Latest / Radio Baloney - The Richie Baloney Show! / 'STAND ON GUARD' Castle Law Proposed By Pierre Poilievre

Transcript

'STAND ON GUARD' Castle Law Proposed By Pierre Poilievre · Radio Baloney - The Richie Baloney Show!

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: We're calling on the government to introduce and immediately pass
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: the stand on Guard law.
• 0:09
  Speaker 2: So a man in Lindsay, Ontario was awoken at three
• 0:11
  Speaker 2: point twenty in the morning by an armed home invader,
• 0:15
  Speaker 2: and the home invader ended up in hospital with life
• 0:19
  Speaker 2: threatening injuries as a result of the victim of the
• 0:24
  Speaker 2: home invasion defending himself and then of course was arrested
• 0:28
  Speaker 2: by the police because well, I guess just Canada, let's
• 0:32
  Speaker 2: see what Pierre Pauliff has to say about this.
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: Conservatives are standing here today based on the principle that
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: your home is your castle. We're calling on the government
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: to introduce and immediately pass the stand on Guard law.
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: Failing which one of our party's MPs will put forward
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: such a bill. It will amend section thirty four point
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: two of the Criminal Code, which right now says that
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: you can defend yourself based on nine very complicated and
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: vague conditions. Now, look, if you're defending your house, you
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: don't have time to think through nine different conditions. You
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: have one condition to protect yourself and your kids. And
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: it is wrong for the law, for the police and
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: for judges to apply a complicated, indecipherable legal doctrine against
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: you when you were only doing what is right. Our
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: amendment instead will change section thirty four point two of
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: the Criminal Code to say that the use of force,
• 1:39
  Speaker 1: including lethal force, is presumed reasonable against an individual who
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: unlawfully enters a house and poses a threat to the
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: safety of anyone inside. The proposed amendment is reasonable and prudent.
• 1:55
  Speaker 1: It applies only to the unlawful entry of a home
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: and preserves proportionality simply puts. Simply put, it means you
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: have the right to use force to defend your home
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: and your family against someone who threatens you and who
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: is entered illegally.
• 2:11
  Speaker 2: The standard is reasonable force. But how can anybody be
• 2:15
  Speaker 2: expected to be reasonable in an unreasonable situation? You've been
• 2:19
  Speaker 2: woken up in the middle of the night, You're groggy,
• 2:22
  Speaker 2: all of a sudden, you've got adrenaline, adrenaline coursing through
• 2:26
  Speaker 2: your system. You're confused. It's almost like a temporary insanity defense,
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: isn't it like? How could you be expected to parse
• 2:36
  Speaker 2: out the criminal Code in that moment? It's obviously ridiculous.
• 2:41
  Speaker 2: How can you be expected to be able to function
• 2:46
  Speaker 2: rationally in that moment? I mean it is literally in
• 2:50
  Speaker 2: your mind. You have no idea. Is this life and death.
• 2:53
  Speaker 2: The idea that anything isn't reasonable in that circumstance is absurd. No,
• 3:00
  Speaker 2: whatever happens happens. Right, you do something unreasonable and put
• 3:05
  Speaker 2: somebody in an unreasonable position where they can't be expected
• 3:09
  Speaker 2: to act even rationally in terror, in fear, adrenaline. They're confused. Yeah,
• 3:16
  Speaker 2: once you cross that threshold, that's it. Your rights. You
• 3:20
  Speaker 2: left your rights at the door or the window that
• 3:22
  Speaker 2: you climbed in through done castle law over So, in
• 3:28
  Speaker 2: determining whether the act committed is reasonable in the circumstances,
• 3:32
  Speaker 2: the court shall consider the relevant circumstances of the person,
• 3:35
  Speaker 2: the other parties, and the act, including but limited to,
• 3:38
  Speaker 2: the following factors. Now, I hope everybody in Canada is
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: memorizing this, all of this right now, just in case
• 3:42
  Speaker 2: somebody breaks into your place. You don't want to get arrested.
• 3:46
  Speaker 2: Let's see. So, the court shall consider relevant circumstances of
• 3:51
  Speaker 2: the person, the nature of the force or threat. You
• 3:55
  Speaker 2: have no idea. Somebody could look like they're not armed.
• 3:58
  Speaker 2: They can have a knife in their pocket, they can
• 3:59
  Speaker 2: have a gun. You don't know. It's dark, you can't
• 4:02
  Speaker 2: see you have no idea the extent to which the
• 4:06
  Speaker 2: use of force was imminent, and whether there was other
• 4:08
  Speaker 2: means available to respond to the potential use of force. Well,
• 4:12
  Speaker 2: you know what, now it occurs me. Perhaps everybody should
• 4:15
  Speaker 2: have a counselor or a social worker. Yeah, that's it.
• 4:19
  Speaker 2: Everybody should just have a social worker in their place
• 4:22
  Speaker 2: at all times, right, just in case, just in case
• 4:26
  Speaker 2: somebody breaks in, in case you need other means to respond.
• 4:30
  Speaker 2: I mean, what is this the extent to which the
• 4:33
  Speaker 2: use of force was imminent. You have no idea what's
• 4:36
  Speaker 2: in this person's mind. You can't be a mind reader.
• 4:40
  Speaker 2: The law should not require people to be mind readers.
• 4:44
  Speaker 2: The person's role in the incident, Well, you're in somebody's house.
• 4:49
  Speaker 2: I think we know your role. Whether any party to
• 4:52
  Speaker 2: the incident used our threatened to use a weapon. Somebody
• 4:55
  Speaker 2: could say I'm not armed and actually be armed. That
• 4:58
  Speaker 2: shouldn't be your problem as the homeowner. The size, age, gender,
• 5:02
  Speaker 2: and physical capabilities of the parties to the incident, Well,
• 5:05
  Speaker 2: you know what, I'll tell you what. I'll give them
• 5:06
  Speaker 2: this if a baby breaks into your house. You know,
• 5:11
  Speaker 2: maybe if a baby breaks into your house, Okay, maybe
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: hold back a second, the nature, duration, and history of
• 5:20
  Speaker 2: any relationship between the parties to the incidents, including any
• 5:23
  Speaker 2: prior use or threat of force, and the nature of
• 5:25
  Speaker 2: that force or threat. I don't know, you wake up
• 5:27
  Speaker 2: at three twenty in the morning, there's somebody in your place.
• 5:30
  Speaker 2: You know, it just feels like a game over thing
• 5:33
  Speaker 2: for me. The nature and proportionality of the person's response
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: to the use of threat or force should not be
• 5:39
  Speaker 2: your problem. Whether the actimmitted was responds to a use
• 5:43
  Speaker 2: or threat of force that the person to do was
• 5:44
  Speaker 2: a look in the middle of the night. You can't
• 5:47
  Speaker 2: think straight. You've got you've got hormones flooding your system.
• 5:52
  Speaker 2: You've got adrenaline flood flooding your system. You can't be
• 5:55
  Speaker 2: expected to be rational or to you remember, let's see
• 5:58
  Speaker 2: what did part say or you know what did part say?
• 6:04
  Speaker 2: As size, age, gender, Well, it's not a baby that
• 6:07
  Speaker 2: broke in, so I guess I should be fine. Yeah,
• 6:10
  Speaker 2: this needs to be changed because this is just perfect
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: for an activist judge just to go through all this.
• 6:16
  Speaker 2: If you're an activist judge, you can find a reason
• 6:19
  Speaker 2: to convict somebody or to put somebody through the hell
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: of a trial. Because you use too much force. It
• 6:27
  Speaker 2: was not proportionate force. Right, I say, you have no
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: idea what's in that person's mind. You don't have any
• 6:35
  Speaker 2: idea what that person was armed or not. Even if
• 6:38
  Speaker 2: they look like they're not armed, you have no idea
• 6:41
  Speaker 2: if they are, you won't know until the threat is neutralized.
• 6:44
  Speaker 2: It's all pretty simple to me. I think we need
• 6:47
  Speaker 2: new laws in Canada, sane laws, saying laws. And let's
• 6:53
  Speaker 2: hear this as well. Here's just one more, Pierre PAULV.
• 6:56
  Speaker 2: Now we haven't heard anything from Carnion this have we?
• 6:59
  Speaker 2: And he can't because it's self defense. Isn't a progressive value, right,
• 7:04
  Speaker 2: Protecting the protecting the criminal is the progressive value. So
• 7:09
  Speaker 2: he can't. He's kind of his hands are tight. He
• 7:10
  Speaker 2: can't he get way into this.
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: You need to be able to do whatever you think
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: is necessary to save your family. And so our caucus
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: is going to be talking over the next several weeks
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: about changes that criminal code may need to clarify the
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: absolute right of Canadians to defend themselves, including by taking
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: very aggressive and even lethal action against someone who's broken
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: into their house.
• 7:41
  Speaker 2: This is the kind of forthright comment that we need
• 7:46
  Speaker 2: from conservative leader in Canada. We don't need water down,
• 7:50
  Speaker 2: we don't need Oh what will the CBC say, Oh
• 7:53
  Speaker 2: what will you know? Purple haired gremlins say? Oh what
• 7:57
  Speaker 2: will far left activists say? What will far left communist
• 8:01
  Speaker 2: academics say? Just speak to sane people, don't change it,
• 8:06
  Speaker 2: don't water it down. The people who don't like it
• 8:09
  Speaker 2: will never vote for you in a million years anyway, right,
• 8:13
  Speaker 2: those people would rather be victimized than vote for you.
• 8:17
  Speaker 2: So just this, this is it, This is what we want. Right,
• 8:21
  Speaker 2: anything necessary, And in those circumstances, anything is anything because
• 8:27
  Speaker 2: you have no I get you have no idea what
• 8:31
  Speaker 2: is in that other person's mind, And you shouldn't have
• 8:34
  Speaker 2: to read their mind and you shouldn't have to be
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: a doctor and do it on the spot, a healthless
• 8:40
  Speaker 2: assessment of that person. If you've done too much harm
• 8:42
  Speaker 2: or not, that's not your problem. The second that you
• 8:46
  Speaker 2: invade a home and you cross the threshold, you leave
• 8:49
  Speaker 2: your rights outside anyway. That's all I'm going to say
• 8:53
  Speaker 2: about that. Please like, share and subscribe. Subscribing really helps
• 8:57
  Speaker 2: me out. I thank you for that. I will see
• 8:59
  Speaker 2: you next time.