Concealed carry

[alanjh595]

I wish all these people who are so unhappy living in Canada with our Canadian values would exercise their freedom and move somewhere where they could be free to shoot at each other - perhaps Somalia, or Trump's United States.

I agree. Move to a location where you assume that everyone else carries a gun and is prepared to use it against you, even though you might just be retrieving your child's soccer ball from the neighbour's yard.
At least in Canada, we have the assumption of innocence before being killed. Even in the USA, where is there ever been an automatic death sentence for theft of a truck?

[Sparki55]

Yes, better let an unarmed burglar steal your truck than kill them. That said, only a fool thinks that these are the only two outcomes. One can call the cops ever tried this? I have, they don't come until tomorrow., one can interrupt the burglar and let them know the cops are on the way a guy in kelowna was just stabbed for less, are you really going to go out there unarmed and tell him you phoned the cops? Why not invite him in for a cup of tea too?, etc. This was almost certainly not a situation with 2 possible outcomes.

Police no longer going to follow up on car theft:
https://*bleep*.ca/newsitem/penticton-police-limiting-response-to-completely-preventable-auto-crime/it50632

Theft also only warrants a slap on the wrist and let out to do it again. If the homeowner is not allowed to use force, the RCMP will not show up and the crooks get out easily, what stops them from repeat offending?

Only a fool thinks everyone is a decent human being that will leave you unharmed while they steal your stuff. While I don't agree people should just be allowed to shoot whomever they want to I believe this specific case falls under: If you don't want to be shot, stay off people's property in the middle of the night and certainly don't get into their cars and try to steal them.

[Verum]

Yes, better let an unarmed burglar steal your truck than kill them. That said, only a fool thinks that these are the only two outcomes. One can call the cops ever tried this? I have, they don't come until tomorrow., one can interrupt the burglar and let them know the cops are on the way a guy in kelowna was just stabbed for less, are you really going to go out there unarmed and tell him you phoned the cops? Why not invite him in for a cup of tea too?Who said anything about going outside? Someone with military training should understand the benefit of staying concealed. It's damn hard to attack a target you can't see. Even still, he clearly didn't attempt to diffuse the situation, and acted on impulse rather than with measured response., etc. This was almost certainly not a situation with 2 possible outcomes.

Police no longer going to follow up on car theft:
https://*bleep*.ca/newsitem/penticton-police-limiting-response-to-completely-preventable-auto-crime/it50632
Irrelevant to the case. If one has a problem with the way the police work, contact your representative, don't kill the first burglar you come across.

Theft also only warrants a slap on the wrist and let out to do it again. If the homeowner is not allowed to use force, the RCMP will not show up and the crooks get out easily, what stops them from repeat offending? That's actually irrelevant to the case. Just because you don't think the criminal will get a harsh sentence doesn't give you right to be judge, jury and executioner.

Only a fool thinks everyone is a decent human being that will leave you unharmed while they steal your stuff.I never said that one should have that assumption, but assuming that someone is carrying a gun is a much bigger and in this case fatal mistake. Not every criminal is a would-be murderer While I don't agree people should just be allowed to shoot whomever they want to I believe this specific case falls under: If you don't want to be shot, stay off people's property in the middle of the night and certainly don't get into their cars and try to steal them.

Nobody is defending the burglars behaviour, but it was a massively disproportionate response to what was minimal actual threat to the well being of Khill and his family. I have a hard time accepting that with half decent military training and an intention to diffuse the situation, that Khill would have taken the steps he did. The saddest thing is that he uses his military training as some kind of excuse for his behaviour. It's not.

[savvybusinessman]

So if it come down to it. U would prefer to be shot than to defend yourself. Got it.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. I said I think it's insane people here are advocating for the right to execute people without a trial. You're asking for various laws and human decency to be thrown out the window so you can carry a gun around and execute people who you think are trying to steal your power tools. Thank god only a small but very loud minority of people are psychotic enough to want to live in some sort of anarchistic gun shooting land.

[Jonrox]

https://www.castanet.net/news/Canada/229303/Homeowner-kills-suspect


Guess he was supposed to just let the guy steal his truck. Way to go liberal law makers.

If those are the only two options you think he had, then yes he's supposed to let the guy steal his truck. Or... he calls the cops and they likely don't find the truck. He then files an insurance claim, gets a new truck, swears about being inconvenienced, and keeps living his normal life.

Or you know, he goes to jail for a few decades.

It's just a truck. The guy wasn't kidnapping his kids or threatening to kill him. Sure are a lot of tough guys in this thread who think it's easy to kill a human over a possession and never think twice about it again.

[Sparki55]

I'm not sure what you're talking about. I said I think it's insane people here are advocating for the right to execute people without a trial. You're asking for various laws and human decency to be thrown out the window so you can carry a gun around and execute people who you think are trying to steal your power tools. Thank god only a small but very loud minority of people are psychotic enough to want to live in some sort of anarchistic gun shooting land.

Oh . Don't want to be shot at stay out of someone's vehicle on THEIR property.

Trying to portray our thoughts as anarchistic society is so far from what our truth is. You use buzzwords and human rights clauses to get your point across when our point is so simple; stay off my property.

I guess it's going to take this problem getting so out of hand that the anti-gun, anti self-protection will need to be affected by some drug addict who rummages through your stuff every night and no police action will cause a shift in perspective.

I know of people who have been affected by professional thieves, constantly robbed and never put up a fight. Truck broken into 4 times in 18 months. First time jacket stolen, second time GPS stolen (was hidden in glove box, out of sight), third time nothing stolen, forth time wallet stolen as accidently left in jacket in truck. Each time the window was smashed or lock punched. Police never followed up. This happened in Surrey. The last time the thief was caught in a store with the wallet and credit cards, trying to buy the maximum amount of stuff he could. Cops said the thief told them he "found" the wallet on the ground. Thief was never charged, his criminal record was a mile long. Guy this happened to paid a $500 deductible each time to have the truck fixed on top of dealing with police and insurance plus the loss of security he felt. Just wait until it gets worse.

[savvybusinessman]

I know of people who have been affected by professional thieves, constantly robbed and never put up a fight. Truck broken into 4 times in 18 months. First time jacket stolen, second time GPS stolen (was hidden in glove box, out of sight), third time nothing stolen, forth time wallet stolen as accidently left in jacket in truck. Each time the window was smashed or lock punched. Police never followed up. This happened in Surrey. The last time the thief was caught in a store with the wallet and credit cards, trying to buy the maximum amount of stuff he could. Cops said the thief told them he "found" the wallet on the ground. Thief was never charged, his criminal record was a mile long. Guy this happened to paid a $500 deductible each time to have the truck fixed on top of dealing with police and insurance plus the loss of security he felt. Just wait until it gets worse.

My post was responding to someone who actually used the word 'execute.' So I assume your solution to professional thieves is to execute them?

How dumb was this person to leave his wallet in his truck after it was already broken into multiple times?

[Sparki55]

How dumb was this person to leave his wallet in his truck after it was already broken into multiple times?

Always the victims fault, forgets his jacket in histruck and you call him dumb. A thief with a criminal record over 38 different changes should never see the light of day again, pure scum. Our justice system kicks him back out to rob again.

The point is this thief knew that the person who owned this truck wouldn't cause a physical altercation and that he would never get into serious trouble with the law for theft under $5000.

[Verum]

...
How dumb was this person to leave his wallet in his truck after it was already broken into multiple times?

While I might generally share your sentiment about those who would wantonly kill petty criminals, this is just as much victim blaming as blaming those needlessly and cruelly killed while engaged in petty crime by saying that they shouldn't have done something stupid like being on someone else's property or breaking into a car.

[Verum]

How dumb was this person to leave his wallet in his truck after it was already broken into multiple times?

Always the victims fault, forgets his jacket in histruck and you call him dumb. A thief with a criminal record over 38 different changes should never see the light of day again, pure scum. Our justice system kicks him back out to rob again.

The point is this thief knew that the person who owned this truck wouldn't cause a physical altercation and that he would never get into serious trouble with the law for theft under $5000.

There certainly is something wrong that we don't address these issues adequately, but taking the law into our own hands and dispensing ultimate judgement on someone is neither legal nor civilised. Ultimately, it is no better an attitude than that which says one can take advantage of those one chooses.

[vegas1500]

Would the laws change for storage if one was to be able to carry a weapon? If not, then a home owner would be hard pressed to retrieve a weapon in a timely manner if they felt a need to defend themselves.

Easily retrieved. Biometric safes and lock boxes make it very easy as well as being legal.

[JLives]

I LOVE my truck. I'm a bit over the top about it sometimes. But I still don't own one single thing worth shooting someone over.

[Gone_Fishin]

I LOVE my truck. I'm a bit over the top about it sometimes. But I still don't own one single thing worth shooting someone over.

You LOVE your kids. Would you shoot someone that was stealing your kids?

[Verum]

I LOVE my truck. I'm a bit over the top about it sometimes. But I still don't own one single thing worth shooting someone over.

You LOVE your kids. Would you shoot someone that was stealing your kids?

I suspect that JLives doesn't own his kids, and most people don't think of their kids as "things" either. Additionally, absolutely nobody has suggested not using proportionate means for defending your person or other persons in imminent danger, just that means appropriate for defending oneself are not necessarily appropriate for defending one's property.

Anyway, you love your kids, right? Would you be happy to have them killed the next time they break the law or damage someone else's property?

[Gone_Fishin]

I suspect that JLives doesn't own his kids, and most people don't think of their kids as "things" either. Additionally, absolutely nobody has suggested not using proportionate means for defending your person or other persons in imminent danger, just that means appropriate for defending oneself are not necessarily appropriate for defending one's property.

Anyway, you love your kids, right? Would you be happy to have them killed the next time they break the law or damage someone else's property?

When did you become Jlives' spokesperson, and when did she become a he? I love my kids and they don't mess with other people's stuff, thus they'll never find themselves damaging anything. They were raised to understand RESPECT, something which seems to be completely absent on the entitled left.