Discussions

Stupid question. That’s a good way to end up dead or in jail. Civilians should never ever direct any weapon at another human being, that’s one of the first things we should all be teaching our kids.  
In any case any guns and ammunition you may own should be securely locked away when not being used.  
This is not the USA. We are better than that.

Would be decided on a case by case basis by the court. You might get off-and you might not. I do live in the country, and my preferred weapon of self defense is a cast iron fry pan. An intruder does not want that smacking him upside the head. I would be in favor of castle law, as they have in the US, but unfortunately we do not have that and so I do not keep a gun.

Here’s your answer:  
http://torontosun.com/2016/02/05/the-law-when-it-comes-to-defending-your-property/wcm/08ba73e9-4551-4725-b51f-0f063a02c5a5

I think yours is the more stupid/ ignorant reply. People should have a right to feel safe in their homes without threat of intruders or criminals violating that.  
 
Legal gun owners are aware of the rules of owing guns and respect that. If you are the one breaking in or trespassing on someone’s property then that offender should be aware of the potential consequences of a person trying to protect themselves or their family.

Have you had issues?

There is an old saying that you are better off being judged by 12 than carried by 6. But if your restricted firearm is properly stored, you may be a minute or two getting it out.  
In the case that Adam links to, a person went out to his truck and ended up shooting an unarmed thief, although he believed the man had a firearm. That case is still ongoing, although the man was initially found not guilty. But there have been a number of cases in Canada where restricted firearms have been used by lawful owners in their homes or property and the owner was either not charged, or won their cases in court. But in all those cases the owners believed their life, or the life of their family was being threatened.  
From the Cdn Criminal code:  
Every one who is in peaceable possession of a dwelling-house, and every one lawfully assisting him or acting under his authority, is justified in using as much force as is necessary to prevent any person from forcibly breaking into or forcibly entering the dwelling-house without lawful authority.  
 
But that will mean minimal force necessary. You might start with the fists, baseball bat or the frying pan before moving up to the knife or firearm. When it comes to the firearm, if it is not properly stored in the first place, if they can't get you on the shooting, they will charge you on the unsafe storage.

That wouldn’t stand up in court for a minute. Lots of property owners have gone to jail over the years supposedly protecting their property or wound up with the weapon being turned on them.  
I have property in the country and yes I have a PAL and own legal guns. I would never direct any weapon at anyone loaded or not and my guns and ammunition would not be quickly accessible anyway because they are secure.  
We don’t live in the Wild West. Civilian owned guns are for pest control, humane slaughter of animals, hunting or target shooting.  
Exit the property and call the cops.  
A gun owner protecting their property with weapons only serves to give further argument to the anti gun lobbyists.