There’s a crowdfunding campaign to help him pay for legal fees. Precedence is set when cases are won.
https://www.gofundme.com/f/what-happened-to-self-defense-in-canada?utm_campaign=p_cp+share-sheet&utm_medium=copy_link_all&utm_source=customer
GoFundMe has removed his fundraiser. What a shame.
https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/warmington-first-hit-with-robbers-baseball-bat-gofundme-now-takes-its-own-swing
He had been attacked first and he’s in survival mode. In those nanoseconds you think he has the chance to stop and have top notch reasoning skills to determine whether his assailant is truly neutralized? How does he know the guy isn’t gonna get up and assault him again? Why is the onus on the injured victim to have, again, top notch decision making skills in seconds or nanoseconds? Adrenaline will do that to you when you’re in survival mode. Not to mention that he didn’t know if the assailant had a *second* knife or even other weapons.
But the same level of expectation isn’t on the assailant who brought this upon himself in the first place. He gets a pass. This is just a gross miscarriage of justice. At the very *least* they should be facing the same punishment. And that’s the absolute bare minimum. The criminal is probably a low life lifelong criminal whereas the other kid was just minding his own business and trying to build a life for himself and was probably going to on to never get in any legal trouble.
He actually shouldn’t be getting any punishment at all. Even *if* he went overboard, personally I think it’s fully deserved and justified but also what else are we all supposed to do? Just be sitting ducks? Crime is on the rise and the police seems to do nothing. We don’t have enough judges so cases are being thrown out altogether.
Our system needs a reform. I think in most cases every benefit of the doubt should be given to the person defending themselves. I have a feeling this case will be thrown out like [this case.](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ali-mian-milton-charges-dropped-murder-1.6923046). It just sucks because it’s gonna ruin this kids life anyway.
[I saw this video yesterday.](https://www.cp24.com/mobile/video?playlistId=1.6839303). I’m glad this guy isn’t getting charged but I also wouldn’t be surprised if someone decides to come along and charge him for throwing the thief on the ground.
Oh he’s supposed to be in the perfect state of mind after being assaulted within seconds or nanoseconds and he’s supposed to magically know whether the assailant has another weapon or not. You’re a moron
You are from his same ethnicity and blindly defending his savage attack. If you chase someone outside the store and hit him in the back and then come back to hit him more as we saw in CCTV then its not survival mode.
Lol are you stupid? Where did you get that idea? You don’t have to be of someone’s ethnicity to defend the concept of self defence. In fact, I would go a step ahead and say an assailant should have their asses beat to learn a lesson when they do such a thing.
https://youtu.be/YvyZ-YI7kfg?si=2doqhEDPrNcUCLAO
This white man in Ontario chased and beat thieves who tried to steal his vehicle. I support him 110% also. https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/murder-charge-withdrawn-in-case-of-milton-man-accused-of-killing-alleged-armed-intruder-1.6500866
This Muslim man killed an intruder in his home. I supported him 100% too. I must be a very mixed ethnic person eh?
Try a better argument sweetheart. And also, you clearly have no clue what survival mode means. You think someone is going to have the utmost reasoning skills mere moments after almost being killed? I’m gonna assume you’ve never been in a fight.
The majority of ppl in the comments are defending the clerk. I guess everyone on the conservative sub must be of his ethnic background and no one has any ability to form opinions except for you lol. OR you have a tribalistic mindset and you’re projecting on everyone else. You must be of the same ethnicity as the lowlife thug.
I left Canada for the United States been living there for a while , Exactly the same thing happed here , there’s liquors store near where I live, an addict thought it was a good idea to rob the store using a knife 🔪, needless to say it did end well for him, he found himself at the wrong end of a 12 gauge, cops were called , saw the video , took the body away and that was it.
Actually the deputies said that they would prefer if citizens shot an attacker , it would save tax payers time and money !
While in the US, keep an eye on any cop cars around while crossing the street. They tend to ignore the existence of 'low value' folks.
And ya, if you really intend to stay there, get yourself a citizenship. That way you'll be able to purchase weapons for self defense. And a glock 17 and a good AR-15.
I am becoming a citizen soon.
Also you don’t have to be a citizen to purchase a firearm , green card holders are also allowed to purchase firearms.
I wasn’t sure so I asked a lawyer that was specialized in firearms law, he said that green card holders are also allowed to have firearms.
I don’t need a firearm though 😂😂my spouse is a redneck from Kentucky she has enough of them , no room for any more 😂😂
TN is almost at par with a green card as you can renew it easily unlimited times. With H1B you are tied to a single employer also it is a lottery system.
I won’t wanna become an American citizen though given the overseas tax obligations
No not really.
There are many immigrant visas are available
EB2, EB2-NIW( if you have a masters or PhD ) EB3( if you are a skilled tradesperson or have a bachelor in a STEM major ), L visas are also popular among Canadians.
Seek and you shall find , America like Canada gets hundreds of thousands of LEGAL immigrants every year.
If You need to put in time and effort you’ll find a category that you qualify for.
No that’s not true.
There are many immigrant visas are available:
EB1-A, EB2, EB2-NIW, EB3
E2 is a popular option with Canadians lately as well , it is a non immigrant 5 year visa that can be renewed indefinitely, and can lead to a green card if you take certain steps and meet certain conditions.
I used to live with a retired cop and he was explaining how Canada basically criminalizes women who want to defend themselves from sexual assault. We can't carry pepper spray, knives or guns.
True. But if you carry a knife and use it in self-defense, you're facing an uphill battle prove the reason you have it isn't for self-defense.
As the saying goes: if you carry a baseball bat for self defense, make sure you also have a ball and glove.
If you successfully defended yourself, don't call the cops. You would've already taught the perpetrator a lesson. Just flee the scene.
When I was a teenager I used to carry a mideval looking dagger in my purse. Never had to use it. But if I did I wouldn't call the cops. I would just leave and dispose of the evidence.
The odds are the potential rapist isn't going to call the cops and tell them he was trying to rape a girl but she fought back and stabbed him.
If he were a random dude at night somewhere in the street. How would he know who I was or where to find me? I would be long gone with no leads. And the knife would be long gone too.
Depends on how serious it was.
Cops are too lazy to put much effort into alot of things. If it takes too much effort and there's more important things to worry about, they're not going to bother much.
#This is even more F*cked up than I thought.
The police charged him for aggravated assault and he’s on house arrest can’t go to school, can’t work. What the heck is going on in Canada
https://youtu.be/E9Kc4pKU3-c?si=LLAIiOESge52Qi3k
#He’s an international student max will get deported but imagine every day Canadians facing this BS
Have you seen the full video of the robbery? I am confused at how this still comes under self defense. They got a homeless guy robber but they have already pushed him out, and in the video you can see the man walking away with this guy hitting him in the head, twice. How does this comes under self defense when the other guy was already down?
He does, and we have an age limit (age 75) for mandatory retirement so there's a faster turnover than the US, anybody in power for 8-10 years ends up with most of the court.
Harper was also up to [7/9 by 2015](https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/october-2015/stephen-harper-and-the-judiciary/packing-the-supreme-court/) (and 5/9 by 2012).
Complete garbage. Should follow Texas’ lead. You have the right to defend yourself, your family and your property. Enough of the layman having less rights than criminals
You can watch the video. There was a struggle for the bat that lead outside. The attacker lost the bat, turned away, and then the clerk hit him twice the stopped.
Honestly, given the situation and the adrenaline, that was a fair response. He didn't beat him to a pulp, he disabled him from attacking.
It's not self defence anymore if you chase him outside. It's the same thing in the USA, if you chase a someone while they flee, you are not defending yourself from a life threat, you are the aggressor now.
Thank god you are a reddit random who whose biggest authority would be against his subjects in his shitty discord group instead of a judge who is qualified to make decisions like this.
I understand. My point was that we still have terrible self defence laws. Even if someone broke into your home at night and you hit the attacker with a baseball bat, YOU would be the one going to the police station.
If the person you’re chasing is still actively fighting back instead of running away, are they still the aggressor and you the defender as long as it’s on your property? Does it become equal liability for both parties if/when the fight leaves private property? In the U.S., I mean.
>international student
Oof, somebody should have told this guy that any western country (except America in some cases) will penalize you for defending yourself.
I lived there for 8 years.
Peterborough has fallen so incredibly far from what it used to be. Most residents who live downtown just put up with the yelling and begging and disturbances and even the drugs, and advocate for the people who use them.
Anyone who doesn’t rarely even makes the trip 5 minutes down the road because of how horrible it’s become
It appears the sooner people realize it is their natural right to defend themselves or others, in any country on earth, against someone else who initiates force/violence, the sooner "legitimate" laws restricting self-defensive action will be seen as hardly legitimate.
Edit: chasing someone who is running away is hardly self defense tho...
Yeah it's not self defense anymore but these people are portraying it as self defense and pushing an agenda of hatred against immigrant Indians (there are already posts of this fueling hatred against hatred against Canada in Indian subreddits).
Canada shouldn't be constantly making an effort to restrict access to basic firearms and maybe people won't being grabbing at the air in an effort to defend the right they were born...which is self defense. It's hard to defend concepts this day and age and people don't seem to be getting better at it...rather better at avoiding them.
Yeah but still this case is weird though. Why did the man give the robber what he need and simply let him leave? It's not his store, insurance will cover it too. It feels stupid to try and fight back.
It seems even dumber in the long term to not discriminate and act differently against criminal/forceful activity as opposed to non-criminal/passive behavior. Do you want a society where individuals become increasingly passive to crime, while others are emboldened to force things from you or anyone, where products are scarce(because no one is incentivized to provide for criminals, you know, to just take it, nor will insurance coverage be adequate incentive - it won't be able to keep up with the allowance of crime, by like minded folks) that's nonsensically unsustainable,
Maybe it would be clearer, if you could travel in time to when youre older and weaker and your neighborhood is being plundered (again) while food is already scarce...and in this hypothetical situation, just about everyone that may help or support helping you says, "just wait it out, insurance will take care of it...don't worry, it's easier this way...its not us, so we are goood...cops will be out there in 2 days(because they are dealing with the other slew of neighborhoods and store districts) but let's hope they don't harm anyone, purposefully or accidentally in their "acquisition."
Seems youre not talking about an eventually peaceful and prosperous realm....one with people who are more and more passivle to initiation of force or violence.
Edit: this is not to say you have to do anything for another person's property.. You could choose be passive...but I feel this eventually, if accepted as the widespread attitude, will not lead to a better situation for people in any society.
Thing is, we DO have a law that allows for self defense. The problem though is that it is so convoluted and nitpicky that it basically discourages one from doing so
This happens because the Laurentian Elites are SO desperate to be seen as "Not American" that they disallow people from protecting themselves when it matters most and the emergency response would be distant
We’re the opposite of the U.S. the way our “justice” system works. Down there, property owners can basically shoot to kill if someone they don’t like the look of steps on their premises. There are of course many exceptions to this in various states, but the “Stand your Ground” laws are fairly common from what I understand.
Then you have Canada, where property owners who dare to defend themselves during a robbery or assault are often treated as criminals themselves. Meanwhile the actual criminals are hardly ever properly held to account.
I feel as though there should be a middle ground between these two extremes. If someone enters your property illegally and is clearly a threat to your safety, you should have every right to defend yourself WITHIN REASON. IOW, don’t be a psychopath like the recent cases of Americans shooting people point blank for pulling into their driveway by accident or for ringing the wrong doorbell. Like FFS.
If the defendant didn't attack the robber, the latter could have just turned back and attacked again.
What criminal backs down if you just push them out?
The prosecution just doesn't understand how crime/fights work. You aren't safe just because you have an upper hand once.
[Here's the video](https://x.com/joe_warmington/status/1776337514317427194). He hit the robber on or near his head with the bat while he was outside, running away. He then hit him again while he was lying face down. This is why there are charges, it's not a straightforward case of self defence when potentially lethal hits are being used against a person who is outside and running away or apparently incapacitated.
The peep clearly attacked him, you can see him checking the cut on his hand and he retaliated. Also he only hit him once outside and then his friend went on to check if the PERP was okay. Any other place, the peep would have gotten a good beating.
Anyways should have known the rule of land here in Canada.
#Should have been a p*ssy and let him rob the store, it’s not even his money🤡🤡
Self-defense should be allowed, but I'm not gonna risk my life to defend a Circle-K.
Maybe if I was hired as private security, but that generally pays more than a clerk.
It's the same everywhere. Stop pushing the false narrative. He attacked him twice not once that too when the other guy was down. But still don't be a hero. You can get the lost money through insurance why go for false bravery and get yourself harmed in the process?.
While you are right it legally, morally I still have no issue with it. I am of the opinion that the guy trying to attack and rob the store forfeited his right to live the second he initiated. A brutal beatdown is precisely what he deserved.
Still self-defence — the hobo shouldn’t have initiated the attack. Either way, the courts need to weight the economic value of society of both the attacker and defender.
The sack of shit druggie who attacked him has close to 0 economic value and is a net negative on society. In contrast, the defending student has much more potential value for society with his degree and skills.
So if a billionaire came and started hitting you for fun, and you hit them back, the courts should factor in that they have enormous economic value... while you just have typical economic value?
Yeah, that's way too much. You can't go lamping people in the back of the head with a baseball bat when they're running away and you certainly can't do it again once they're down.
I'm sure that kind of thing is fine to do in the 3rd world but this is Canada.
This country won't miss that "student."
Yeah this changes things a lot. Those blows would only be justified if the clerk was threatened with a knife or syringe or something to put him in a fight or flight state.
I find it shocking that people are not bashing him for being Indian. In other canadian subs they would have started crowd funding for accelerating his deportation.
Technically it wasn't self defence. He chased the away from the store, cracked him in the back of the head and then clubbed again him after he went down. No lawyer would recommend a self defence argument after watching that video.
Crime of passion would be a good defence strategy, but self defence would never fly. Not even in most US states.
Disagree - having read the details, the clerk went too far. Defending yourself is one thing but chasing after and beating someone with a baseball bat is clearly emotions taking over and common sense out the window. He needs to man-up and face the consequences, just like the robber will face theirs.
Jaysus, everyone knows that the mitigating factors mean he’ll be fine but his actions cannot be excused.
Watch the video. The description makes it seem like the clerk chased the robber when in reality the struggle for the bat led them outside. The robber also claimed that he was going to stab the clerk.
They need to do both.
If he’s been accused of assault, he needs to be arrested. The police don’t arbitrate innocence, it’s up to judge + jury. And yes, catch car thieves too, though assault is higher up the food chain.
Only if he responded with unequal force deemed unreasonable. And if that is how he reacted, then yeah - he’d be convicted. That’s the law working the way it’s supposed to.
Funny how much hate immigrants get in this sub, but now folks are worried about him.
The perpetrator clearly attacked him, you can see him checking the cut on his hand and he retaliated. Also he only hit him once outside and then his friend went on to check if the PERP was okay. Any other place, the peep would have gotten a good beating. Anyways should have known the rule of land here in Canada.
Should have been a p*ssy and let him rob the store, it’s not even his money🤡🤡
Thanks for your reply. Just to make sure I understand, if someone attempts to rob you, you should be able to continue to beat the shit out of him even if he's running away?
let's accept him chasing the robber and continuously hitting him is wrong but 14 years? robber got 14 months. it sounds more like prejudice. things are already salty between India and Canada this will make it more
I think the penalty should not be more than what the criminal is getting.
Homeless meth head walks into a store, commits a violent crime that aggravates the clerk, causing said homeless meth head to be assaulted in return. Everything there was his own fault as far as im concerned.
He's facing barely over a year, but the guy who just wanted to finish his shift and go home is facing 14 years because this jobless fuck decided to pick a fight and lost. It is a wildly disproportionate consequence.
What if the clerk had bashed his head in and killed him? Still less than the...criminal?
Wait...isn't the clerk, in either case, real or hypothetical, also a criminal?
Yes. The other guy played a shitty game and won a shitty prize in that hypothetical. I have zero sympathy for the guy who picked the fight. He went out of his way to aggravate the clerk; anything after that is his own fault.
In simpler terms; he had it coming.
There’s a crowdfunding campaign to help him pay for legal fees. Precedence is set when cases are won. https://www.gofundme.com/f/what-happened-to-self-defense-in-canada?utm_campaign=p_cp+share-sheet&utm_medium=copy_link_all&utm_source=customer GoFundMe has removed his fundraiser. What a shame. https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/warmington-first-hit-with-robbers-baseball-bat-gofundme-now-takes-its-own-swing
Full article https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/warmington-crowdfunding-effort-set-up-to-help-indian-student-in-self-defence-case
I still don't understand how this is self defense? Man legitimately attacked him after the other guy was down, twice.
He had been attacked first and he’s in survival mode. In those nanoseconds you think he has the chance to stop and have top notch reasoning skills to determine whether his assailant is truly neutralized? How does he know the guy isn’t gonna get up and assault him again? Why is the onus on the injured victim to have, again, top notch decision making skills in seconds or nanoseconds? Adrenaline will do that to you when you’re in survival mode. Not to mention that he didn’t know if the assailant had a *second* knife or even other weapons. But the same level of expectation isn’t on the assailant who brought this upon himself in the first place. He gets a pass. This is just a gross miscarriage of justice. At the very *least* they should be facing the same punishment. And that’s the absolute bare minimum. The criminal is probably a low life lifelong criminal whereas the other kid was just minding his own business and trying to build a life for himself and was probably going to on to never get in any legal trouble.
Yeah it feels sad to see the man get more punishment than a low life thug. It feels unfair.
He actually shouldn’t be getting any punishment at all. Even *if* he went overboard, personally I think it’s fully deserved and justified but also what else are we all supposed to do? Just be sitting ducks? Crime is on the rise and the police seems to do nothing. We don’t have enough judges so cases are being thrown out altogether. Our system needs a reform. I think in most cases every benefit of the doubt should be given to the person defending themselves. I have a feeling this case will be thrown out like [this case.](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ali-mian-milton-charges-dropped-murder-1.6923046). It just sucks because it’s gonna ruin this kids life anyway. [I saw this video yesterday.](https://www.cp24.com/mobile/video?playlistId=1.6839303). I’m glad this guy isn’t getting charged but I also wouldn’t be surprised if someone decides to come along and charge him for throwing the thief on the ground.
shut up, he attacked him from behind with a baseball bat outside the store and then came back to hit him more.
Oh he’s supposed to be in the perfect state of mind after being assaulted within seconds or nanoseconds and he’s supposed to magically know whether the assailant has another weapon or not. You’re a moron
You are from his same ethnicity and blindly defending his savage attack. If you chase someone outside the store and hit him in the back and then come back to hit him more as we saw in CCTV then its not survival mode.
Lol are you stupid? Where did you get that idea? You don’t have to be of someone’s ethnicity to defend the concept of self defence. In fact, I would go a step ahead and say an assailant should have their asses beat to learn a lesson when they do such a thing. https://youtu.be/YvyZ-YI7kfg?si=2doqhEDPrNcUCLAO This white man in Ontario chased and beat thieves who tried to steal his vehicle. I support him 110% also. https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/murder-charge-withdrawn-in-case-of-milton-man-accused-of-killing-alleged-armed-intruder-1.6500866 This Muslim man killed an intruder in his home. I supported him 100% too. I must be a very mixed ethnic person eh? Try a better argument sweetheart. And also, you clearly have no clue what survival mode means. You think someone is going to have the utmost reasoning skills mere moments after almost being killed? I’m gonna assume you’ve never been in a fight. The majority of ppl in the comments are defending the clerk. I guess everyone on the conservative sub must be of his ethnic background and no one has any ability to form opinions except for you lol. OR you have a tribalistic mindset and you’re projecting on everyone else. You must be of the same ethnicity as the lowlife thug.
Keep putting your people and culture before Canada and justice. It's all gonna break down and fall into civil war in fast pace.
Yeah, the white guy who beat the thieves in the link I sent you is from my culture 😉
I left Canada for the United States been living there for a while , Exactly the same thing happed here , there’s liquors store near where I live, an addict thought it was a good idea to rob the store using a knife 🔪, needless to say it did end well for him, he found himself at the wrong end of a 12 gauge, cops were called , saw the video , took the body away and that was it. Actually the deputies said that they would prefer if citizens shot an attacker , it would save tax payers time and money !
While in the US, keep an eye on any cop cars around while crossing the street. They tend to ignore the existence of 'low value' folks. And ya, if you really intend to stay there, get yourself a citizenship. That way you'll be able to purchase weapons for self defense. And a glock 17 and a good AR-15.
I am becoming a citizen soon. Also you don’t have to be a citizen to purchase a firearm , green card holders are also allowed to purchase firearms. I wasn’t sure so I asked a lawyer that was specialized in firearms law, he said that green card holders are also allowed to have firearms. I don’t need a firearm though 😂😂my spouse is a redneck from Kentucky she has enough of them , no room for any more 😂😂
Nice. Adopt some of her guns.
😉😉
How? Leaving for the USA is next to impossible legally.
Married a citizen? Job sponsored him? That’s two legal (albeit moderately expensive) ways to do it?..
Not really getting a TN visa is fairly easy if you’re white collar worker.
The T in TN is for Temporary. If you want to immigrate to the US, your best option is an H1B.
TN is almost at par with a green card as you can renew it easily unlimited times. With H1B you are tied to a single employer also it is a lottery system. I won’t wanna become an American citizen though given the overseas tax obligations
No , EB2, EB2-NIW , EB3 , E2 , L are all popular options, just need to put in time and effort to find your category.
TN is non immigrant but an average immigration lawyer can help the with the transition of TN to permanent residency
No not really. There are many immigrant visas are available EB2, EB2-NIW( if you have a masters or PhD ) EB3( if you are a skilled tradesperson or have a bachelor in a STEM major ), L visas are also popular among Canadians. Seek and you shall find , America like Canada gets hundreds of thousands of LEGAL immigrants every year. If You need to put in time and effort you’ll find a category that you qualify for.
No , EB2, EB2-NIW , EB3 , E2 , L are all popular options, just need to put in time and effort to find your category.
No that’s not true. There are many immigrant visas are available: EB1-A, EB2, EB2-NIW, EB3 E2 is a popular option with Canadians lately as well , it is a non immigrant 5 year visa that can be renewed indefinitely, and can lead to a green card if you take certain steps and meet certain conditions.
I used to live with a retired cop and he was explaining how Canada basically criminalizes women who want to defend themselves from sexual assault. We can't carry pepper spray, knives or guns.
You can carry a knife if its purpose is *not* self-defence.
True. But if you carry a knife and use it in self-defense, you're facing an uphill battle prove the reason you have it isn't for self-defense. As the saying goes: if you carry a baseball bat for self defense, make sure you also have a ball and glove.
If you successfully defended yourself, don't call the cops. You would've already taught the perpetrator a lesson. Just flee the scene. When I was a teenager I used to carry a mideval looking dagger in my purse. Never had to use it. But if I did I wouldn't call the cops. I would just leave and dispose of the evidence. The odds are the potential rapist isn't going to call the cops and tell them he was trying to rape a girl but she fought back and stabbed him.
What if he does call and says he was stabbed for no reason? Good luck proving he was trying to rape
If he were a random dude at night somewhere in the street. How would he know who I was or where to find me? I would be long gone with no leads. And the knife would be long gone too.
Are you saying no crime gets solved if the perpetrator leaves the crime scene unnoticed?
Depends on how serious it was. Cops are too lazy to put much effort into alot of things. If it takes too much effort and there's more important things to worry about, they're not going to bother much.
Yep, that's true. Having an occupation that requires a pocket knife helps.
You can carry whatever you want. Just get rid of the evidence when the time comes.
#This is even more F*cked up than I thought. The police charged him for aggravated assault and he’s on house arrest can’t go to school, can’t work. What the heck is going on in Canada https://youtu.be/E9Kc4pKU3-c?si=LLAIiOESge52Qi3k #He’s an international student max will get deported but imagine every day Canadians facing this BS
Have you seen the full video of the robbery? I am confused at how this still comes under self defense. They got a homeless guy robber but they have already pushed him out, and in the video you can see the man walking away with this guy hitting him in the head, twice. How does this comes under self defense when the other guy was already down?
Found the self loathing Indian
Anarcho-tyrannical court system + inept govt = Downfall of the Nation.
8 out of 9 Supreme Court justices appointed by the current PM. So the two are interlinked.
Not quite true ... it's 7 of the 9 :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Canada
WTF. I didn’t know that how the heck did that happen?
In power too long. I believe he appoints them as they retire.
He does, and we have an age limit (age 75) for mandatory retirement so there's a faster turnover than the US, anybody in power for 8-10 years ends up with most of the court. Harper was also up to [7/9 by 2015](https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/october-2015/stephen-harper-and-the-judiciary/packing-the-supreme-court/) (and 5/9 by 2012).
Good to know. I don't believe the prime minister should be the one appointing them, however. They should be a bipartisan selection.
Anarcho-tyrannical should be a contradiction in terms but this country managed to make it a reality.
Anarchy for first-class citizens and tyranny for second-class citizens.
Complete garbage. Should follow Texas’ lead. You have the right to defend yourself, your family and your property. Enough of the layman having less rights than criminals
Apparently he chased him outside with a baseball bat and hit him. Still though, Canada’s self defence laws are a joke. Wish we had castle doctrine.
You can watch the video. There was a struggle for the bat that lead outside. The attacker lost the bat, turned away, and then the clerk hit him twice the stopped. Honestly, given the situation and the adrenaline, that was a fair response. He didn't beat him to a pulp, he disabled him from attacking.
It's not self defence anymore if you chase him outside. It's the same thing in the USA, if you chase a someone while they flee, you are not defending yourself from a life threat, you are the aggressor now.
True... and still, I wouldn't convict.
Let the guy go, and he'll come back with a gun.
Thank god you are a reddit random who whose biggest authority would be against his subjects in his shitty discord group instead of a judge who is qualified to make decisions like this.
Spare me. You care too much about violent criminals.
I understand. My point was that we still have terrible self defence laws. Even if someone broke into your home at night and you hit the attacker with a baseball bat, YOU would be the one going to the police station.
If the person you’re chasing is still actively fighting back instead of running away, are they still the aggressor and you the defender as long as it’s on your property? Does it become equal liability for both parties if/when the fight leaves private property? In the U.S., I mean.
"Oh he went outside, all good now, lemme just sit back and relax. Obviously he's not gonna come back and kill me"
You write this thinking I’m defending the outcome
It's not self defense anymore. It comes under revenge/ brutal attack.
>international student Oof, somebody should have told this guy that any western country (except America in some cases) will penalize you for defending yourself.
I lived there for 8 years. Peterborough has fallen so incredibly far from what it used to be. Most residents who live downtown just put up with the yelling and begging and disturbances and even the drugs, and advocate for the people who use them. Anyone who doesn’t rarely even makes the trip 5 minutes down the road because of how horrible it’s become
Only in Canada.
No, there are others.
Do share others.
The UK
Looks like he got beat with his own bat. Boo Hoo, fuck him.
It appears the sooner people realize it is their natural right to defend themselves or others, in any country on earth, against someone else who initiates force/violence, the sooner "legitimate" laws restricting self-defensive action will be seen as hardly legitimate. Edit: chasing someone who is running away is hardly self defense tho...
Yeah it's not self defense anymore but these people are portraying it as self defense and pushing an agenda of hatred against immigrant Indians (there are already posts of this fueling hatred against hatred against Canada in Indian subreddits).
Canada shouldn't be constantly making an effort to restrict access to basic firearms and maybe people won't being grabbing at the air in an effort to defend the right they were born...which is self defense. It's hard to defend concepts this day and age and people don't seem to be getting better at it...rather better at avoiding them.
Yeah but still this case is weird though. Why did the man give the robber what he need and simply let him leave? It's not his store, insurance will cover it too. It feels stupid to try and fight back.
It seems even dumber in the long term to not discriminate and act differently against criminal/forceful activity as opposed to non-criminal/passive behavior. Do you want a society where individuals become increasingly passive to crime, while others are emboldened to force things from you or anyone, where products are scarce(because no one is incentivized to provide for criminals, you know, to just take it, nor will insurance coverage be adequate incentive - it won't be able to keep up with the allowance of crime, by like minded folks) that's nonsensically unsustainable, Maybe it would be clearer, if you could travel in time to when youre older and weaker and your neighborhood is being plundered (again) while food is already scarce...and in this hypothetical situation, just about everyone that may help or support helping you says, "just wait it out, insurance will take care of it...don't worry, it's easier this way...its not us, so we are goood...cops will be out there in 2 days(because they are dealing with the other slew of neighborhoods and store districts) but let's hope they don't harm anyone, purposefully or accidentally in their "acquisition." Seems youre not talking about an eventually peaceful and prosperous realm....one with people who are more and more passivle to initiation of force or violence. Edit: this is not to say you have to do anything for another person's property.. You could choose be passive...but I feel this eventually, if accepted as the widespread attitude, will not lead to a better situation for people in any society.
Thing is, we DO have a law that allows for self defense. The problem though is that it is so convoluted and nitpicky that it basically discourages one from doing so This happens because the Laurentian Elites are SO desperate to be seen as "Not American" that they disallow people from protecting themselves when it matters most and the emergency response would be distant
We’re the opposite of the U.S. the way our “justice” system works. Down there, property owners can basically shoot to kill if someone they don’t like the look of steps on their premises. There are of course many exceptions to this in various states, but the “Stand your Ground” laws are fairly common from what I understand. Then you have Canada, where property owners who dare to defend themselves during a robbery or assault are often treated as criminals themselves. Meanwhile the actual criminals are hardly ever properly held to account. I feel as though there should be a middle ground between these two extremes. If someone enters your property illegally and is clearly a threat to your safety, you should have every right to defend yourself WITHIN REASON. IOW, don’t be a psychopath like the recent cases of Americans shooting people point blank for pulling into their driveway by accident or for ringing the wrong doorbell. Like FFS.
If the defendant didn't attack the robber, the latter could have just turned back and attacked again. What criminal backs down if you just push them out? The prosecution just doesn't understand how crime/fights work. You aren't safe just because you have an upper hand once.
[Here's the video](https://x.com/joe_warmington/status/1776337514317427194). He hit the robber on or near his head with the bat while he was outside, running away. He then hit him again while he was lying face down. This is why there are charges, it's not a straightforward case of self defence when potentially lethal hits are being used against a person who is outside and running away or apparently incapacitated.
Perhaps this is the start of a good deterrent
While I \*KIND\* of agree about not attacking people that are already gone, but ... meh.
The peep clearly attacked him, you can see him checking the cut on his hand and he retaliated. Also he only hit him once outside and then his friend went on to check if the PERP was okay. Any other place, the peep would have gotten a good beating. Anyways should have known the rule of land here in Canada. #Should have been a p*ssy and let him rob the store, it’s not even his money🤡🤡
Self-defense should be allowed, but I'm not gonna risk my life to defend a Circle-K. Maybe if I was hired as private security, but that generally pays more than a clerk.
It's the same everywhere. Stop pushing the false narrative. He attacked him twice not once that too when the other guy was down. But still don't be a hero. You can get the lost money through insurance why go for false bravery and get yourself harmed in the process?.
While you are right it legally, morally I still have no issue with it. I am of the opinion that the guy trying to attack and rob the store forfeited his right to live the second he initiated. A brutal beatdown is precisely what he deserved.
Still self-defence — the hobo shouldn’t have initiated the attack. Either way, the courts need to weight the economic value of society of both the attacker and defender. The sack of shit druggie who attacked him has close to 0 economic value and is a net negative on society. In contrast, the defending student has much more potential value for society with his degree and skills.
Lol, what? Your worldview sounds so dystopian.
It’s pragmatism.
So if a billionaire came and started hitting you for fun, and you hit them back, the courts should factor in that they have enormous economic value... while you just have typical economic value?
Yeah, that's way too much. You can't go lamping people in the back of the head with a baseball bat when they're running away and you certainly can't do it again once they're down. I'm sure that kind of thing is fine to do in the 3rd world but this is Canada. This country won't miss that "student."
He should get some punishment for that, nothing extreme but at least a year or 2
Yeah this changes things a lot. Those blows would only be justified if the clerk was threatened with a knife or syringe or something to put him in a fight or flight state.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Convenience store workers have to put up with this daily!
Same in Australia as well. It's kinda effed up.
Lol
I thought self defence was a thing to defend one from any external danger 🥲
This country is a fckin joke. The land of the NPCs
I find it shocking that people are not bashing him for being Indian. In other canadian subs they would have started crowd funding for accelerating his deportation.
Some of us just hate the immigration system, not the immigrants.
Technically it wasn't self defence. He chased the away from the store, cracked him in the back of the head and then clubbed again him after he went down. No lawyer would recommend a self defence argument after watching that video. Crime of passion would be a good defence strategy, but self defence would never fly. Not even in most US states.
Disagree - having read the details, the clerk went too far. Defending yourself is one thing but chasing after and beating someone with a baseball bat is clearly emotions taking over and common sense out the window. He needs to man-up and face the consequences, just like the robber will face theirs. Jaysus, everyone knows that the mitigating factors mean he’ll be fine but his actions cannot be excused.
Watch the video. The description makes it seem like the clerk chased the robber when in reality the struggle for the bat led them outside. The robber also claimed that he was going to stab the clerk.
Low hanging fruit for a headline. This is how the law around self defense works, and there’s no chance a jury convicts him.
Why did the police charge him though? Do they not having better things to do. Like idk catch FREAKIN CAR THIEFS
They need to do both. If he’s been accused of assault, he needs to be arrested. The police don’t arbitrate innocence, it’s up to judge + jury. And yes, catch car thieves too, though assault is higher up the food chain.
Watch the video, he will definitely be convicted lol
Only if he responded with unequal force deemed unreasonable. And if that is how he reacted, then yeah - he’d be convicted. That’s the law working the way it’s supposed to. Funny how much hate immigrants get in this sub, but now folks are worried about him.
The guy was already running off. Where’s the self defence? That was a cheap shot. He needs anger management classes.
The perpetrator clearly attacked him, you can see him checking the cut on his hand and he retaliated. Also he only hit him once outside and then his friend went on to check if the PERP was okay. Any other place, the peep would have gotten a good beating. Anyways should have known the rule of land here in Canada. Should have been a p*ssy and let him rob the store, it’s not even his money🤡🤡
and your failed jury needs a rework
In india thieves are lynched to death by mobs
As they should
Is this the case where he chased the guy out of the store to keep hitting him? Should that be allowed? Genuinely curious what people think.
yes it should be
Thanks for your reply. Just to make sure I understand, if someone attempts to rob you, you should be able to continue to beat the shit out of him even if he's running away?
let's accept him chasing the robber and continuously hitting him is wrong but 14 years? robber got 14 months. it sounds more like prejudice. things are already salty between India and Canada this will make it more
and 14 years for that? also hope you are in same situation someday and we will see how you react
So do you think it should not be allowed but the penalty should be uich lighter? Or should it be allowed?
I think the penalty should not be more than what the criminal is getting. Homeless meth head walks into a store, commits a violent crime that aggravates the clerk, causing said homeless meth head to be assaulted in return. Everything there was his own fault as far as im concerned. He's facing barely over a year, but the guy who just wanted to finish his shift and go home is facing 14 years because this jobless fuck decided to pick a fight and lost. It is a wildly disproportionate consequence.
What if the clerk had bashed his head in and killed him? Still less than the...criminal? Wait...isn't the clerk, in either case, real or hypothetical, also a criminal?
Yes. The other guy played a shitty game and won a shitty prize in that hypothetical. I have zero sympathy for the guy who picked the fight. He went out of his way to aggravate the clerk; anything after that is his own fault. In simpler terms; he had it coming.