Discussions

Had it explained to me by a former Mountie, I was told that outside of my house I could not discharge a weapon at a person, we never went into details of if a person was shot at, but most people shouldn't be wandering around their yard with a weapon. If you went to your house to get a weapon you weren't to go looking for the person, but you could discharge a weapon if a person entered your house and you felt that your life was in danger. I was also told that if I ever shot someone there had better not be a trail of blood across the yard where I had dragged the body.  
One of the biggest problems we have in rural areas is response time from police, and I'm not going to blame the police, but the growing problem of elected officials to properly fund and provide officers to carry out their duties. It's bad when there is a situation where the police are the last people to make it to accidents or crime scenes.  
Guess it's one of those situations that governments are more concerned with people's wants, and forget the important put of governing is looking after people's needs.  
Something else that might be really wrong is sentencing is to lenient, and prison should not be a place that anyone wants to go.

Tater said "On what authority do you pass along more hearsay when the thread is actually hoping for facts? Even the RCMP were complicit in this case, and theft doesn't justify murder so whatever. When I see nonsense about wishing it were more like Texas here, all I can say is go there. If you don't like murder not being justified by theft, then get the %^&* out of this country. "

The items I listed earlier are some of the basics that the RCMP revealed soon after the event happened. And you are right, this isn't Texas, so Mr Stanley could not legally shoot anybody for mere theft of property.  
 
But there are times when you can shoot, and those are in order to protect life, and as well you can use whatever force is necessary to prevent entry into your home. Mr Stanley shot at the first two..what we don't know at this time is what they were doing when he shot at them. That would be speculation and the trail will reveal it soon enough.  
 
The initial RCMP release said that the two women in the car woke up the Colton, who climbed into the front seat. What we don't know is what he was doing with the gun. If preparing to fire it, then it will be up to the court to decide if Mr Stanley is justified in discharging the firearm.  
 
As to land claims, I seriously doubt that issue will be entering into this trial.  
 
The other 4 that were with Mr Boushie should be glad this did not occur in Texas. Under Texas law, since they were committing a crime, and someone got killed during it, it would be the four of them facing the murder charges.  
 
You will have to explain to me how the RCMP were complicit in this case...I don't understand the rational behind that statement. If you mean the fact that they went looking for two suspects who were armed and attempting to steal motor vehicles, I think that is part of their job des:cription.

My opinion, These guys going around Stealing atv's , vehicles and anything of value is Not right. This guy was defending his person and property.  
 
Yes too bad the thief got shot, But what is going to stop them? Call Police, they say it's gone, We can't go and get it.  
 
There is lots of this going on around here, maybe that is what it is going to take to get them to stop stealing around here.

Tater said "On what authority do you pass along more hearsay when the thread is actually hoping for facts? Even the RCMP were complicit in this case, and theft doesn't justify murder so whatever. When I see nonsense about wishing it were more like Texas here, all I can say is go there. If you don't like murder not being justified by theft, then get the %^&* out of this country. "

Get them Tater!

adc said "    Tater said "    Beeboy said "If something doesn't belong to you don't touch it. " Well I'd like to see all first nations land claims settled, because until that happens the settler population have not learned that lesson. " So you’re saying it’s okay to steal from white people?? "

I don't think it's okay to steal AT ALL.  
 
Stealing is wrong.  
 
Killing a human being is more wrong. Human life is precious and you can't get it back.  
 
Seeing all the disgusting comments at the time that this news broke, and even now about the only mistake that Mr Stanley made was in leaving witnesses or wishing Canada was more like Texas, is terrible.

countryboy 84 said "The ONLY mistake he made was leaving witnesses. This wasnt a one-time thing, there obviously has been problem around there a while, you have a problem you fix it. I for one would donate to his defense fund, and damn proud to do so. And to Tater, no i will not get the *%*% out of the country, its people with views like yours why crime rates are where they are here. Slap them on the wrist and let them go in three months if they even get caught at all... "

I agree with you!

Unless we are talking about a thieving scumbag, then no-i don't give a rat's ass about that life. If it is so precious the owner of that life should take better care of it.

Well I don't think that I am so all-knowing and infallible that I can be judge, jury and executioner of other human beings.  
 
Leave it for the courts.  
 
Do you think that killing one young person is going to SOLVE A LONG STANDING PROBLEM?  
 
Not only morally disgusting, but stupid.  
 
JessieJay, you don't have to give a rat's ass about that life, but you don't get to decide to kill that person. How hard is that to get your head around?

That some lives just aren't worth much. A few more cases of "lead poisoning" might just might make a difference in the long run. If thugs know they are likely to get shot for trespassing/stealing, maybe they would be less inclined to do it.  
 
I am reminded of the time some out of country missionaries were in Ontario and reported a trespasser. They called the RCMP and when the officer came out to the property they asked what should they do if the guy came back. Officer replied "shoot him and drag him into the house". I have always loved that officer!

It is too bad one cannot remove the race card from these discussions. I really feel for this farmer. Those that are pro life in this thread, have you had an armed intruders enter your house, steal, damage, terrorize your family? These people are the victims. Not someone who causes this destruction and terror and winds up hurt or dead. I have family that lives on farms and they say there has been an increase in farm thefts over the years. They are the ones left with costs to replace, going through courts, dealing with police, dealing with being violated. The thieves get a slap on the wrist and back at it the next day. If people want to pull the race card well then police should be open to searching reserves as locals where my grandma lives know exactly where their stolen property is but their is no jurisdiction to recover it. I do believe that we should have laws like the us. I know I work hard for what I have and I don't care what people have to say that money can easily replace it....well start dishing out the money for all these victims of crimes. No criminal I know of knocks on the door, politely says they wish to rob the place, and that they have no weapons on them. Saying the criminals are the victim I would say they haven't had a knife or gun held to their wife or child begging for their life. Nobody is going to be calm and smile knowing if they survive the ordeal justice with be duly served to the criminal.

So, I’ve read through most of the posts on this discussion....and as a parent I’m shocked and dismayed by the sentiment most people have shared. Because the way I see things, the best way to beat the bully is to be the bigger bully. Or, in this case, kill or be robbed. In the case of the thief, if people think that his punishment fits his crime, should Mr. Stanley’s sentence not be carried out with the same weight?

PrimeConvoy said "So, I’ve read through most of the posts on this discussion....and as a parent I’m shocked and dismayed by the sentiment most people have shared. Because the way I see things, the best way to beat the bully is to be the bigger bully. Or, in this case, kill or be robbed. In the case of the thief, if people think that his punishment fits his crime, should Mr. Stanley’s sentence not be carried out with the same weight? "

Should be found not guilty and then there would be no sentence. That is an easy one.

If I were a farmer I'd bear arms. If someone came on to my property with a gun then fair game.  
 
Yes, LIFE is PRECIOUS!! Therefore as a human being we owe it to ourselves and our loved ones to protect our life and not cause our life to be in danger from any source, whether that is a farmer who is facing thieves or the law asking us to submit! Don't put yourself in a situation that make cost you your life!

I agree with Fishin Guy that it is too bad race had to come into this. Nor do I understand it. I am trying to decide if I have rose colored glasses on that I need to take off to see the whole story. I don't understand why it matters the color of the skin the jury is made up of, yet it obviously does as the defense dismissed all potential jurors that were of aboriginal decent. I'm trying to figure out why the family of the deceased believes they will not get a fair trial. And I am trying to figure out why anyone thinks he was shot and killed because he was indigenous. I don't know what role that plays in this, do people honestly believe the if everything at the time remained the same except for the color of someones skin that the outcome would be any different?

Never_give_up said "I agree with Fishin Guy that it is too bad race had to come into this. Nor do I understand it. I am trying to decide if I have rose colored glasses on that I need to take off to see the whole story. I don't understand why it matters the color of the skin the jury is made up of, yet it obviously does as the defense dismissed all potential jurors that were of aboriginal decent. I'm trying to figure out why the family of the deceased believes they will not get a fair trial. And I am trying to figure out why anyone thinks he was shot and killed because he was indigenous. I don't know what role that plays in this, do people honestly believe the if everything at the time remained the same except for the color of someones skin that the outcome would be any different? "

Just the amount of post here giving the guy a pass before all the evidence is presented and court case is over should be a bit of a hint, the guy said it was an accident trying to scare them we arn't America yet its not legal to shoot them but by the sounds of things some cant wait but alas shooting people still not legal.

there was an attempt to snow us that these were simply joyriders looking for help because of a flat tire.  
 
As with most things the evidence now shows roving the countryside stealing anything of value.  
 
The evidence now shows they were armed...commonly known as armed robbery.  
 
The property owner was simply matching the aggressors with that same force.  
 
In his shoes one should think that his only defense would be with a gun of his own.  
 
I am sure this was not the first of this activity in the neighbourhood, so one has to be prepared for the worst.  
 
It is so easy to say he over reacted but if you were left to protect your family/property, facing armed robbers you might think different.

Cassie1668 said "That some lives just aren't worth much. A few more cases of "lead poisoning" might just might make a difference in the long run. If thugs know they are likely to get shot for trespassing/stealing, maybe they would be less inclined to do it.     I am reminded of the time some out of country missionaries were in Ontario and reported a trespasser. They called the RCMP and when the officer came out to the property they asked what should they do if the guy came back. Officer replied "shoot him and drag him into the house". I have always loved that officer! "

I seriously doubt this ever happened. If it did, those cops are disgusting people with no respect for human life or the rule of law.

cmp said "    Tater said "On what authority do you pass along more hearsay when the thread is actually hoping for facts? Even the RCMP were complicit in this case, and theft doesn't justify murder so whatever. When I see nonsense about wishing it were more like Texas here, all I can say is go there. If you don't like murder not being justified by theft, then get the %^&* out of this country. " The items I listed earlier are some of the basics that the RCMP revealed soon after the event happened. And you are right, this isn't Texas, so Mr Stanley could not legally shoot anybody for mere theft of property.     But there are times when you can shoot, and those are in order to protect life, and as well you can use whatever force is necessary to prevent entry into your home. Mr Stanley shot at the first two..what we don't know at this time is what they were doing when he shot at them. That would be speculation and the trail will reveal it soon enough.     The initial RCMP release said that the two women in the car woke up the Colton, who climbed into the front seat. What we don't know is what he was doing with the gun. If preparing to fire it, then it will be up to the court to decide if Mr Stanley is justified in discharging the firearm.     As to land claims, I seriously doubt that issue will be entering into this trial.     The other 4 that were with Mr Boushie should be glad this did not occur in Texas. Under Texas law, since they were committing a crime, and someone got killed during it, it would be the four of them facing the murder charges.     You will have to explain to me how the RCMP were complicit in this case...I don't understand the rational behind that statement. If you mean the fact that they went looking for two suspects who were armed and attempting to steal motor vehicles, I think that is part of their job des:cription. "

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/jury-to-hear-from-accuseds-son-in-colten-boushie-trial-crown/article37786857/  
The RCMP left the vehicle with door open over 24 hours uncovered, there was a downpour washing away blood and physical evidence. Their poor investigation puts the whole case in jeopardy.

Fishin Guy said "It is too bad one cannot remove the race card from these discussions. I really feel for this farmer. Those that are pro life in this thread, have you had an armed intruders enter your house, steal, damage, terrorize your family? These people are the victims. Not someone who causes this destruction and terror and winds up hurt or dead. I have family that lives on farms and they say there has been an increase in farm thefts over the years. They are the ones left with costs to replace, going through courts, dealing with police, dealing with being violated. The thieves get a slap on the wrist and back at it the next day. If people want to pull the race card well then police should be open to searching reserves as locals where my grandma lives know exactly where their stolen property is but their is no jurisdiction to recover it. I do believe that we should have laws like the us. I know I work hard for what I have and I don't care what people have to say that money can easily replace it....well start dishing out the money for all these victims of crimes. No criminal I know of knocks on the door, politely says they wish to rob the place, and that they have no weapons on them. Saying the criminals are the victim I would say they haven't had a knife or gun held to their wife or child begging for their life. Nobody is going to be calm and smile knowing if they survive the ordeal justice with be duly served to the criminal. "

I have not seen any agreed upon facts or testimony so far that anyone was begging for their lives etc.  
 
As for have I experienced crime or trauma yes I have.  
 
I have sympathy for people that have been robbed, and who are fearful. However, this man had a handgun, which is a restricted firearm, in order to legally possess one you have to have not only a PAL but a restricted PAL which means you should understand the consequences of shooting a human being and the limits of the law.  
 
Many posters on here are ADVOCATING KILLING PEOPLE. If you don't think police are doing their jobs, go to your elected officials and COMPLAIN. Write letters to the editor of your local papers, make your voice heard. Don't cheapen human lives by advocating violence.

Never_give_up said "I agree with Fishin Guy that it is too bad race had to come into this. Nor do I understand it. I am trying to decide if I have rose colored glasses on that I need to take off to see the whole story. I don't understand why it matters the color of the skin the jury is made up of, yet it obviously does as the defense dismissed all potential jurors that were of aboriginal decent. I'm trying to figure out why the family of the deceased believes they will not get a fair trial. And I am trying to figure out why anyone thinks he was shot and killed because he was indigenous. I don't know what role that plays in this, do people honestly believe the if everything at the time remained the same except for the color of someones skin that the outcome would be any different? "

If you had seen the incredibly racist and violent messaging at the time, you would understand.

Tater said "    Cassie1668 said "That some lives just aren't worth much. A few more cases of "lead poisoning" might just might make a difference in the long run. If thugs know they are likely to get shot for trespassing/stealing, maybe they would be less inclined to do it.     I am reminded of the time some out of country missionaries were in Ontario and reported a trespasser. They called the RCMP and when the officer came out to the property they asked what should they do if the guy came back. Officer replied "shoot him and drag him into the house". I have always loved that officer! " I seriously doubt this ever happened. If it did, those cops are disgusting people with no respect for human life or the rule of law. "

Seriously think there are not police officers who feel that way? I suspect the one who actually said that in the case I mentioned - and yes it happened, if you also not want to believe it that is up to you, i don't care-said it with the belief the guys did not have guns with them (visitors, remember?) However, if some officers really think that way, who can blame them with what they see and experience in the course of their work.

I must live in a bubble because I really wasn’t aware of this case until recently. Colour of skin of any involved makes no difference. I have done a bit of reading and I have read statements such as the witnesses were there to get help because of their flat tire. Upon looking at the photos of the property then why not stop at the house to see if anyone was home? Why drive to the back where the quad and other vehicles are? Why did one try and steal a quad? Why run when being confronted. One witness also stated the guy murdered was in the back seat initially but was killed in the front seat. Likely because when the other 2 bolted he jumped in the front to make his getaway? I also read that Stanley stated to his son that he wasn’t sure how the man got killed that he was just trying to scare him. Could this not be the case? Like I said I don’t know all of the details so I could have missed something.  
 
Personally I feel every person has the right to defend their property. 5 people who are intoxicated drive up to my house and try and steel stuff would probably be met with some hostility as well. Yes life is precious but when you go around doing illegal things like they were doing you have to expect the situation may not have a great outcome.

I agree with the one post on here, leave no witnesses...

Tater said "    Fishin Guy said "It is too bad one cannot remove the race card from these discussions. I really feel for this farmer. Those that are pro life in this thread, have you had an armed intruders enter your house, steal, damage, terrorize your family? These people are the victims. Not someone who causes this destruction and terror and winds up hurt or dead. I have family that lives on farms and they say there has been an increase in farm thefts over the years. They are the ones left with costs to replace, going through courts, dealing with police, dealing with being violated. The thieves get a slap on the wrist and back at it the next day. If people want to pull the race card well then police should be open to searching reserves as locals where my grandma lives know exactly where their stolen property is but their is no jurisdiction to recover it. I do believe that we should have laws like the us. I know I work hard for what I have and I don't care what people have to say that money can easily replace it....well start dishing out the money for all these victims of crimes. No criminal I know of knocks on the door, politely says they wish to rob the place, and that they have no weapons on them. Saying the criminals are the victim I would say they haven't had a knife or gun held to their wife or child begging for their life. Nobody is going to be calm and smile knowing if they survive the ordeal justice with be duly served to the criminal. " I have not seen any agreed upon facts or testimony so far that anyone was begging for their lives etc.     As for have I experienced crime or trauma yes I have.     I have sympathy for people that have been robbed, and who are fearful. However, this man had a handgun, which is a restricted firearm, in order to legally possess one you have to have not only a PAL but a restricted PAL which means you should understand the consequences of shooting a human being and the limits of the law.     Many posters on here are ADVOCATING KILLING PEOPLE. If you don't think police are doing their jobs, go to your elected officials and COMPLAIN. Write letters to the editor of your local papers, make your voice heard. Don't cheapen human lives by advocating violence. "

I haven't indulged in all the details. Yes you need a restricted PAL. I haven't read on any websites yet that he didn't have one. What about the people that tried stealing from them? Didn't they have a long gun on them? Can you verify that they had a PAL? They too should know the consequences of using a rifle during a robbery. To be straight I am not ADVOCATING KILLING PEOPLE I am just all for protecting what is rightfully mine.  
 
As for going to our elected officials. I would put money on it if everyone in Canada protested on the lawns of legislature wanting changes to the justice system nothing would be done. It seems there are more rights to a criminal than a victim. You may call it violence, I call it protecting my family and self.

There's something that a person has to realize if your going to confront someone with a gun, and that is you had better be ready to use it, and you had better be ready to live with all the consequences that go along with it. It might be fine to say your going to shoot someone, but once you pull that trigger is becomes a whole new story. Just reading some of the accounts of this situation, you know that the accused was familiar with guns, and if like they say, one of the casings was in the vehicle, it was a close range shooting. The son said his dad looked sick after the shooting, and while waiting there wasn't much talking, does anyone wonder why.  
I'm like most people, I've worked hard for what I have, and I detest liers, cheats and thieves, thieves more that the other two, but thinking we are going to gain anything with shooting a theif will just take things to another level, and that level is when someone is going to steal something, a shooter will likely take a position before the theft, just in case.  
These young adults made a big mistake, but by the end of the trial someone else may find out he made mistake as well, according to the existing law, and that is what he is being tried on,  
As for leave no witnesses, that would likely end up with second degree murder x five.

Last I heard the farmer claims it was a accident - meaning he did not mean to shoot the victim 3 times...  
It's not been reported yet that at any time was a firearm pointed at the farmer but rather a firearm was found with blood splatter beside the victim or on the ground near the vehicle. (Conflicting reports on that) Please note the victim was found in the passenger seat.  
 
What's the justification for shooting a trespasser or a failed attempted theft (thief) ??  
 
Two wrongs don't make a right. - and now there is a farmer on trial for murder!

I thought I read that there were 3 shots fired, only one shot hit the victim. Maybe I miss read

Going to close this thread to further discussion at this time as I'm not prepared to have it go down the road it wants to go prior to going through court with all of the necessary facts presented.