorized by law to do in the administration or enforcement of the law, unless the person who commits the act that constitutes the offence believes on reasonable grounds that the other person is acting unlawfully.

[Dweano]

Hmm. Interesting. Thank you for that

[paul1shooter]

So use your gun but you better be able to site chapter and verse of the Canadian criminal code and have all case laws in your back pocket preferably the ones that best resemble your situation in which the victim was not charged with ANY crime whats so ever . thats how you fight the bureaucrats.

[Bigvern]

Talk about going off topic, all of a sudden everyone's a lawyer.....get real, and grow up.

[MCP]

Better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6...... I think the Hornary Rapid safe is a great product and I love the plain looking bracelet that looks like every other "energy" bracelet out there

[BCCartman]

Restricted and prohibited firearms
Attach a secure locking device so the firearms cannot be fired and lock them in a cabinet, container or room that is difficult to break into;

or

Lock the firearms in a vault, safe or room that was built or modified specifically to store firearms safely.
For automatic firearms, also remove the bolts

or

bolt carriers (if removable) and lock them in a separate room that is difficult to break into.

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/f...posage-eng.htm

it loos like as long as it's classified as a safe no trigger lock is needed.