Seriously? It Was Okay For A Woman To Protect Herself And Her Baby?

Well, not here in Canada, but maybe we should be looking at a form of Castle Doctrine here.

The H/T from the comments:

Mike from Saskatoon

This is ludicrous.  Canada needs a Castle Doctrine.  We need to drop this dangerous and ignorant situation where the government treats people defending themselves and their property as criminals.

The US has many problems, but this is one area where they got it right.  A prime example would be the 18 year old mother in Oklahoma who faced a home invasion on Dec 31 2011.  She was recently widowed and had a 3 month old at home, and two men tried to break into her home.  She barricaded the door & called 911, but for over 20 minutes the cops didn't show up.  She ended up having to shoot one of the criminals when he managed to break down the front door, killing him.

US reaction:  congratulate the woman, and charge the surviving criminal with murder.

Canadian reaction:  haul the woman to jail, charge her with murder, and hand her child over to strangers to raise.

No sane person can say our system is superior.

I'm thinking, is that a REAL story? So, I searched it out, and sure enough, it's true!

A young Oklahoma mother shot and killed an intruder to protect her 3-month-old baby on New Year's Eve, less than a week after the baby's father died of cancer.

Sarah McKinley says that a week earlier a man named Justin Martin dropped by on the day of her husband's funeral, claiming that he was a neighbor who wanted to say hello. The 18-year-old Oklahoma City area woman did not let him into her home that day.

On New Year's Eve Martin returned with another man, Dustin Stewart, and this time was armed with a 12-inch hunting knife. The two soon began trying to break into McKinley's home.

As one of the men was going from door to door outside her home trying to gain entry, McKinley called 911 and grabbed her 12-gauge shotgun.

McKinley told ABC News Oklahoma City affiliate KOCO that she quickly got her 12 gauge, went into her bedroom and got a pistol, put the bottle in the baby's mouth and called 911.

 Make sure you watch the video at that site, it will make you think about how our citizens in Canada are treated. Thankfully this guy had video too! If it would have been just his word against the criminals, the criminals would have won. Despite the taped evidence of criminals fire bombing his place.....

He is the one being charged with illegal storage of fire arms. That is how stupid Canadian law is. The guy under threat from three terrorists, is on trial. We need a form of the Castle doctrine:

Typical conditions that apply to some Castle Doctrine laws include^{[citation needed]}:

• An intruder must be making (or have made) an attempt to unlawfully or forcibly enter an occupied residence, business or vehicle.
• The intruder must be acting illegally—the Castle Doctrine does not give the right to attack, for example, officers of the law acting in the course of their legal duties
• The occupant(s) of the home must reasonably believe that the intruder intends to inflict serious bodily harm or death upon an occupant of the home
• In some states, the occupant(s) of the home must reasonably believe that the intruder intends to commit some lesser felony, such as arson or burglary
• The occupant(s) of the home must not have provoked or instigated an intrusion, or provoked or instigated an intruder to threaten or use deadly force
• The occupant(s) of the home may be required to attempt to exit the house or otherwise retreat (this is called the "Duty to retreat" and most self-defense statutes referred to as examples of "Castle Doctrine" expressly state that the homeowner has no such duty)

In all cases, the occupant(s) of the home must be there legally, must not be fugitives from the law or aiding or abetting another person in being a fugitive from the law, and must not use force upon an officer of the law performing a legal duty

Another person leaving a comment stated it better than I could:

 

Hobbittall

Incredible story.

Mr. Thompson did make several mistakes though and he deserves to pay.
1) He should have used a shotgun and left these bombers as a puddle on his lawn.
2) He is a white male (and therefore he has no rights).
3) He is not Indian like chiefie Spence of Attawapiskat so "Blame the victim" will not work.

I could go on with his multitude of faults...

It's clear that his proper course of action would have been to twiddle his thumbs in the corner saying "Our Father who art in Queens Park, Dalton be thy name..." as fire bombs rained down on himself and his property.

He still has a chance to redeem himself slightly though. If he were to self immolate on the steps of Queens Park to partially compensate society for his grievous crimes.

Throw the book at him I say!

As a female, I am supposed to shout "FIRE" if some predator is chasing me down the street. God forbid I have a gun to protect myself, and if I did happen to have a gun (yikes) it should be triple, double, double, locked up at home with the ammo for it at my Mom's house 8 blocks away.

Our laws are ridiculous. Mr. Thomson should have never been charged with anything, period. Unfortunately, our liberal attorney generals and police listen to Dalton and other political people and forget that their jobs are to protect, we the people, not we the politicians. Mr. Thomson has killed fewer people than a certain ex-attorney general in Ontario. 

Mr. Thomson now has to pay court and lawyer fees, while the criminals who fire bombed his place get court appointed lawyers, and they have not been charged with the most obvious crime they tried to commit, ATTEMPTED MURDER.

The main reason for the governments (on all levels) lack of response to this crime against citizens is that we have no property rights. The government reserves the right to take away anything from us, because they have the power. This is what we should be yelling about as freedom loving people.

If It Saves Just One Life, It Is Worth It.

Dr. Bennett, you have an appointment....with some violent criminals. You can yap all you want about crime rates, but until you actually visit a prison, keep your yap shut. Typical Liberal, bellyache about Conservatives being tough on crime and forget to actually talk to the ones most involved, the victims. Then she needs to go to a prison and talk to the inmates, she will be shocked with the crowded conditions they have to live in, that should get her little Liberal heart beating fast so she can start a group advocating better prisons.

Statscan's "Crime Severity Index", which tracks violent crime, also dropped to its lowest level ever since that index was created in 1998.
"Yet we have a Conservative government trying to implement policies based on ill-informed ideas instead of evidence," said Liberal MP Carolyn Bennett.
"Conservatives continue their fear-mongering in hopes of scaring Canadians into accepting severe and ineffective crime legislation. The omnibus crime bill planned for fall will only exacerbate prison costs."

 Liberals blast the Conservatives for getting rid of the useless long gun registry, by stating...."if it saves just one life, it is worth it". They should also apply that same logic to prisons. If keeping one violent criminal behind bars for their full sentence, "saves just one life"... it is worth it!

How about this unhinged Judge, who couldn't wait 3 minutes for a prosecutor?

An Ontario Court judge, in an apparent fit of pique, has tossed an entire docket’s worth of guilty pleas.
The incident happened Thursday in 202 court in Newmarket, north of Toronto, where a dozen people, some of whom had already pleaded guilty and were slated for sentencing, were abruptly released.
Ontario’s attorney-general’s ministry is already “taking steps to have a court review the dismissals,” spokesman Jenn Bell said in an email, with a view to getting the charges “back before the court quickly.”
The courtroom is solely dedicated to guilty pleas.
Apparently furious that assistant Crown attorney Brian McCallion was late returning from a recess, Judge Howard Chisvin abruptly dismissed the charges for what he called “want of prosecution.”

 This is Liberal justice? Free guilty people because a Judge was made to wait a few minutes? This judge should be fired. Especially for a past ruling:

Judge Chisvin, who was appointed to the bench in 2004 after an 18-year stint as a defence lawyer, is no stranger to controversy.
Three years ago, he set free a man who was facing four charges of assault, three of threatening and two of mischief in relation to a domestic dispute because the judge ruled he had been denied a properly speedy bail hearing.
But Judge Chisvin didn’t only release the man, also ordered the Crown to pay his $12,000 legal costs as a penalty for what he called its “lackadaisical attitude.”
Three months later, the same fellow, one Davood Zarinchang, was being sought by York Regional Police for attempted murder in connection with a violent home invasion. The revelation that he’d been released not long before by Judge Chisvin caused a brouhaha.
A headline in the Toronto Star on Feb. 5, 2008, read, “Warrant for man released by angry judge.”
Mr. Zarinchang was eventually convicted in connection with the violent home invasion and sentenced to seven years.
And in the spring of last year, the Ontario Court of Appeal ordered that he also stand trial for the charges Judge Chisvin had thrown out – and reduced the amount the Crown had to pay for Mr. Zarinchang’s legal bills to about $3,000.

 So, the Judge releases a violent criminal and 3 months later that same criminal gets arrested for ATTEMPTED MURDER? Dr. Bennett can harp all she wants about statistics that show crime decreasing, that is her right, but I want her to talk to some criminals first, she might be shocked about what they have to say. Too bad she is all spit, and no shine!

Here is an idea, Dr. Bennett should go undercover into a prison for the month of August, live with the inmates, talk to them, see how crowded the prisons really are, and then come back and spout off about no funds needed to upgrade those prisons. She should spend the month in a provincial prison, not a federal prison, because from what I hear, the provincial prisons are hellholes compared to the federal ones.

MP's go on fact finding tours to places like Greece, Italy, and France all the time. It is time for them to go on a fact finding tour into our prisons. I bet none will, it's not an exotic enough location, kind of like the Greens, never holding a conference in the NWT in January. 

Maybe an actual journalist could do a little investigative reporting and talk to some real criminals, convicted of real crimes, to see what they think of the prison system, and while they are at it, they might want to talk to some prison guards, parole officers, etc. It might be an interesting article, instead of the garbage we usually get from journalists.