Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You know how on TV you see robbers putting ladder up to a house and the homeowner pushed the ladder down and the robber goes with it?
Well thats on TV...What if this situation were to unfold in real life?
If a robber puts a ladder to your upstairs or apt window 2:45 in the morning and you push it down, in real life they are gonna spit their head open when they hit the ground and die.
How would that scenario be seen in Canadian law?
Would that be defense of self, home and property or would you be going away on a murder/manslaughter charge if they died from the fall?
Canada doesn't have what Americans call the Castle Doctrine, but it does have laws and recourse that are similar and allow the homeowner to protect property and person. Using force to drive off intruders attempting to enter your home (or the home of someone you are helping to defend) is perfectly legal. The case will hinge on how much force was used, and whether it was “reasonable.”
...... Under Section 40 of the Criminal Code, which deals with the defence of dwellings, Nichols says, "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."
Cohen echoes Nichols' sentiments, adding that when it comes to defending themselves, Canadians have the most rights inside their own homes.
"This area is less grey than others. The rule of reasonable force still applies, but most judges will give you the benefit of the doubt," Cohen says. "… You can use any force you deem necessary to remove the burglar from the house and eliminate the threat to yourself.".....
Just to add personal comment. If I discovered a ladder against the side of my house at 2:45 in the morning and I wasn't the one who put it there, and there was somebody climbing up it, I would inform the climber that the police have been alerted and that the climber needs to get off the ladder immediately. If the climber does not get off the ladder I would then inform the climber that I am now going to knock the ladder down with them on it or off it, they can take their choice. If they don't get off the ladder after receiving that fair warning I would certainly knock the ladder down. If he splits his head open when the ladder gets knocked down, well that's his problem that he chose for himself.
It's a little more nuanced than the article (or articles, if we include the NP item) implies. Probably a lot more nuanced--it is true that we have nothing like the American castle doctrine, but we do have certain recourses available to us, under certain conditions and certain circumstances.
I won't go into detail, as I'd have a hard time keeping things short (I've done two-hour lectures on this topic before). Let's just say that while there are a few common starting points, and a few general rules, every situation is going to be different, and every situation is going to be fact-dependent.
Castle doctrine is a really big chainsaw when often a scalpel will suffice.
The problem is that while the nuances and facts are sorted in each case, in the OP's example, you'll be charged and pending trial on manslaughter while that process is taking place. Possibly 2nd degree murder depending on the CP. Or ultimately the facts won't be sorted until the trial has started, so regardless you'd have an arrest and failed conviction on your record.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.