Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on January 10, 2013 at 3:54pm

'So, I guess the best thing to do might be to close your eyes and hope you don't get killed."

No, the law accounts for that, but really, the best thing to do is to man the fuck up, have a little conviction, and accept the consequences of your actions. It's a bad situation, sure, but it wasn't caused by the government and the government has no cause to give carte blanche to me being a trigger happy coward every time someone threatening causes me to piss my pants.

There are at least seven sections in Canadian law which cannot be summarized neatly, but here are the two most relevant regarding your concerns:

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-13.html#docCont

• 34. (1) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted without having provoked the assault is justified in repelling force by force if the force he uses is not intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm and is no more than is necessary to enable him to defend himself.

• Marginal note:Extent of justification

  (2) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grievous bodily harm in repelling the assault is justified if

  • (a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence with which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes; and

  • (b) he believes, on reasonable grounds, that he cannot otherwise preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm.

41. (2) A trespasser who resists an attempt by a person who is in peaceable possession of a dwelling-house or real property, or a person lawfully assisting him or acting under his authority to prevent his entry or to remove him, shall be deemed to commit an assault without justification or provocation.

Permalink Reply by Gregg R Thomas on January 10, 2013 at 4:12pm

No wonder Canada calls their money "Loonie".

:)

We have rules for gunfights too:

Rule number 1:

There are no rules in a gunfight.

Oh wait, there is one rule...Survive.

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on January 10, 2013 at 4:46pm

Rules for gunfights?

Permalink Reply by Gregg R Thomas on January 10, 2013 at 5:32pm

@ Kris have you always lived in a sheltered safe violence-free environment?

Kris you have obviously never been in a fight where someone else is trying to fuck you up, otherwise you would realize how ridiculous those rules are.

Twice as many people as a percentage of population assaulted in Canada as America, I now know why.

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on January 10, 2013 at 5:33pm

Care to substantiate?

Permalink Reply by Unseen on January 10, 2013 at 7:47pm

(I)n 2003, the violent crime rate in the United States was 475 per 100,000 people; while up north, there were 963 violent crimes per 100,000 people. The figure for sexual assault in Canada per 100,000 people was more than double that of the United States: 74 as opposed to 32.1; and the assault rate in Canada was also more than twice that of the states: 746 to America's 295 for the people. (source)

I found this and a couple other articles seeming to show that while the homicide rate is much lower in Canada, the assault rate and rate of rapes was considerably higher in "peaceful" Canada.

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on January 10, 2013 at 8:06pm

Problematically, our definition for level one assault is pretty liberal. 

source for the following: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2009004/article/10930-eng.htm

In general, incidents of assault are classified by police into one of three categories. Level 1 assaults are the most common and refer to assaults that cause little to no physical harm to victims.

source for the following: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2011001/article/11523-eng.htm

Using 2004, the figure of level 2 and 3 assaults comes in at roughly 160 per 100,000 people for 2004.

But let's stick with the highest figure including level 1 assault. After all, perhaps the American statistics have a similar issue with the legal definition of assault. The claim I would most like explained in greater depth is that Gregg knows why that figure is high based on the information he has been provided. I'd like to hear the logic.

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on January 10, 2013 at 8:12pm

To be clear, I do get what was implied, but I don't want to assume too deeply.

Permalink Reply by Unseen on January 10, 2013 at 9:16pm

Well, when you have an inclusive definition of assault, that is what a Canadian considers assault, and one has to live with the statistics. Equally loose on rape stats in Canada? Does trying to grab a goodnight kiss without asking permission first constitute rape up there?

Permalink Reply by Strega on January 10, 2013 at 9:05pm

@Unseen

Comparing Canadian reported violent crimes with US reported violent crimes is an interesting exercise, but there are two considerations that would potentially skew the resulting comparison.

One is that the people in the USA who shot someone (gun crime) are still a criminal element.  There is a real possibility that without access to guns they may have carried out other violent crimes and thus appeared in the US statistic for those.

The other is that the figures for sexual assault or domestic assault are those reported; the culture surrounding, or mechanism for reporting may be completely different.  We know that many of these assaults are not reported (I could probably wiki some data if it were necessary) but we don't know how many.

I'm not refuting the result of that article, I'm just pointing out the potentially statistic-affecting other differences which we would need to make some attempt at factoring in, in order to get a more realistic view. 

Permalink Reply by Unseen on January 10, 2013 at 9:18pm

So, do Canadians tend to report events as rape that would just constitute being a little forward in the U.S.?

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on January 10, 2013 at 9:33pm

There is a similar issue where the bulk of sexual assault stats are comprised of level 1 sexual assault. Personally, I have my concerns regarding the broad scope of these level 1 categories.

Stats Canada surveyed with this line of inquiry: (http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85f0033m/85f0033m2008019-eng.htm)

During the past 12 months, has anyone forced you or attempted to force you into any unwanted sexual activity, by threatening you, holding you down or hurting you in some way?

The levels are defined as such.

Sexual assault level 1 (s.271): An assault committed in circumstances of a sexual nature such that the sexual integrity of the victim is violated. Level 1 involves minor physical injuries or no injuries to the victim.
Sexual assault level 2 (s.272): Sexual assault with a weapon, threats, or causing bodily harm. 
Aggravated sexual assault (level 3): Sexual assault that results in wounding, maiming, disfiguring or endangering the life of the victim.
Other sexual offences: A group of offences that are meant to primarily address incidents of sexual abuse directed at children. The Criminal Code offences included in this category are: Sexual interference (s.151), Invitation to sexual touching (s.152), Sexual exploitation (s.153), Incest (s.155), Anal intercourse (s.159), and Bestiality (s.160).

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 55
• 56
• 57
• 58
• 59
• …
• 73
• Next ›
• Page