Man faces jail after protecting home from masked attackers (Canada - Castle Doctrine Coming?)

[shadowrider]

Ian Thomson moved to a rural homestead in Southwestern Ontario to lead a quiet life investing in a little fixer-upper. Then his neighbour’s chickens began showing up on his property. He warned his neighbour, then killed one of the birds.

The incident began six years of trouble for Mr. Thomson that culminated early one Sunday morning last August when the 53-year-old former mobile-crane operator woke up to the sound of three masked men firebombing his Port Colborne, Ont., home.

“I was horrified,” he said. “I couldn’t believe it. I didn’t know what was happening. I had no idea what was going on.”

So Mr. Thomson, a former firearms instructor, grabbed one of his Smith & Wesson revolvers from his safe, loaded it and headed outside dressed in only his underwear.

“He exited his house and fired his revolver two, maybe three times, we’re not sure. Then these firebombing culprits, they ran off,” said his lawyer, Edward Burlew.

--snip--

His collection of seven guns, five pistols and two rifles was seized, along with his firearms licence. Mr. Thomson said he lives in fear that his attackers will return and has taken to arming himself with a fire extinguisher.

--snip--

Their cases are renewing calls for Canada to introduce a version of the “Castle Doctrine” found in many U.S. states, which allows citizens to defend their property with force.

Ian Thomson, who is a Brock University Environmental Geo Sciences student, was attacked by people throwing molotov cocktails at his home near Port Colborne in August of 2010

“I hear some people, some being police officers, some being Crown attorneys, some being ordinary people, say we don’t want vigilantism, to which I can only give an emphatic pardon me?” Mr. Burlew said. “When you’re under attack, it’s not a vigilante act. Vigilantism talks about vengeance and retribution. This is about saving your life and saving your property.

“I’m sure that will be recognized at trial, but why would a citizen, where it’s so obvious that what he was doing was protecting himself during a continued attack, be put to the expense of a trial? It’s demeaning.”

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/01/20/man-faces-jail-after-protecting-home-from-masked-attackers/

[oneshooter]

1. And this is what many who live up north want to happen here. n/t

[Uben]

2. I like the castle doctrine......

If someone is brazen and stupid enough to break into my home, well.....let's just say it would be a big mistake. A person's home is their sanctuary, the place they feel safe, and one should be able to defend it from any intruders. If they are trying to steal your property, they should do so knowing they face a lethal response.

You see all these stickers from Brinks and other securit companies that say "This home protected by (fill in the blank) security systems. I should put one up saying "This home is protected by the Castle Doctrine" and any intruders will face lethal force"

[GreenStormCloud]

4. Like this? Actual photo of Dallas sign.

[Uben]

5. exactly!

I'm not that far away from Dallas. My wife is from Dallas and we own some commercial real estate there. I live in a gated community with 24/7 security patrols so we don't have a big problem with burglary, but it occasionally happens.

[Hangingon]

7. I have never seen one of those signs.

I live on the Gulf Coast. Where can I get one?

[Katya Mullethov]

3. why would a citizen?

why would a citizen, where it’s so obvious that what he was doing was protecting himself during a continued attack, be put to the expense of a trial? It’s demeaning.”
////////////////

It may be demeaning , but it is what they think we are for .

[krispos42]

8. The burden of proof is on the shooter to prove it was necessary n/t

[Atypical Liberal]

6. This is exactly the Utopia that many here want.

This is exactly the kind of Utopia that many on this forum would want for the United States. No ability to defend yourself or your property, without resorting to a physical contest in hand-to-hand combat with your attacker, or just capitulating to them and giving them what they want, or running away.

There are people here who honestly embrace this as a moral code to live by and impose on others.