r/canadaguns • u/rastamasta45 • Mar 17 '26
News / Politics / Activism 3 suspects sought in Vaughan break-in, homeowner who fired gun at them not being charged
https://www.cp24.com/local/york/2026/03/17/3-suspects-sought-in-vaughan-break-in-homeowner-who-fired-gun-at-them-not-being-charged/191
u/rastamasta45 Mar 17 '26
Gun sales and license applications gonna pop off
98
Mar 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
15
u/RDasher3333 Mar 18 '26
The Quebec FedeCP released the stats for 2025 and it was a record year for the number of people who took the CSFC
52
u/Outrageous_Lie_979 Mar 17 '26
Sent in my RPAL application yesterday! now I have to wait my 28 days ++++
52
u/Lopsided_Ad3516 Mar 17 '26
Took me a year while they banned handguns.
Obligatory fuck the State.
10
u/Arayder Mar 17 '26
The + on the 28+ being the key here lmao. Took me about 8 months to get mine pre covid. Buddy just got his recently after over a year wait.
7
u/Sco0basTeVen Mar 18 '26
After you wait 28+ day for it to arrive, there’s nothing left to buy in restricted anymore unfortunately.
2
u/Senior_Mail4090 Mar 18 '26
Mossberg 990 short barrel sa shotgun apparently. (14.5 semi auto)
But I do agree the list is very small now.
1
u/Outrageous_Lie_979 Mar 19 '26
Don’t care about restricted stuff. Going for a 10/22, .308 bolt and pump 12 ga. That’s it.
1
u/pahtee_poopa Mar 18 '26
It’s more of the fact that you can still get a Restricted license at this point. It lets you at least have the option of borrowing your friend’s restricted handguns and whatever else is not prohibited these days…
-1
u/Sco0basTeVen Mar 18 '26
Definitely cannot borrow friends handguns with a restricted….you can shoot them at the range while the owner is present, but you can do that without an RPAL.
You need an authorization to transport your handguns to the range, you will never get one of those trying to transport handguns that aren’t registered to you.
2
u/pahtee_poopa Mar 18 '26
Having the RPAL means you don’t need to shoot it with my supervision. And also what occasions would you need to borrow a handgun outside of the range? It’s not like you can use it anywhere else.
I also haven’t tried this, but do you have a source on you will never be able to get an ATT for it? If I’m going south for a few months on vacation, I’m not leaving my stuff unattended and will likely have it stored with another RPAL holder.
1
u/Sco0basTeVen Mar 18 '26
Maybe you are right, Google states it is possible, but this could be info from before the freeze
1
u/pahtee_poopa Mar 18 '26
There’s a couple threads on this in the subreddit. It is possible. Just search “borrow handgun” and there’s quite a few threads like this one:
1
Mar 18 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Sco0basTeVen Mar 18 '26
Yes I was wrong, just assumed that wouldn’t be allowed with how strict things are now.
0
u/Sco0basTeVen Mar 18 '26
An RPAL is for possession and acquisition, that means the firearm is registered to you and stored at your home.
I’ve never done it either, but they are so strict about the movement of handguns, that I would imagine you can’t just “lend” handguns to friends. How would they get an ATT if it’s not in their name? And seeing as all handguns are frozen, you can’t even transfer it into their name temporarily.
I’m happy to be proved wrong but cannot imagine borrowing handguns is even a thing. They can’t even be stored away from their registered address.
1
u/pahtee_poopa Mar 18 '26
This is confirmed to not be true. Search “borrow handgun” in this subreddit for some info.
1
u/Sco0basTeVen Mar 18 '26
Yes I was wrong and you are correct. Crazy I thought they would have stopped that.
My mistake.
2
u/Hot_Cheesecake_905 Mar 18 '26
Stay positive, mine was approved at 8PM on the 28th day ... so perhaps you'll luck out.
1
u/WearifulSole Mar 18 '26
Emphasis on the "++++" I waited about 8 months for mine, I have 2 friends that are coming up on a year waiting for theirs.
4
1
u/MediaOld666 Mar 18 '26
Yeah, we've seen a massive uptick in classes since December in Saskatchewan.
59
76
u/CatchADeffaz Mar 17 '26
This is gonna set some sort of precedence!
13
u/Perfect-Emphasis-211 Mar 18 '26
Not a precedence, but does indicate a change in the way front line YRP officers are handling these situations.
4
u/Fine-Tie2651 Mar 18 '26
Not really, the intruders were armed and it’s technically a proportional use of force. A real precedent in case law would be if the crown charged the homeowner and lost instead of dropping the case.
29
u/ElongatedDongus Mar 17 '26
Good don’t go breaking into peoples houses unless you value your life less than their property
23
u/jollygreengiant1655 Mar 17 '26
Don't get too excited here guys. The article says they haven't charged the homeowner at this time. They can very well come along a few months later and lay charges.
I'd love for this to not be the case, but police frequently lay charges well after the event.
4
u/pahtee_poopa Mar 18 '26
This is the way it should be done though. Unless there is something you did wrong in defending yourself (e.g. shooting at them while they are running away) or you didn’t properly store your firearms, there’s nothing to really charge the homeowner with and nothing for him to defend against. Don’t need to spend money to retain a lawyer because if the crown’s got nothing, don’t charge them unless they think there’s a reasonable chance of conviction for something.
3
u/Perfect-Emphasis-211 Mar 18 '26
No, the police (YRP anyways) almost always arrest the home owner on the night of the event. Then the charges are withdrawn months later once no reasonable prospect of conviction is determined.
1
1
u/MilkIlluminati Mar 18 '26
I mean, probably. How can you respond that quickly with an actually properly stored firearm?
11
u/Diligent_Studio6763 Mar 18 '26
A combination trigger lock with it being 1 number off of unlocking is completely legal storage as far as I’m concerned
10
u/Terapr0 Mar 18 '26
In-wall safe in the bedroom with a digital keypad. No trigger lock needed, and you can have a loaded magazine next to the gun. Pretty easy actually.
68
u/Dramatic_Wrangler920 Mar 17 '26
Self Defense, Self preservation is a god given right. It’s a shame that these things are not “officially” taught to us.
-30
u/Comfortable-Chair527 Mar 18 '26
Ffs - god didn’t give us rights or gunshots a shame you weren’t “officially” taught that 🙄
2
29
u/LurkerGarry Mar 17 '26
Correct me if I’m wrong, but you do have the right to use a firearm to self defence in Canada if you feel like your life and the lives of others in the home are in danger. You’re just not allowed to chase and fire at someone retreating your home or property.
But if you do, you still need to prove in a court of law that you used your firearm lawfully correct? I can’t seem to find cases where people used their firearm to defend themselves and have gone to jail for doing so.
80
u/OniDelta al Mar 17 '26
Jail isn't the problem for people using legitimate self-defense. It's the cost of the legal process that follows. Self-defense cases should be free for the defendant. They didn't ask to be put into the situation and were forced to endure it. That shouldn't come at a significant life changing cost to finances. These cases are over 6 figures and people go bankrupt protecting themselves.
25
u/AdeptArt Mar 17 '26
I'm with you. Legal representation should not ruin your life financially even if you win.
3
u/Old-Selection-1012 Mar 18 '26
Americans get massive health care bills for medical.
Canadians get massive lawyer bills for self defence.
20
u/LurkerGarry Mar 17 '26
In Canada 60%~ of the legal costs are rewarded to the winner of the legal case. But you’re not wrong. A law abiding citizen should not have to pay thousands after defending themselves from an intruder.
7
u/Lumindan Mar 17 '26
But if you do, you still need to prove in a court of law that you used your firearm lawfully correct? I can’t seem to find cases where people used their firearm to defend themselves and have gone to jail for doing so.
The core issue isnt if you're guilty or not. It's that you're losing six figures in cash for a lawyer, months / years of your life get put on hold and you get to deal with all the stress and anxiety of being dragging into court to prove you were simply defending your family and property.
Go look up Ian Thompson come back to this comment. You'll understand why a lot of folks support C270 and take issue with the current system.
3
u/gnu_gai Mar 17 '26
You're not allowed to have a firearm on your person for the purpose of self defense unless you have a very specific judge-permitted ATC. If you happen to be cleaning your gun when someone breaks into your home, that's their bad luck, you don't have a duty to retreat from your own home and can use whatever is reasonably accessible to defend yourself
4
u/GabRB26DETT Mar 17 '26
Thing is, it's seems like it's up to a judge to decide AFTER what is and what is not a danger to your life. Easy to say looking back compared to when an attempt to your life is happening
3
u/FuzzyLampShade Mar 17 '26
Well it’s sort of in a grey area atm. We don’t yet have a castle law like in the states or parts of Europe. Usually depends if the police decide to charge you for using a firearms or any object in self defense. If you do get charged then you get financially fucked trying to argue in a court that you had no other options. It gets worse and more expensive if you end up killing an intruder and you’ll likely get charged and sent to jail for manslaughter.
TLDR; sort of yes, but actually no.
1
u/RYRK_ Mar 18 '26
It gets worse and more expensive if you end up killing an intruder and you’ll likely get charged and sent to jail for manslaughter.
Citation needed. If it was self-defense the Crown will drop charges due to likelihood of conviction.
1
u/Upbeat_Plane6490 Mar 18 '26
There’s case law that shooting at someone retreating can still be self defence, if you have reasonable grounds to believe they are retreating to a more suitable firing position.
But good luck on that one
0
u/waitwhatnothing Mar 18 '26
That’s all well and good. The main issue, aside from having to deal with legal process, is that we can’t legally possess anything for the purpose of self defense (gun or otherwise). It’s illegal to plan ahead basically and the firearms storage laws reflect that.
-1
u/meme__machine Mar 17 '26
The gun has to be stored legally, and if it’s in your basement and you were able to run down unlock it etc the state will argue you could have left out the back door, locked yourself in a safe room etc.
Now if the safe happens to be in the bedroom and was the closest thing you had access to and there was no other path to defending yourself ….
4
u/IGnuGnat Mar 18 '26
We have no duty to retreat in Canada AFAIK. I think that juries are specifically instructed not to consider the possibility that a defender could leave their house in Ontario; however, the judge may take that possibility into consideration depending upon circumstance.
8
9
u/Neat_Imagination2503 Mar 17 '26
Even the way the police talked about it without charging him is fucked ip
5
5
3
5
u/Rockefeller07 Mar 17 '26
Common sense. If you go into the forest hunting bears and the bear eats you, is it the bears fault?
5
u/nejnedau Mar 17 '26
crazy thing is if it was a cops home, our lawyer said they can go on disability many at 100% salary till they retire due to PTSD.
2
2
u/a_guy_in_ottawa Mar 18 '26
Is it safe to assume the gun used was a non restricted? I’m just curious if the homeowner had used a restricted, like a handgun, even if the gun was properly stored is it likely they would’ve been charged in that scenario? I guess I’m wondering if the type of firearm used would’ve affected the outcome here.
2
u/00Anbu00 Mar 18 '26
This is the "ONLY" way these criminals will learn not to break into peoples homes. They won't learn by the police telling victims to run away, hide or leaving their keys at the front door, that'll only encourage criminals.
1
1
u/FireDragonMonkey Mar 18 '26
But good to see this outcome; would like it to become the norm. However I wonder if the outcome would have been different if it didn't receive media attention.
1
Mar 18 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/canadaguns-ModTeam Mar 19 '26
[9] Trolling/Spam/Disruptive Behaviour This subreddit is intended for constructive discussions. Trolling, bad-faith participation, spam, or behaviour intended to provoke, derail, or inflame discussion is not permitted.
This includes, but is not limited to:
Posts or comments made solely to bait, antagonize, or misrepresent others. Repeated off-topic derailment. Low-effort inflammatory remarks or drive-by provocations. Repetitive posting, copy-pasted content, or flooding threads. Ban evasion. Publicly arguing moderator decisions within threads. Users are expected to participate in good faith. Content or behaviour determined to be disruptive may be removed, and users may be temporarily or permanently banned at moderator discretion.
Accounts flagged by Reddit’s spam filters will have their content automatically removed.
Accounts less than 30 days old, that have negative karma, or have a history of posting rule breaking content, while also actively engaging in trolling, spam or disruptive behaviour, may without warning, be temporarily or permanently banned at moderator discretion.
Argumentative/fighting/mudslinging comment threads may be subjected to locking or outright removal, if deemed disruptive, at Moderator discretion. In egregious cases, at Moderator discretion, users can even be temporarily or permanently banned.
Please do not engage with the rule breaking content itself. Report the content and let the moderators handle it.
-3
u/Hot_Cheesecake_905 Mar 18 '26
Great news; perhaps the tide is turning.
But how did the homeowner get the firearm unlocked and loaded so quickly? What is the secret? 😂
Hopefully, the RCMP and Canadian Firearms Program do not put a flag on his profile for his renewal.
10
u/goingslowfast Mar 18 '26 edited Mar 18 '26
The secret is to say nothing without your lawyer present.
-14
-71
u/StolenGoods_77 Mar 17 '26
The timeline of events doesn't make sense here if the firearm was lawfully stored. The homeowner had just seconds to react, yet he/she had time to run to the safe, open it, take the trigger lock off, find and load ammo, and then finally confront the thugs, all under extreme stress...does that seem feasible? Did these idiots try to rob John Wick?
47
u/Any-Rip-9727 Mar 17 '26
Well you dont need a trigger lock in a safe and you can also store your ammo in the same safe
6
12
Mar 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/StolenGoods_77 Mar 17 '26
I'd try to do the same, chances are I wouldn't make it that quickly...it was around midnight.
2
Mar 18 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/StolenGoods_77 Mar 18 '26
I get it, but this is a little different...I doubt this guy and his elderly mother had any advance notice. The whole thing lasted under a minute at night. Good for him for being alert and cool under pressure; I doubt many keyboard commandos on this thread would perform as well.
4
11
u/I-amgr00t Mar 17 '26
Regardless of the firearm classification it's not unreasonable to assume the ammo was stored in the safe. Additionally, if the firearm took magazines, I'm pretty sure you could store loaded magazines in said safe (assuming they aren't actually in the firearm). Also, if it's in a safe then a trigger lock isn't lawfully required (for NR firearms).
Lot's of unknowns about what happened here but I'd say there are theoretical scenarios where this is feasible.
16
u/bzarembareal Mar 17 '26
THAT is your concern/takeaway?
-3
u/StolenGoods_77 Mar 17 '26
Yeah, what's yours?
3
u/bzarembareal Mar 18 '26
The fact that homeowner was not automatically charged.
There are a number of takeaways from this article one could make. But anybody familiar with gun storage laws in Canada would not be wondering "how did the homeowner have time to take the gun from the safe and remove the trigger lock"
0
u/StolenGoods_77 Mar 18 '26
Ok John McPhee...there are a hundred other comments in the thread about how the homeowner was not charged. Go clap some gums on those.
2
u/bzarembareal Mar 18 '26
That reference is lost on me. But just in case I failed to carry my point across, legally you are not required to trigger lock guns that are in a safe.
4
u/goingslowfast Mar 18 '26
Why is anything in your safe trigger locked? Why is your ammo not secured within your safe, safely stored in magazines?
Can Crown prove that he wasn't dry firing in the living room after loading mags for tomorrow's range trip?
The key is to not talk to police without your lawyer.
The video could also be shortened.
3
u/Dickastigmatism Mar 17 '26
Who said anything about a trigger lock? Find ammo? I know where my ammo is.
6
4
u/SettingPitiful4330 Mar 17 '26
Much deserved down votes! Very dumb comment/takeaway 🤦♂️
0
u/StolenGoods_77 Mar 17 '26 edited Mar 17 '26
How so? What's your takeaway? I would not be able to react as fast as this guy did at 1am...but apparently you're a tier 1 operator, so kudos to you.
2
u/Hot_Cheesecake_905 Mar 18 '26
I agree, if this scenario were to happen to any of us, we would need to have our procedures and story straight.
It seems like everyone has their setup down pat, apparently.
I don't think OP should have been downvoted.
2
u/IGnuGnat Mar 18 '26
You don't need to store your firearms in a safe if they aren't restricted. They can simply have a trigger lock.
Ammunition doesn't have to be locked up; it should not be "easily accessible" from where the firearm is stored.
So you could have a firearm with a trigger lock in the bedroom, and a loaded magazine in the attached bathroom. A trigger lock really only takes a second to get off. Step to washroom, grab mag and load another 1-2 seconds maybe. It helps if you practice a little. Any firearms owner should practice really
1
u/Cre_AK47 Name Prohibited by OIC Mar 18 '26
Did you forget a "safe" is a legal storage option in which you do not need a secure locking device on the firearm of any classification, and magazines can be stored in the same receptacle (safe)? Doesn't take very long to access a safe.
336
u/En4cr Mar 17 '26
Good…the way it should be.
Don’t want to get shot? Don’t invade people’s homes.