Violent crime keeps increasing, despite what StatsCan claims. Canadian authorities seem to prefer candlelight memorials to actually protecting citizens. Violent criminals are quickly released only to murder helpless victims. We’re on our own. 

To defend yourself, you must know the law

When can we fight back against an attacker? If a thug attacks you on the street, can you punch his nose?  Shoot him? What if the attacker dies?

If someone breaks into a home in the middle of the night, and refuses to leave, can the resident use violent force to get him to leave? Can the resident legally shoot him?

In most countries, self-defence is a legal excuse for using violence to stop or even kill an attacker. Even in England. Even in Canada. But Canadians will be arrested for doing so.

Back to basics

Defending oneself, or one’s family, from a violent attack is a natural right. Personal self-defence is an inherent moral right that does not depend upon the government. Every human being has this right. Even deadly force can be used if necessary to stop an attacker who is believed likely to kill or “cause grievous harm.”

On the other hand, there is no right to vengeance. We have the right to stop an attack, even if the attacker dies, but we have no right to do any further damage than is strictly necessary; anger is no justification for retaliation. Governments jealously guard the power to punish.

As a lawyer once explained to me, the model for the law of self-defence is a bar brawl between two adult males. It such a case it is best to avoid a fight, but, if necessary, only reasonable force is allowed to stop an attack.

Self-Defence in Canada: What You Need to Know

Elizabeta Costa at Costa Law explains: In Canada, self-defence is governed by Section 34 of the Criminal Code. This law permits the use of reasonable force to defend yourself or others if you believe it’s necessary to prevent imminent harm. However, the term “reasonable” is crucial—it’s not a free pass to use violence in any situation. The law is designed to protect you, but it also sets boundaries to prevent unnecessary or excessive force.

When the courts evaluate a self-defence claim, the focus is on whether the force used was reasonable given the circumstances. This evaluation isn’t just about what you felt in that moment; it also considers what the court, with a full view of the facts, deems appropriate. The law carefully balances your right to protect yourself with the need to prevent acts of excessive violence.

Key Elements of a Self-Defence Claim

To successfully claim self-defence, three key elements must be established:

Perception of Threat: You must have a reasonable belief that force was necessary to defend yourself or someone else from an imminent threat. For instance, if someone approaches you aggressively with a weapon, it’s reasonable to perceive that a threat is imminent.

Proportionality: The force you use must be proportionate to the threat. For example, if someone threatens you with their fists, responding with the lethal force of a weapon might be considered excessive unless you genuinely believed your life was in extreme danger.

No Reasonable Alternative: The courts will consider whether you had other options, such as retreating or calling for help. If there were viable alternatives to using force, your claim of self-defence might be weakened.

Deadly force is a desperate right

Violence is only available for defending oneself, legally as well as morally, when it is a last-ditch act. If there is no way to avoid imminent harm, then deadly force is a moral and legal option.

Avoiding confrontation may be the best strategy

Realistically, it may not be wise to exercise your right to defend yourself. Depending upon the circumstances, avoiding a possible attack may be wiser than a successfully defence.

As Sun Tsu, said more than one thousand years ago,
“He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight.”

It may be wise to avoid certain locations where fights start. And it certainly is wise to carefully pick an intimate partner. Of course, not all confrontations can be avoided, but careful forethought can reduce potential problems.

The process is the punishment

The Canadian government discourages self-defence. Anyone in Canada who uses armed force defensively can be subjected to expensive and protracted legal proceedings. Anyone defending oneself, although convinced they are exercising their basic rights, could up in a prison cell.

Canadian self-defence law, as written, is as good as any self-defence law in the US. Unfortunately, the “progressive” culture in Canada will most likely impose an expensive and painful legal battle upon anyone brave (or foolish) enough to use violent force to defend themselves or their family. Defenders, no matter how righteous, will be subject to arrest and may be immediately jailed, after which defenders will face years of court battles which could exhaust their life savings, and may even end up in prison.

Consider the United States

The famous Second Amendment fosters responsible gun ownership. Virtuous American citizens not only can protect themselves, and their families, but their neighbours as well. See John Lott’s research on mass public shootings and an article on neighbours defending neighbours.