Concealed carry

[Jonrox]

People often believe that their right to protect themselves, their families, or their property means they can shoot to kill. However, even in most US states (that we often like to use as examples), this isn’t the case.

Even in states that have stand your ground laws, if you aren’t facing an imminent threat to your life you cannot legally shoot a home intruder. For example, if that home intruder is unarmed and you were to shoot them, you would not be protected by a self defense argument or at the very least would have a very difficult time proving it after being charged with murder.

Generally speaking, the response to a threat has to be reasonable and the courts generally don’t agree that killing an offender is a reasonable response if the offender isn’t posing an immediate and life threatening situation. In states that don’t have stand your ground laws, you would actually be required to attempt to retreat to safety first. If you are still in a life threatening situation, only then do you have the right to shoot/kill the intruder.

The court cases get messy and although a lot of you talk tough, I don’t think you would want to find yourself in a situation like that. So even if someone walks up to you on the street, it’s not as simple as pulling a concealed gun on them to scare them off. You just can’t do that.

[Jflem1983]

People often believe that their right to protect themselves, their families, or their property means they can shoot to kill. However, even in most US states (that we often like to use as examples), this isn’t the case.

Even in states that have stand your ground laws, if you aren’t facing an imminent threat to your life you cannot legally shoot a home intruder. For example, if that home intruder is unarmed and you were to shoot them, you would not be protected by a self defense argument or at the very least would have a very difficult time proving it after being charged with murder.

Generally speaking, the response to a threat has to be reasonable and the courts generally don’t agree that killing an offender is a reasonable response if the offender isn’t posing an immediate and life threatening situation. In states that don’t have stand your ground laws, you would actually be required to attempt to retreat to safety first. If you are still in a life threatening situation, only then do you have the right to shoot/kill the intruder.

The court cases get messy and although a lot of you talk tough, I don’t think you would want to find yourself in a situation like that. So even if someone walks up to you on the street, it’s not as simple as pulling a concealed gun on them to scare them off. You just can’t do that.

Personally if i ever pulled a gun on someone. I would use it. I dont view pulling a gun as a joke or a way to scare someone off. This is not talking tough. Just common sense. Your only gonna get one chance to save your life . If u need the gun. You better use it

[Treblehook]

Jflem1983 responded to my post with:

"Road rage lol. Really. Have u or anyone u know ever had road rage. Only a complete unhinged maniac would ever claim to have been enraged by someone driving down the road .
This thread is about protecting yourself and your family with a small pistol or revolver. Nothing to do with road rage."

The only thing I can say to that remark is, go back and read my post. I said I was citing road rage as an example of people making poor split second decisions, with life altering consequences. I believe that there is benefit in reading, comprehending and considering other perspectives. Interesting as this debate may be, it is probably a waste of time in that the likelihood of legal concealed carry laws existing in Canada are hugely remote.

[Jflem1983]

Bringing up road rage is same as bringing up mental illness. Seperate from guns. This thread is about concealed carry. U have created in your mind many scenarios that good people having a gun could potentially be bad for u. However you fail to see how it cant really hurt u as all the bad guys are already packin a gun

[floppi]

Bringing up road rage is same as bringing up mental illness. Seperate from guns. This thread is about concealed carry. U have created in your mind many scenarios that good people having a gun could potentially be bad for u. However you fail to see how it cant really hurt u as all the bad guys are already packin a gun

What hogwash! Typical altright deflection. What does road rage and mental illness have to do with it? By all accounts the link I posted, the shooter was a typical redneck US joe packing heat in his car. It was all about a momentary lapse in judgement and road rage that forever changed the course of 2 lives. All because he had easy access to a gun concealed in his car. In Canada, that would have been a flip of the middle finger at the other driver.

[Treblehook]

Bringing up road rage is same as bringing up mental illness. Seperate from guns. This thread is about concealed carry. U have created in your mind many scenarios that good people having a gun could potentially be bad for u. However you fail to see how it cant really hurt u as all the bad guys are already packin a gun

I guess using the example of road rage to support the contention that ordinary people are prone to making, spur of the moment decisions, that they most often regret, was a bad idea and derailed you ability to consider my thoughts about John Q Citizen packing a concealed firearm. That having been said, I leave you to your opinion that you and others should be able to lawfully carry a concealed gun, out in public for the purpose of defending yourselves against harm and to protect the rest of society from those who would do them harm. I guess that means you want the option of not walking away from trouble when you are out and about. God Bless you and good luck with that.

[Jonrox]

Personally if i ever pulled a gun on someone. I would use it. I dont view pulling a gun as a joke or a way to scare someone off. This is not talking tough. Just common sense. Your only gonna get one chance to save your life . If u need the gun. You better use it

Well just be careful if you do. Self defense doesn't mean you can shoot to kill and get away with it.

[Sparki55]

What hogwash! Typical altright deflection. What does road rage and mental illness have to do with it? By all accounts the link I posted, the shooter was a typical redneck US joe packing heat in his car. It was all about a momentary lapse in judgement and road rage that forever changed the course of 2 lives. All because he had easy access to a gun concealed in his car. In Canada, that would have been a flip of the middle finger at the other driver.

FYI, in Canada, it's legal to carry a non-restricted firearm in your vehicle. Canadians can and do carry firearms but our culture is different and we don't go around shooting each other. Has nothing to do with the laws.

[floppi]

What hogwash! Typical altright deflection. What does road rage and mental illness have to do with it? By all accounts the link I posted, the shooter was a typical redneck US joe packing heat in his car. It was all about a momentary lapse in judgement and road rage that forever changed the course of 2 lives. All because he had easy access to a gun concealed in his car. In Canada, that would have been a flip of the middle finger at the other driver.

FYI, in Canada, it's legal to carry a non-restricted firearm in your vehicle. Canadians can and do carry firearms but our culture is different and we don't go around shooting each other. Has nothing to do with the laws.

Yeah law matters. If the link I provided was in Canada, the redneck would not have been able to carry a handgun in his car.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/who-may-c ... -1.1135084

Even transporting non-restricted firearms such as a rifle requires due care and attention, such as having an UNLOADED firearm inside your vehicle. Our culture is certainly a little different but not all that different. Who knows if we had liberal gun laws like in the US, perhaps we would be shooting each other more often too.

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

[BGrigg07]

What happens if someone decides to "defend themselves and us" from a crook, fires the first shot and misses his target?

We have police for a reason, we have a pretty civil and decent society here, why are we trying to test methods which have shown in the states to not work? I recall an example of a lady who decided to shoot at someone stealing a car in a Wal-Mart parking lot in the US. That wasn't the smartest of decisions and could have ended much worse than it did.

What happens when a "crook" decides to reduce his competition and opens fire in a crowded restaurant? Oh yeah, innocent people die. This is a true story and has happened more than once.

What happens when the police go to a home and the resident opens the door with a remote control or some other non-lethal item in his hand? Oh yeah, innocent people die. This is a true story and has happened more than once.

happens, whether we're armed or not. And sometimes the police do more harm than good.

[sobrohusfat]

happens

[dle]

I support an armed Canada

The right to self-defense should be a given. The US Second Amendment recognizes that rather obvious fact, while Trudeau’s Charter leaves the weak to be victimized.

We just have to find solace in the fact that when they find the time, the police will investigate whatever tragedy we fell victim to.

I agree and if I may expand on your comment:

The right to self-defense should be a given. The US Second Amendment recognizes that rather obvious fact, while Trudeau’s Charter leaves the weak to be victimized.

, the right to self-defence doesn't necessarily mean with a gun - it's just that in Canada if we simply defend ourselves/property/family with anything, even our fists, we run the risk of being charged with assault or worse which is just crazy, while the perpetrator gets off scott free for the initial break and enter or whatever he/she was illegally doing involving our property. Not only does Trudeau's Charter leave the weak to be victimized, as you say, it leaves the victims without recourse and I believe it gives all the rights to the criminal flat out. What kind of a Charter is that?

[Ka-El]

The right to self-defense should be a given. The US Second Amendment recognizes that rather obvious fact, while Trudeau’s Charter leaves the weak to be victimized.

The right to self-defense is addressed in the Canadian Criminal Code.

Google is your friend.

edit: typo

[Gone_Fishin]

*removed*

[BGrigg07]

happens

And that's an FBI Officer. One of those Law Enforcement people we're supposed to call when there's trouble...