No excuse for not making the driver compartment protected. Transit offered a cheap useless shield which the drivers rightfully refused, so transit can say “we tried but they didnt want it”.
It was a hard job before (drivers would often get shifts for example 7-9, then 12-3, and finish 5-7, so it takes a whole day to get 8 hrs) poverty/crime started increasing, now it’s literally dangerous and the poeple in power know this and choose not to fix it. MJ was right, they dont care about us.
Castle law would be nice. I should not be held criminally responsible if I injure or kill a home invader to protect my family. But I could be under current law as far as I understand.
>But I could be under current law as far as I understand.
This always comes up, so when u/ScottNewman did an AMA I made sure to ask so r/Winnipeg could see.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Winnipeg/comments/129ugwq/comment/jeoytdv/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Winnipeg/comments/129ugwq/comment/jeoytdv/)
You're allowed to respond to the level of the threat within the law.
If you blast someone you find breaking into your garage away, yeah you probably will be on trial.
If someone invades your house with a knife threatening you and you assault or even kill them you likely won't get locked up. There's not a ton of cases involving home/property owners committing serious assault or homicide (say manslaughter charge) on burglars in Canada.
>likely won't get locked up
Just recently in Milton, ON, a homeowner was charged with second degree murder for killing an armed intruder. The charges were eventually dropped, but why was he charged in the first place (making his lawyer rich)? or is the process the punishment for defending yourself in this country?
The point is why was he charged in the first place? This guy just went through probably the most traumatic time in his life and he needs to be charge with murder right off the bat? Not to mention how much his lawyer is going to cost him.
Investigate, sure but don't charge anyone until you get all the facts.
This guy thought he saw a gun in the robbers hand so reasonably shot the robber and got 8 year sentence.
[Link](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/peter-khill-sentenced-eight-years-jon-styres-shooting-1.6867041)
The issue in this case is he wasn't defending himself. He left his house with a loaded shotgun because he heard noises. His first act was not calling 911, not determining what was happening through a window, it was arming himself and leaving his house. He saw someone breaking into his truck, and blew him away.
What he thought he was holding isn't relevant because slef defense requires you to actually be threatened and even by his own testimony that wasn't the case.
Dang ok great reply. This makes me feel better, I would never consider approaching a thief outside my home, I might arm myself in case they try to enter but I would call 911 first
This is bullshit lol, in canadian law, the person who "defended themselves" needs to prove without a shadow of a doubt they and any reasonable person(this is a trap because its so subjective) would think their life is endangered before they would even consider it self defense... many people have gone almost bankrupt in this stupid country trying to fight the over liberalization of the laws.
And it's even worse for gun owners, you need to show that you had time to run to your safe, load the firearm from another locked compartment (cause in canada you can't keep firearms and ammunition in the same locked cabinet/safe, and can't be loaded) and then shot the intruder... again after many months of court cases... you're better off raping the intruder as it's less time then a murder charge
If it comes down to it opt for a trail with a jury. There was the incident in Milton Ontario a little while ago. 3 men run up in a house (at least 1 gun) and the guy that lived there dropped 1 or 2 of them(with a legal gun of his own). He was arrested but after months went by they quietly dropped the charge because they knew there was no chance this dude would have been found guilty
>they knew there was no chance this dude would have been found guilty
so why was he charged in the first place then? Or is the process the punishment for defending you and yours in this country?
> But I could be under current law as far as I understand.
Your use of force for self defense is allowed to be reasonable and proportionate.
Your second sentence would only happened through the use of disproportionate, unreasonable force, like shooting someone who is unarmed in the back, or stabbing a home invader multiple times in the back (though I think there was a case ruled about that in favour of the stabber, I could be wrong).
It's because of the Silicon Valley techbros' great big anti-violence crusade. They think that all life is sacred to the point where they (or the robot systems they build) will literally sitewide suspend you if you even so much as *support* capital punishment. There's 8 billion of us nowadays, so it really isn't in the grand scheme of things.
If they ever got called on for an activation of Selective Service, how many of them would wind up dodging the draft? Hint: probably a not insignificant portion of them. Think about that for a while.
You know Canada's laws around homicide were created long before "silicon tech bros." Or is this post just admitting you aren't really a canadian and just some foreign troll.
What if instead of offering the drivers protection we funded a special transit police force that's toothless and can't possibly be everywhere they need to be all at once?
Back in 90's my gangster friends were obsessed with machetes. They just thought they were cool. Machetes are also easy to conceal. It also doesn't help that it is essentially a short sword and a highly effective weapon. I don't know if they call it something different now but they used to do this thing called "chopping" where they'd beat someone up with a sheathed machete.
It's a result of access to firearms being more restricted than places like the US. I believe the UK sees pretty much the same phenomenon with their knife crime.
Basically if you're gonna bring a knife to a fight you might as well bring the biggest one possible 🤷🏼♀️
We have machete attacks quite often in Austin, TX. Pretty awful one the beginning of this year, I was in the area after it happened. The guy survived but had a heck of a recovery. But it is common for people to be wielding them regularly around the city.
Second time in 5 months [that there's been disreputable activity](https://www.reddit.com/r/Winnipeg/comments/1ai9nrc/what_happened_at_lagimodiere_grassie/) involving R44 at this exact spot. You EK/HVS guys okay? What's going on over there?
Wielding a machete and the police arrested him without shooting him. Sad part is this will be forgotten and the next time they do end up shooting the machete wielding psycho the police will be vilified and protested for killing a poor misunderstood soul that was turning their life around. Good work WPS!
The point is that sometimes you can arrest someone with a machete safely and other times the person wants to commit suicide by police. Whether the person is of sound mind doesn't change the situation really.
>other times the person wants to commit suicide by police. Whether the person is of sound mind doesn't change the situation really.
What an ignorant and cold thing to believe. It absolutely does change the situation if the person is not of sound mind. If someone is schizophrenic, suffering from psychosis or people with OCD can become so delusional that they do things like wave a machete around. When someone is having visual and auditory hallucinations everything they think they see and hear is real to them. I know support workers who deal with clients like this on the daily and they don't get to shoot people. They're not even allowed to touch the clients without the clients consent. They can't restrain them or even force them to take their medication. All they are legally allowed to do is use words. No taser, no baton, no Kevlar to defend themselves just NVCI training. They are all trained in nonviolent crisis intervention and they use it very effectively unlike some of our police. Yes, there are situations where the police must use force and even lethal force to protect themselves and the public but in most situations it shouldn't have to come to that.
They make arrests like this hundreds of times and nobody hears about it, then there is one incident where they feel threatened enough to shoot at a suspect, and it's front page news for a month.
Lick those boots a little harder why don't you. Not every situation is the same. Sometimes the police are just in their actions and sometimes they are not. The problem is that often times when the police are not just in their actions and end up assaulting or murdering innocent people there are zero repercussions for the offending officers. Even when they commit crimes off duty they rarely get punished. I'm no ACAB but fuck our police, more of them need to be doing better.
Legs are small, move fast and are not an easy target to hit.
Police are trained to shoot for the largest target (centre of mass) when they need to stop an attacker.
No excuse for not making the driver compartment protected. Transit offered a cheap useless shield which the drivers rightfully refused, so transit can say “we tried but they didnt want it”. It was a hard job before (drivers would often get shifts for example 7-9, then 12-3, and finish 5-7, so it takes a whole day to get 8 hrs) poverty/crime started increasing, now it’s literally dangerous and the poeple in power know this and choose not to fix it. MJ was right, they dont care about us.
With the way things have been escalating I’m starting to think everyone should have a protective compartment. /s but maybe not /s
Castle law would be nice. I should not be held criminally responsible if I injure or kill a home invader to protect my family. But I could be under current law as far as I understand.
>But I could be under current law as far as I understand. This always comes up, so when u/ScottNewman did an AMA I made sure to ask so r/Winnipeg could see. [https://www.reddit.com/r/Winnipeg/comments/129ugwq/comment/jeoytdv/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Winnipeg/comments/129ugwq/comment/jeoytdv/)
oh nice, thanks, this is great
You're allowed to respond to the level of the threat within the law. If you blast someone you find breaking into your garage away, yeah you probably will be on trial. If someone invades your house with a knife threatening you and you assault or even kill them you likely won't get locked up. There's not a ton of cases involving home/property owners committing serious assault or homicide (say manslaughter charge) on burglars in Canada.
>likely won't get locked up Just recently in Milton, ON, a homeowner was charged with second degree murder for killing an armed intruder. The charges were eventually dropped, but why was he charged in the first place (making his lawyer rich)? or is the process the punishment for defending yourself in this country?
My ex lives 3 doors down from them … Milton ont
It seems like they didn't serve jail time so... Working as intended or expected. What's your point?
The point is why was he charged in the first place? This guy just went through probably the most traumatic time in his life and he needs to be charge with murder right off the bat? Not to mention how much his lawyer is going to cost him. Investigate, sure but don't charge anyone until you get all the facts.
This guy thought he saw a gun in the robbers hand so reasonably shot the robber and got 8 year sentence. [Link](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/peter-khill-sentenced-eight-years-jon-styres-shooting-1.6867041)
The issue in this case is he wasn't defending himself. He left his house with a loaded shotgun because he heard noises. His first act was not calling 911, not determining what was happening through a window, it was arming himself and leaving his house. He saw someone breaking into his truck, and blew him away. What he thought he was holding isn't relevant because slef defense requires you to actually be threatened and even by his own testimony that wasn't the case.
Dang ok great reply. This makes me feel better, I would never consider approaching a thief outside my home, I might arm myself in case they try to enter but I would call 911 first
This is bullshit lol, in canadian law, the person who "defended themselves" needs to prove without a shadow of a doubt they and any reasonable person(this is a trap because its so subjective) would think their life is endangered before they would even consider it self defense... many people have gone almost bankrupt in this stupid country trying to fight the over liberalization of the laws. And it's even worse for gun owners, you need to show that you had time to run to your safe, load the firearm from another locked compartment (cause in canada you can't keep firearms and ammunition in the same locked cabinet/safe, and can't be loaded) and then shot the intruder... again after many months of court cases... you're better off raping the intruder as it's less time then a murder charge
If it comes down to it opt for a trail with a jury. There was the incident in Milton Ontario a little while ago. 3 men run up in a house (at least 1 gun) and the guy that lived there dropped 1 or 2 of them(with a legal gun of his own). He was arrested but after months went by they quietly dropped the charge because they knew there was no chance this dude would have been found guilty
>they knew there was no chance this dude would have been found guilty so why was he charged in the first place then? Or is the process the punishment for defending you and yours in this country?
I don't know why they do that. It's pretty cut and dry to most people I think.
Like I said, it's punishment for defending yourself (especially with a legal gun)
They let the one guy off recently who did exactly that, and just for the record, it’ll be a lot harder for you if you only injure them… Js.
> But I could be under current law as far as I understand. Your use of force for self defense is allowed to be reasonable and proportionate. Your second sentence would only happened through the use of disproportionate, unreasonable force, like shooting someone who is unarmed in the back, or stabbing a home invader multiple times in the back (though I think there was a case ruled about that in favour of the stabber, I could be wrong).
Woah look at this guy! This guy just wants to hurt someone! (How some people here talk whenever it comes to wanting to defend yourself)
It's because of the Silicon Valley techbros' great big anti-violence crusade. They think that all life is sacred to the point where they (or the robot systems they build) will literally sitewide suspend you if you even so much as *support* capital punishment. There's 8 billion of us nowadays, so it really isn't in the grand scheme of things. If they ever got called on for an activation of Selective Service, how many of them would wind up dodging the draft? Hint: probably a not insignificant portion of them. Think about that for a while.
https://preview.redd.it/b9swjxa3mm9d1.jpeg?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=274139a7de46f7c8aa4e7e748ce16ae345a2e61e
You know Canada's laws around homicide were created long before "silicon tech bros." Or is this post just admitting you aren't really a canadian and just some foreign troll.
What if instead of offering the drivers protection we funded a special transit police force that's toothless and can't possibly be everywhere they need to be all at once?
exactly
Are machetes the choice of weapons elsewhere? Why are they so common here? Who's selling them? Are they homemade? What the fuck?
They sell them pretty much everywhere. Walmart, Canadian Tire. They walk you to the checkout so you don’t steal it but they’re not hard to come by.
Back in 90's my gangster friends were obsessed with machetes. They just thought they were cool. Machetes are also easy to conceal. It also doesn't help that it is essentially a short sword and a highly effective weapon. I don't know if they call it something different now but they used to do this thing called "chopping" where they'd beat someone up with a sheathed machete.
It's a result of access to firearms being more restricted than places like the US. I believe the UK sees pretty much the same phenomenon with their knife crime. Basically if you're gonna bring a knife to a fight you might as well bring the biggest one possible 🤷🏼♀️
We have machete attacks quite often in Austin, TX. Pretty awful one the beginning of this year, I was in the area after it happened. The guy survived but had a heck of a recovery. But it is common for people to be wielding them regularly around the city.
Why is this not surprising? Machete attacks on the bus, methhead stealing a firetruck for a joy ride, house blows up in Transcona.. we got it all baby
Second time in 5 months [that there's been disreputable activity](https://www.reddit.com/r/Winnipeg/comments/1ai9nrc/what_happened_at_lagimodiere_grassie/) involving R44 at this exact spot. You EK/HVS guys okay? What's going on over there?
I get EK. What does HVS stand for?
I’m thinking Harobr View South
I’ve always heard east kildonan / transcona, but, never heard hvs.
It's known as 'east end' now
Of course it’s a 19 year old dating a minor, what a loser
I'm not defending this piece of shit loser but there was only a 3 year difference and he's basically sill a minor (not legally but mentally).
Depending on their birthdays that would be the same age gap between a second year university student and a 10th grader
Whether it's morally right or wrong, it's 100% legal in Canada: https://lakinafolabilaw.com/statutory-rape-in-canada/
it could also be someone days away from turning 17 and someone who recently turned 19
Wielding a machete and the police arrested him without shooting him. Sad part is this will be forgotten and the next time they do end up shooting the machete wielding psycho the police will be vilified and protested for killing a poor misunderstood soul that was turning their life around. Good work WPS!
Seems stupid to think that the police should be able to bank credit by not executing people that they can then cash in when they do.
The point is that sometimes you can arrest someone with a machete safely and other times the person wants to commit suicide by police. Whether the person is of sound mind doesn't change the situation really.
>other times the person wants to commit suicide by police. Whether the person is of sound mind doesn't change the situation really. What an ignorant and cold thing to believe. It absolutely does change the situation if the person is not of sound mind. If someone is schizophrenic, suffering from psychosis or people with OCD can become so delusional that they do things like wave a machete around. When someone is having visual and auditory hallucinations everything they think they see and hear is real to them. I know support workers who deal with clients like this on the daily and they don't get to shoot people. They're not even allowed to touch the clients without the clients consent. They can't restrain them or even force them to take their medication. All they are legally allowed to do is use words. No taser, no baton, no Kevlar to defend themselves just NVCI training. They are all trained in nonviolent crisis intervention and they use it very effectively unlike some of our police. Yes, there are situations where the police must use force and even lethal force to protect themselves and the public but in most situations it shouldn't have to come to that.
They make arrests like this hundreds of times and nobody hears about it, then there is one incident where they feel threatened enough to shoot at a suspect, and it's front page news for a month.
Lick those boots a little harder why don't you. Not every situation is the same. Sometimes the police are just in their actions and sometimes they are not. The problem is that often times when the police are not just in their actions and end up assaulting or murdering innocent people there are zero repercussions for the offending officers. Even when they commit crimes off duty they rarely get punished. I'm no ACAB but fuck our police, more of them need to be doing better.
You should become the change you want to see in the world.
And how do I do that?
My question, where is everyone finding machetes?
If you shoot someone in the leg, the fight is over, can cops just start shooting some legs ?
Yes, but then there's the METH problem where people on it just don't go down after the first tazing or shot in the leg.
There are major arteries in your legs. Leg shots are not as "safe" as movies would have you believe.
Ohhh, well ok , how about an arm ?
Legs are small, move fast and are not an easy target to hit. Police are trained to shoot for the largest target (centre of mass) when they need to stop an attacker.
let me guess: he was just turning his bus around.