You can google how to get laws changed. You won’t. Because bitching on a review board is all you are capable of but google is your friend. So use it if you like. I’m not here to educate you.
Ontario man faces charges after allegedly assaulting home intruder: police
- Thread starter richaceg
- Start date
Yes, the best approach to an argument is to use the common house breakin scenario which is to knife a sleeping child ? You couldn't think of a more outlandish proposal such as the baby is on a BBQ spit that the house intruder is trying to light ?So you find an armed intruder hovering over your newborns crib with a knife in his hand and your approach is to 'give him a few shoves'? Like 'get out of here you pesky armed intruder'?
A little empathy for the intruder, people ! The guy is in a dark unfamiliar house and rooting around unfamiliar dark places looking for your valuables. It's scary enough without homeowners sneaking up and scaring you. Maybe a hall light so we can see and a friendly 'hello?' wouldn't be asking too much. I didn't go to scouts so a little help tying up your wife isn't too much to ask. Alternatively, a little friendly 'I got you' should suffice. Do you think my prospect of facing jail would motivate me to attack you ? Should a physical altercation ensure - avoid the face. My routine bail releases go smoother if I'm not injured.
Last edited:
Meh - your opinion. Many laws are changed because one person spoke up. You could be that one person. You could make history.
Instead you want to bitch at me for stating factual law. I have said I don’t agree. I didn’t say to yell at the intruders to make them go away. I said IF that is all it takes to make someone flee, you can’t chase after them. But you have such a hate on for me personally, you let your emotions get the better of you and you bitch at me instead of the people who can actually change the law.
Maybe you should consider the later to be the correct and proper way. Unless criminals know they will be met with upto and including lethal force on a break and enter do you expect break and enters to stop? or less cars to be stolen? Is a cop shooting an unarmed suspect proportional?
Stealing your car keys has a much bigger impact than you're giving it. For example if you are paying for your 60k car and its half paid off and stolen what do you think your insurance company is going to give you 30k? a new car? The crook won't be found, you're out 40 to 50k and now need to shell out for a new car. After dealing with the bullshit you are 100k out - Should the thief have been maimed absolutely. killed maybe not, but still.
idk about hilarious but unfair as f* certainlyIt will be hilarious if the burglar sues the homeowner.............AND WINS!!!
Bedford got the prostitution laws changed.
If you want an example close to home and care to do the search.
And we both know you have been pissed with me since I laughed a posted you made. It is not rocket science but keep denying it. It’s all good. I know the truth.
Edit: it was in a thread that discussed ODSP that we first started having a difference of opinion and then I laughed at post you made about a government conspiracy to make people drink pasteurized milk that got you hating me. You can go back in your posting history for the examples. Again, I’m not here to do the searching for you.
Last edited:
The real problem is taht cops nowadays do NOT consider the adverse consequences the person being charged will experience. Stress, cost of layers to defend yourself etc. Heck, jsut retaining a lawyer to bring you through the bail and pre-trial stages can be $5-7k. Trial $20-$100k
The cops simply charge the last man standing with asssault, attempted murder, murder, manslaughter etc. They only need probably cause to make the arrest.
Then, as they always say "We leave it for the Courts to decide".
The Crown Attorney's generally assess cases on a win/lose basis, not always on what's right or wrong. More than is good, they will abide by the sunk cost fallacy and bulldoze forward on charges they don't really, personally, believe in or that won't result in a guilty verdict. That''s where you need a good lawyer to tactfully explain the facts of life, and the case, to them to encourage them to drop the charge as there is no reasonable prospect of conviction, or pursuing it would either not be in the best interests of society or bring the judicial system into disrepute by pursuing the case.
Yes. All of that is true but that is their job. It is not their job to make a determination. That is truly for the courts to decide.
The crown should be dismissing charges at or before a first appearance. As soon as they get and review the disclosure.
But most don’t even review the case until the pre-trail because they just have to many cases.
Did I say that it has to be a solo event? No, but it starts with one person and it was her who started it. It was her who set the challenge, the community was only able to assist with more then money, later when the laws were struck down and then the floor was open to community to assist in creating new laws. That is how it works. To change a law, you usually have to strike down the old law. Like I said, google is your friend.
And of course you don’t know what I am talking about.….. that is such an easy line avoid the truth. But you keep up with it, that is fine. Like I said, I know the truth.
As to teh specifics of this, and similar cases.
First. It has been my experience that even if you are the victim of an aggressor and you so much as push him back and he looses his balance falls down, hits his head on a lamp post or sidewalk and is knocked out or bleeding, the cop IS going to charge YOU with assault. Last man standing, especially if they are bigger physically, seems to get charged..no matter what.
In this case, reading between the lines... I wouldn't be surprised that once the homeowner saw.heard/confronted the intruder, he laid a real beating on the intruder. And he opened his mouth using lines like the tough-guy TERBites here have said like "Yeah, well he had it coming and he's lucky he didn'tget carried out in a body bag etc. Or some other words or actions that the homeowner/initial victiim decided to "teach him a lesson" or even saying he knew this guy and was pissed off and angry. Even having a baseball bat at yor front door if you don't play baseball shows your pre-meditated intention to use it as a weapon. Same with having a knife beside your bed. Or a baseball bat in 9our car when you don't play baseball.
Carrying a knife on your person is not illegal so long as your stated intention is to use it to cut twine, boxes or whatever. Once you say, or add, 'and just in case I get attacked I can defend myself', well then that makes it a prohibited weapon. If you happen to use it to defend yourself
Mens rea, aka guilty mind or intent makes all the difference.
If the guy had have said something like; "Well the guy came in and I yelled for him to leave, he didn't and came at me.. and I punched, kicked or pushed him down the stairs to defend myself... and that he got back up and kept coming at me... so I feared for my safety, and life that he may be on a PCP or otherwise mentally invulnerable to simple defense, so I hit him with whatever was close, (fire poker, whatever happened to be near) until he stopped moving SO THAT HE WAS NO LONGER A THREAT to me or my family", than he may very well not have been charged in the first place.
But if Bubba had have said' Yeah, I told the motha fucka to GTFO and he didn't so I taught himself some manners, or that he had a baseball bat beside his bed or front door and wnet looking for the guy and hit a home run as he came around the corner and hit a triple off his face, or worse, the back of his skull, .... well then he's gonna get convicted too.
First. It has been my experience that even if you are the victim of an aggressor and you so much as push him back and he looses his balance falls down, hits his head on a lamp post or sidewalk and is knocked out or bleeding, the cop IS going to charge YOU with assault. Last man standing, especially if they are bigger physically, seems to get charged..no matter what.
In this case, reading between the lines... I wouldn't be surprised that once the homeowner saw.heard/confronted the intruder, he laid a real beating on the intruder. And he opened his mouth using lines like the tough-guy TERBites here have said like "Yeah, well he had it coming and he's lucky he didn'tget carried out in a body bag etc. Or some other words or actions that the homeowner/initial victiim decided to "teach him a lesson" or even saying he knew this guy and was pissed off and angry. Even having a baseball bat at yor front door if you don't play baseball shows your pre-meditated intention to use it as a weapon. Same with having a knife beside your bed. Or a baseball bat in 9our car when you don't play baseball.
Carrying a knife on your person is not illegal so long as your stated intention is to use it to cut twine, boxes or whatever. Once you say, or add, 'and just in case I get attacked I can defend myself', well then that makes it a prohibited weapon. If you happen to use it to defend yourself
Mens rea, aka guilty mind or intent makes all the difference.
If the guy had have said something like; "Well the guy came in and I yelled for him to leave, he didn't and came at me.. and I punched, kicked or pushed him down the stairs to defend myself... and that he got back up and kept coming at me... so I feared for my safety, and life that he may be on a PCP or otherwise mentally invulnerable to simple defense, so I hit him with whatever was close, (fire poker, whatever happened to be near) until he stopped moving SO THAT HE WAS NO LONGER A THREAT to me or my family", than he may very well not have been charged in the first place.
But if Bubba had have said' Yeah, I told the motha fucka to GTFO and he didn't so I taught himself some manners, or that he had a baseball bat beside his bed or front door and wnet looking for the guy and hit a home run as he came around the corner and hit a triple off his face, or worse, the back of his skull, .... well then he's gonna get convicted too.
I didn’t imply that at all. If that is how you read it, that is on you. Again, it often does and can start with one person. Be that person. Take the charge and rally the rest of the folks here who are bitching about the system.
And you got the wrong impression, but you keep letting those emotions show. However, don’t worry about me. I am leaving shortly to up the trailer for the weekend like I do every weekend. You can spend the weekend continue to bitch and moan on a review board. Have a good weekend.
Cops make discretionary decisions every shift. If you've ever been let go from a speeding ticket you know. Also, the offense of seppeding is defined as ONE km/h over the limit. So they have ample latitude.
Cops more often than not will not even send out an officer or investigate car thefts even when the owner says their car has an Air Tag and is located in a specific spot in a Lobaws parking lot for 2 days. They often refuse to lay criminal fraud charges for an NSF cheque and (falsely) claim they can't, that "it's a civil matter."
But bring guns, blood or anything where there is a reason for 30 cops from 50 miles away to come racing at 150km/h to the scene with sirens and flashing lights... and then stand around for a couple hours chatting WHEN THEIR RESPONSE WAS NOT, and continued presence IS NOT required... then that's a different box of donuts.
In this case, the Crown was likely consulted before the charge was laid.. or there were spontaneous utterances of the homeowner indicated some sort of street justice attitude, etc.
Ignore is a wonderful function terb offers sir.
Also go to the 50 second mark below.
Can apply here lol.
NSF is usually a civil matter unless you can prove it was fraudulently written. There are criteria's that have to met.
The system is a legal system. Not a justice system. A speeding ticket is different from an assault charge. Cops are given latitude for the one but not the other.
I got accused 2x by a crazy, date whom I finally told to fuck off when she wouldn't leave me alone after I told her we weren't compatible after we had weird sex and I realized she was a psycho. She outright TOLD me she false accused her last bf of assault because he "disrespected" her. And he went to jail. I said that she was fucked in the head and that I was leaving. She begged me not to leave etc. Made suicide threats etc. "Your choice " I said . I left anyways.
First time she called as I was leaving and I got arrested for domestic assault. Cops were REAL assholes. I gave a full statement, which ultimately saved me as the Crown recognized it as valid and consistent "my word" carried the day as a "sponteneous, contemporaenous utterance". Cops told me they didn't beleive her but the Ontario Domestic Violence Policy says that cops MUST charge when there is a complaint of any sort of assault made against anyone who even so much as had a Tinder coffee date. that the Courts then sort it out. Cost me $10,k to get it dismissed.
Then, 15 years later she saw me with another girl, and reported I had SEXUALLY assaulted her 15 years ago. Even though the cops had VIDEO evidence of her 15 year old reply to the Detective's question asking, she said that "no way he ever sexually assaulted me, ever, he is not that kind of guy. He only slapped me in the face to tell me to shut up"
Again, I got charged, $15k to get this withdrawn.
I was very tempted to bring a civil action against TPS and the Dicks for a negligent and or misfeasant investigation. They ADMITTED they knew she was lying, but they were "handcuffed" by the "policy". Not FEDERAL CRIMINAL CODE LAW, but ONTARIO PROVINCIAL POLICY.
Did the Crown or cops EVER take action against her for false allegations? Of course not! In fact, Disclosure showed she had 12 TWELVE other occurrences on the TPS files of similar mental health outbursts, complaints against other dates that resulted in assault charges etc.
The system is fucked.
Physical and legal Self defence advice.
Learn Krav Maga.
It is an Israeli style of brutal, self defence fighting that is specifically designed to inflict excruciating, debilitating pain on the recipient so that you can flee. Like kick him in the nuts, knee him in the face and break his shin ... then run.
Unlike fighting arts like kickboxing, karate, MMA, Mui Thai, It is NOT a sport.
It is a valid argument that if you, as a trained and practiced sport fighter, defend yourself against an attacker and the attacker is seriously injured, that your application of your skills was excessive and if not deliberate, was reasonably foreseeable.
However, Krav Maga is NOT a sport. There is no sport league for it. You don't compete, otherwise everyone would be carried off with their tesitcles in their small intestines, their eyes poked out and their wrist fractured. It is BRUTAL and causes severe inuries. However, the stated and ONLY goal of Krav maga training is self defense where you incapacitate the aggressor so you can run away without them being able to follow you.
Learn Krav Maga.
It is an Israeli style of brutal, self defence fighting that is specifically designed to inflict excruciating, debilitating pain on the recipient so that you can flee. Like kick him in the nuts, knee him in the face and break his shin ... then run.
Unlike fighting arts like kickboxing, karate, MMA, Mui Thai, It is NOT a sport.
It is a valid argument that if you, as a trained and practiced sport fighter, defend yourself against an attacker and the attacker is seriously injured, that your application of your skills was excessive and if not deliberate, was reasonably foreseeable.
However, Krav Maga is NOT a sport. There is no sport league for it. You don't compete, otherwise everyone would be carried off with their tesitcles in their small intestines, their eyes poked out and their wrist fractured. It is BRUTAL and causes severe inuries. However, the stated and ONLY goal of Krav maga training is self defense where you incapacitate the aggressor so you can run away without them being able to follow you.
Self-Defence Laws in Canada
One of the big concerns many people have regarding self-defence is understanding what they legally can and can't do.
www.tipofspearkravmaga.ca
Read this excellent article for a clear, concise understanding of the specific applications of self defence laws in Canada
Writing a cheque without the funds IN YOUR BANK and failing to maintain such funds to cover the cheque is absolutely a criminal offence. It is a defence if, for reasons outside your control, the funds became unavailable prior to the cheque being cashed. Like Roogers or a subscription service failed to cancel your service and mistakenly withdrew funds or the like.
Here is the AI summary with reference liinks:
Writing an NSF cheque is considered a criminal act when you:
- Knowingly issue the cheque: without sufficient funds in your account.
- Intend to deceive: the person receiving the cheque.
- Obtain something of value: using the false pretence of having funds to cover the cheque.
Exactly. Which means accidentally writing an NSF cheque is not illegal. Unless it can be proven to be one of the 3 you listed, it is civil.
Which most times, that is how it happens. Someone forgets something else is coming out. Or they are some single mom who wrote a cheque for baby bonus day and it didn't go in.
If you go to a store and purposely write a bad cheque, you will be charged. I know a girl who did that and was arrested on multiple charges of fraud. This was like 30 years when stores still took cheques.
I also know a guy who disputed paypal charges as fraud when he knowingly and intentionally gave the money freely and he has been charged with fraud.
Fraud has criteria, like you pointed out and like I said. So when it is clear, with evidence then it is charged. When there is not enough evidence (the cheque is not enough, mindset plays) then it is a civil matter.
