support for eddie Maurice's self defense case Please read...

[Kingjenky]

https://youtu.be/TZWCjrvNwkQ

[Hartman751]

Donated

[bmx_cruiser]

Thanks for doing this IRG. Your efforts will not be forgotten and I will definitely remember them when I look for my next purchase. Anonymous donation inbound. I wish the all best to the Maurice family. Sadly, in the blink of an eye, their lives have been changed forever.

[oddball_ted]

35. Defence of Property

Defence - 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.

No defence

(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.
No defence

(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.




You are wrong, sir.

That's a good comment, and I hope you're right and I'm wrong. My guess would
be that a city slicker crown prosecutor will make a case that he committed an unreasonable act under the circumstances.

[Hitzy]

Sorry, but you shouldn't be allowed to shoot people breaking into cars. No justification it, it is excessive force.

So just sit there and wait and hope they don't decide to kill you after? Every case I read like this (Boushie especially) makes me think of a local retired husband and wife that got murdered by a couple of drunk and drugged up dirtbags that were on a drug fueled B&E crime spree. They both died on the phone to 911, lot of help the police are in rural settings.
If some worthless loser wants to steal my stuff, do it during the day when I'm at work like the rest of the world...I have insurance, life goes on.
Do it at night and I have to assume you are there to harm me or my family. Police are 30 mins away at minimum, my families safety is worth my freedom if it comes to that.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/studen...chers-1.328613

More than 1,000 people crowded into an Ottawa church Saturday for the funeral of two retired teachers killed during an attempted burglary last weekend.

The couple were asleep at their Val-des-Monts, Que., cottage on Nov. 23, when they heard someone trying to break in.

Bob Dagenais, 52, was shot dead as he tried to dial 911, police said. His wife, Bonnie, 51, was killed by a second blast seconds later.

Police have two suspects, both from Notre-Dame-du-Laus, Que., in custody. Rene Michaud, 26, and a 15-year-old boy were charged with first-degree murder in the death of Bonnie Dagenais and second-degree murder in the death of her husband.

Police said they had been looking for Michaud at the time of the killings, and that he had been released from custody eight days before the Val-des-Monts incident.

Authorities have refused to comment on why he was set free. "I prefer not to make any comments on that subject," Crown lawyer Denis Pilon told reporters.

The shooting victims had retired from teaching last June.

Bob Dagenais was principal of Sir Guy Carleton Secondary School in Ottawa, where he ended a career that spanned 27 years. Bonnie taught for 32 years, most recently elementary students at Broadview Public School.

As testament to their popularity, St. Patrick's Basilica was packed to overflowing with many former students.

"It's not at all surprising, said student Steve Marriner about the large turnout. "I mean, he touched so many people's lives, and so did his wife, Bonnie."

Bob Dagenais was principal of several high schools. Students at one of them, Woodroffe High, staged a protest in 1996 when they learned he would be transferred to another school.

[BCMac]

How many times do these guys need to let people take their stuff and pay the deductible? How many times until their insurance rates skyrocket? How many times until they are no longer insurable?

[Matt762]

So if I shoot a home invader, should I stab myself and say he attacked first? Is this what we need to do to keep ourselves from going to jail for defending our homes? We really need to let the powers at be know how backwards the self-defense laws are. They are made to protect the offender and punish the defender.

[GMHVAC]

Donated.

[arash]

NO. gofundme keeps a large amount of funds as part of their "service fees". not worth it esp for large endeavors such as this one.

[lintocs]

I never said you shouldn't be allowed to confront anyone, learn to read. Criminals are in the wrong but you still can't shoot them for breaking into cars.

I'm not sure I agree. Basically, you're denying people property rights by saying they can't confront a thief with deadly force. If I catch a guy breaking in to my car, by what law is it dicatated that my property rights are decided by whether or not I can physically intimidate them in to fleeing the scene? That denies the property rights of women, the elderly, and people of small stature.

This makes no sense. The argument that property isn't worth a human life basically invalidates ownership rights.