個人資料
正文

加拿大保守黨提案 家裏進賊可用武力防衛 媒體 早該如此

(2025-09-23 04:35:25) 下一個

加拿大保守黨提案 家裏進賊可用武力防衛  媒體 早該如此

美加持槍差別

報道還解釋說,加拿大和美國都允許私人持槍,但美國很多州有城堡法和不退讓法,對進入私人領地的入侵者可以開槍射擊;

而加拿大考槍牌時明確告訴大家,槍可以娛樂、健身、狩獵、收藏,但不是用來防身的。

所以當安省一名在家中與持武器闖入者發生衝突的44歲男子被警方以襲擊罪名提起訴訟後民眾嘩然,因為加拿大法律要求“自衛行為必須與所麵臨的威脅程度相稱”。

但誰能在幾秒中隻能做出準確判斷自己使用的武力是否恰到好處,每一個“不懂法”的加拿大人都支持防衛者,這就說明法律條文本身出了問題。

波利耶夫雷希望在《刑法》中明確“合理”的自衛

Poilievre wants 'reasonable' self-defence defined in Criminal Code

By The Canadian Press  

"令人憤慨,荒謬可笑:波利耶夫雷抨擊基於移民身份的“量刑折扣"

保守黨領袖皮埃爾·波利耶夫雷表示,任何在加拿大境內申請移民並犯罪的人都應被“驅逐出境”。

渥太華——保守黨領袖皮埃爾·波利耶夫雷周五表示,聯邦政府需要修改《刑法》,使使用武力(包括致命武力)來保護自己的家和家人,在有人闖入時被視為合理行為。
安大略省布蘭普頓市的波利耶夫爾召開了新聞發布會,此舉引發了公眾對一名安大略省男子被指控襲擊他人的強烈抗議。這名男子遭遇了另一名男子持弩闖入其公寓的事件。

司法部長肖恩·弗雷澤在社交媒體上表示,根據前總理斯蒂芬·哈珀“在波利耶夫爾的支持下”提出的一項法律,加拿大人已經擁有自衛的權利。

《刑法》規定,如果一個人認為有人對自己使用了武力或武力威脅,隻要他們的行為“在當時情況下是合理的”,就可以自衛。

該法律列出了在確定合理性時需要考慮的九個因素,包括威脅的性質、是否有其他應對手段、事件是否涉及武器,以及涉事人員的體型、年齡和性別。

波利耶夫爾表示,如果麵對入侵者,這些情況過於複雜,無法在當下就考慮。

“如果你在保衛自己的房子,你沒有時間考慮九種不同的情況。你隻有一個條件——保護你自己和你的孩子,”他說。

波利耶夫表示,如果政府不提出自己的修正案,他的政黨將提出一項私人議員法案,以定義“合理”的含義。

他表示,該法案將通過兩項測試來確定何時允許對入侵者使用武力。

“兩件事,一是如果有人非法且未經邀請進入你家;二是你有理由相信他們對你的家人構成威脅,那麽你對該人使用的所有武力都被視為合理合法。這就是我們的法案將引入的測試,”波利耶夫說。

弗雷澤在社交媒體上回複波利耶夫時表示,他相信警方會提出指控,法官會考慮證據。

“這裏不是蠻荒西部。這是加拿大,”弗雷澤寫道。 “加拿大人應該得到切實可行的解決方案,讓我們更安全,而不是為了皮埃爾的政治生存而煽動恐懼和混亂的口號。”

近日,加拿大公眾關於自衛法的辯論在加拿大激起軒然大波。此前,44歲的傑裏米·戴維·麥克唐納於8月18日在安大略省林賽市被控襲擊罪。他的公寓據稱遭人闖入。

涉嫌入侵者是41歲的邁克爾·凱爾·布林,他被空運到多倫多醫院,傷勢危及生命。他被指控入室盜竊、持有危險用途武器以及價值低於5000加元的惡作劇罪。

卡沃薩湖區警察局長柯克·羅伯遜周三在一份聲明中寫道,他承認這起事件引起了公眾的極大關注和“情緒化”反應,但他稱其中一些反應“不公正且不準確”。

羅伯遜寫道,個人有權保護自己和財產,但法律要求任何防禦行動都必須與麵臨的威脅相稱。

“這意味著,雖然房主確實有權保護自己和財產,但使用武力必須考慮到當時的情況,合理。”他寫道。

安大略省省長道格·福特嚴厲批評了對這名公寓住戶提出指控的決定,並表示上周該決定表明“有些事情出了問題”。

多倫多Schofield Macchia律師事務所的辯護律師梅麗娜·馬基亞表示,像麥克唐納麵臨的這種指控並不常見。

“我認為,在目前還不了解更多信息的情況下,就利用或修改法律,或提出(一項)全麵改革,還為時過早。”她在接受加拿大新聞社采訪時表示。

馬基亞表示,現行法律下的合理性可以理解為不升級暴力程度。

她說,如果有人雙手握著棒球棒進入你家,使用類似的物品自衛是合理的。

馬基亞表示,如果房主用雙手握著棒球棒射擊他人,這很可能被視為不合理,因為入侵者並沒有明顯的威脅會開槍打死房主。

馬基亞說:“我認為這很難理解,但(法律)的設計初衷是讓人們不要在入侵者進入家門後就開槍或用刀刺死他人。”

在新聞發布會上,波利耶夫提到了2023年安大略省米爾頓市的阿裏·米安(Ali Mian)的一起案件。他開槍打死了五名闖入者中的一人。波利耶夫說,其中一人

入侵者持有一把“九毫米手槍”。

米安被控二級謀殺,但指控後來被撤銷。

“這就是保守黨今天站在這裏的原因,基於‘家就是你的城堡’的原則,”波利耶夫說道。

薩斯喀徹溫大學助理法學教授科爾頓·費爾表示,目前的自衛立法源自2012年的一項保守黨法案。

費爾在一封電子郵件回複中表示:“總的來說,我認為這是一項非常好的立法,能夠靈活應對特殊情況,例如最近安大略省引發指控的情況。”

“任何更激進的建議,即一個人應該能夠對任何闖入其住宅的人采取任何行動(“保衛你的城堡”原則)……都會帶來各種問題,因為國家實際上是在授予一個人殺人的許可證。”

— 附布蘭普頓的 Vanessa Tiberio 和多??倫多的 Maan Alhmidi 的資料。

加拿大新聞社於 2025 年 8 月 29 日首次發布本報道。

David Baxter,加拿大新聞社

Poilievre wants 'reasonable' self-defence defined in Criminal Code

By The Canadian Press  
 
'Outrageous, ridiculous': Poilievre slams 'sentencing discounts' on the basis of immigration status
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said anyone who is applying for immigration while in Canada and commits a crime should be 'deported.’
 
OTTAWA — The federal government needs to amend the Criminal Code so the use of force, including lethal force, is considered reasonable to defend your home and family if someone breaks into it, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said Friday.

Poilievre called a news conference in Brampton, Ont., amid an outcry over assault charges that were laid against an Ontario man who encountered another man who allegedly broke into his apartment while carrying a crossbow.

Justice Minister Sean Fraser said on social media that Canadians already have the right to defend themselves under a law brought in by former prime minister Stephen Harper, “with Poilievre’s support.”

The Criminal Code says someone can defend themselves if they believe force, or a threat of force, is being used against them, as long as their actions are “reasonable in the circumstances.”

The law lays out nine factors to consider when determining reasonableness, including the nature of the threat, whether there were other means to respond to it, whether the incident involved a weapon, as well as the size, age and gender of the people involved.

Poilievre said these conditions are too complicated to consider in the moment if facing an intruder.

“If you’re defending your house, you don’t have time to think through nine different conditions. You have one condition -- to protect yourself and your kids,” he said.

Poilievre said if the government doesn’t introduce its own amendment, his party will introduce a private member’s bill to define what “reasonable” means.

He said that bill would have two tests to determine when it would be permissible to use force against an intruder.

“Two things, if someone enters your home illegally and uninvited, and two, you reasonably believe they are a threat to your family then it is assumed that all the force you use against that person is reasonable and legal. That is the test that our bill will bring in,” Poilievre said.

In his social media response to Poilievre, Fraser said that he trusts police to lay charges and judges to consider the evidence.

“This isn’t the Wild West. It’s Canada,” Fraser wrote. “Canadians deserve real solutions that make us safer, not slogans that inspire fear and chaos for Pierre’s political survival.”

Public debate about self-defence laws soared in Canada in recent days, after 44-year-old Jeremy David McDonald, was charged with assault in Lindsay, Ont., after an alleged break-in at his apartment on Aug. 18.

The alleged intruder, 41-year-old Michael Kyle Breen, was airlifted to hospital in Toronto with life-threatening injuries. He has been charged with break and enter, possession of a weapon for dangerous purpose, and mischief under $5,000.

Kawartha Lakes Police Chief Kirk Robertson wrote in a statement on Wednesday that he recognizes the incident has generated significant public interest and “emotional” responses, but called some of the reaction “unjust and inaccurate.”

Robertson wrote that individuals have the right to defend themselves and their property, but the law requires that any defensive action be proportionate to the threat faced.

“This means that while homeowners do have the right to protect themselves and their property, the use of force must be reasonable given the circumstances,” he wrote.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford blasted the decision to charge the apartment resident, saying last week that it shows “something is broken.”

Melina Macchia, a defence attorney with Schofield Macchia in Toronto, said that charges like the one faced by McDonald are rare.

“To capitalize or change the law or propose (an) overhaul without knowing more at this stage, I think is premature,” she said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

Macchia said reasonableness under the current law can be interpreted as not escalating the level of violence presented.

She said that if someone enters your home with both hands on a baseball bat, it would be reasonable to use a similar item to defend yourself.

Macchia said if a homeowner were to shoot someone with both hands on a baseball bat, that would likely be seen as unreasonable because there isn’t an obvious threat the intruder will shoot the homeowner.

“I think it is hard understand, but (the law is) designed so that people don’t just shoot people or stab people as soon as an intruder enters their home,” Macchia said.

In his press conference, Poilievre referred to a 2023 case of Ali Mian, a Milton, Ont. man who shot and killed one of five people who broke into his home. Poilievre said one of the intruders had a “nine millimetre handgun.”

Mian was charged with second degree murder, but the charge was later dropped.

“That is why Conservatives are standing here today, based on the principle that your home is your castle,” Poilievre said.

Colton Fehr, an assistant law professor at the University of Saskatchewan, said that the current self-defence legislation comes from a 2012 Conservative bill.

“It is, on the whole, a very good piece of legislation in my view that is capable of responding flexibly to unique circumstances such as the one giving rise to the charges in Ontario recently,” Fehr said in an emailed reply.

“Any more radical suggestion that a person should be able to do anything to anyone who breaks into their home (the “defend your castle” doctrine)... presents a variety of problems as the state is effectively giving a person a license to kill.”

— With files from Vanessa Tiberio in Brampton and Maan Alhmidi in Toronto.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 29, 2025.

David Baxter, The Canadian Press

加拿大保守黨提案:放寬自衛標準!家裏進賊主人可使用致命武力防衛!媒體評價:早該如此

By marketing@tianen.ca  

保守黨重新定義“合理防衛”

剛剛,加拿大媒體《Global News》報道稱,針對多倫多屋主在自家打傷入室劫匪而遭到指控的案例,保守黨領袖博勵誌宣布將推動修改加拿大《刑法典》,目標是將加拿大“合理防衛”標準提高到普通人可以理解的範疇。

那麽什麽是普通人可以理解的標準呢?

舉例說明

一個小姐姐獨自在家,突然闖進一條色狼劫財又劫色,搏鬥中小姐姐用平底鍋擊中了歹徒的腦袋,歹徒當場倒地,然後小姐姐繼續用平底鍋連敲了歹徒腦袋8下,各位覺得小姐姐防衛過當嗎?

博勵誌

博勵誌在新聞發布會上也說,加拿大人在自己的住房裏對付闖入的歹徒時不需要仔細思考《刑法典》中的法律條文,他們有權使用無限製的武力保護自己和家人。

用法律語言來說就是,“在加拿大如果有人非法闖入住宅,並對屋內人員構成威脅,居民使用包括致命武力在內的各類防衛手段,都應被推定為合理合法。”

博勵誌表示,他將正式要求自由黨推動修法,如果自由黨拒絕,將由保守黨議員提出議案然後進入表決程序。

多數加拿大媒體也認為,任何人在自己的家裏保護家人都不應該被法律條文束縛,防衛者可使用致命武力應被視為常識。

美加持槍差別

報道還解釋說,加拿大和美國都允許私人持槍,但美國很多州有城堡法和不退讓法,對進入私人領地的入侵者可以開槍射擊;

而加拿大考槍牌時明確告訴大家,槍可以娛樂、健身、狩獵、收藏,但不是用來防身的。

所以當安省一名在家中與持武器闖入者發生衝突的44歲男子被警方以襲擊罪名提起訴訟後民眾嘩然,因為加拿大法律要求“自衛行為必須與所麵臨的威脅程度相稱”。

但誰能在幾秒中隻能做出準確判斷自己使用的武力是否恰到好處,每一個“不懂法”的加拿大人都支持防衛者,這就說明法律條文本身出了問題。

媒體也表示,私宅不可侵犯和有限製防衛就是矛盾體。修法這件事自由黨也沒有提出反對意見。從輿論氛圍看,通過的概率極大。

具體修改的條款可能包括:

1. 現行法律允許在遭受或即將遭受武力侵害時自衛,但所用武力必須在當時情況下合理。修訂案允許對非法入侵且威脅人身安全者使用致命武力,且被推定為合理。

2. 現行法律要求首威脅時若可安全撤退就不能使用致命武力。修訂案允許首威脅時無需考慮退讓。

3. 現行法律要求防衛者在法庭上自證行為合理性。修訂案自動推定防衛合理,舉證責任轉向控方。

小編支持博勵誌的修法要求,借用羅老師的一句話就是“法不能向不法讓步!”

[ 打印 ]
評論
目前還沒有任何評論
登錄後才可評論.