It depends on the firearm. See s.91.
No, it does not. I have s.91 right here. It has nothing to do with self defense. Doesn’t mention it at all, in fact, and the section of the Criminal Code dealing with self defense also says nothing about restricted weapons.
I’m sorry that you’re having trouble understanding this, but the fact is that there is no law in Canada again using a firearm in self defense. Not a single one. Doesn’t exist.
Were I to get myself, let’s say, a C7A2, I would be breaking the law. Simply possessing it is a criminal offense, according to s.91 of the Criminal Code. ** But using it in self defense would not be a crime.** I was already committing a crime just by having the weapon; were someone to break into my home and threaten my life and I were to shoot them with the rifle, there’s no additional law being broken by my act of self defense, assuming I had reasonable cause to use deadly force in accordance with s.34 of the Criminal Code. There is no additional crime being committed by using the weapon in self defense if it is legally justifiable self defense.
Now, using a restricted firearm is an *additional *offense if it’s used to commit a crime, which might be the source of your confusion. Suppose, for instance, that there was not a reasonable apprehension that my life was in danger but I shot someone with a C7 for, I dunno, keying my car or some other mild insult. I would be guilty not only of some form of homicide, but also guilty under s.239 of the CC for using a restricted firearm in its commission.
Here is s.91 of the Criminal Code. As you can plainly see, the act of using a weapon in self defense has nothing to do with it:
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-42.html#docCont
Here is the full text:
*91. (1) Subject to subsections (4) and (5), every person commits an offence who possesses a firearm without being the holder of
(a) a licence under which the person may possess it; and
(b) a registration certificate for the firearm.
Unauthorized possession of prohibited weapon or restricted weapon
(2) Subject to subsection (4), every person commits an offence who possesses a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device, other than a replica firearm, or any prohibited ammunition, without being the holder of a licence under which the person may possess it.
Punishment
(3) Every person who commits an offence under subsection (1) or (2)
(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years; or
(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Exceptions
(4) Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply to
(a) a person who possesses a firearm, a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device or any prohibited ammunition while the person is under the direct and immediate supervision of a person who may lawfully possess it, for the purpose of using it in a manner in which the supervising person may lawfully use it; or
(b) a person who comes into possession of a firearm, a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device or any prohibited ammunition by the operation of law and who, within a reasonable period after acquiring possession of it,
(i) lawfully disposes of it, or
(ii) obtains a licence under which the person may possess it and, in the case of a firearm, a registration certificate for the firearm.
Borrowed firearm for sustenance
(5) Subsection (1) does not apply to a person who possesses a firearm that is neither a prohibited firearm nor a restricted firearm and who is not the holder of a registration certificate for the firearm if the person
(a) has borrowed the firearm;
(b) is the holder of a licence under which the person may possess it; and
(c) is in possession of the firearm to hunt or trap in order to sustain the person or the person’s family.*
If you keep asking the same question, you will keep receiving the same answer. If you seek a different answer, try asking a different question, for self defence is no defence against a charge under s.91.
For example, instead of asking “since when has it been illegal in Canada to use a firearm in self defense?” try asking “does the illegal use of a firearm in Canada necessarily vitiate the defence of self defence when a person is charged with s.267 assault with a weapon?” to which the answer is no.
I never said it was, and in fact have specifically stated it’s not. So what’s your point here?
It is not illegal to use a gun in self defense in Canada. Using it in self defense may not make possession of an illegal firearm magically legal, but the act of self defense itself is still legal. Spoons implied that firearms cannot be used in self defense. That is simply not true.
It depends on the gun; see s.91.
No, it doesn’t. I posted section 91 above, and it’s plain you didn’t read it. Look, I’m sorry, but we might as well end this line of debate; you just don’t seem willing to understand.
Can I defend myself with what is at hand, illegal or otherwise, and still have a valid claim of self-defense? Does using an prohibited weapon negate self-defense?
RJ, I think the correct answer is that Canadians aren’t like that as that makes us different from Americans, or something equally blind.
Yes.
No.
But the aspect of self defence will not get you off of a s.91 charge if you used a prohibited weapon. In short, it is illegal to use a prohibited weapon, regardless of the prohibited weapon being used in self defence.
No one said that. So, you’d be charged with using/possessing an illegal weapon, not using an illegal weapon in the commission of a crime.
Here’s an example.
Let’s say there are two bad guys, each of whom has a prohibited handgun.
Badguy A shoots badguy B, so badguy B then shoots badguy A.
This would result in both badguys being charged under s.267 and s.91. Badguy B could plead self defence with respect to the s.267 charge, but not the s.91 charge.
What on earth have you been arguing about, then? Do you realize you’re now confirming what I said?
But you also contradticted yourself by saying:
and
when in law it is illegal to possess a prohibited gun without proper authorization, be it in self defence or otherwise, in Canada, as per s.91.
You can rail on about how you belive that I do not understand the criminal code, and that I have not read s.91 as much as you like, but the law is the law.
Nobody said otherwise. You’ve now admitted exactly the point I was making - in answer to Uzi - and you still insist on disagreeing with… something. And saying I contradicted myself and proving it by posting two quotes that aren’t contradictory. Do you have some personal thing with me? I don’t with you.
Then withdraw your statement:
Muffin,
I believe Rickjay meant that while possession of a gun may be illegal, its use in self-defense isn’t.
If I possess a weapon illegally and use it in self-defense, I would be charged with possessing the weapon illegally, not with using it in self-defense.
So what’s illegal is the possession without licence and registration, not the self-defense using the gun. The possession of the gun is necessary to the self-defense but that doesn’t make the use in self-defense illegal.
The point was specifically on whether or not the use of a gun in self-defense is illegal. Canadian laws do let you use guns in self-defense but it doesn’t let you possess them illegally. Issues of possession and use in self-defense can be intertwined in the same case but they’re legally distinct.