First off I’d like to say this is just a hypothetical question that I thought of today.

This following scenario is to be taking place in Canada. Let’s say a guy is at his house on his private property. He’s downstairs on the main floor when someone tries to break into his house. The guy kicks down the door and has a knife in his hand. The owner of the house carries around with him an illegal hand gun which he uses to shoot which kills the person who broke into his house.

My understanding is that because it’s on his private property and because he felt in danger for his life that it wouldn’t have been using excessive force and it would be self defence. Very quickly the police would realize that the firearm he used to shoot and kill person was illegal in Canada.

Would the man end up not getting charged with anything, or because it was with an illegal weapon would it become murder or something similar. I’m also assuming he’d get charged with a crime for having the illegal gun. Is that correct or wrong??

Thanks in advance

  • 1
    I'd note that whether he used excessive force when he killed the intruder (and, thus, whether he may be exposed to a potential murder charge) would largely depend on specific facts to be drawn out in a trial, not automatically deemed legal simply by virtue of a trespass. (I believe).
    – A.fm.
    Jan 13, 2018 at 9:06
  • Related: see in particular the first Q&A.
    – user4657
    Jan 13, 2018 at 10:52
  • 3
    I do not think that having an illegal weapon has any bearing on whether you will be convicted of murder. As the previous poster explained, that will be decided separately. However, you might have a charge for keeping an illegal weapon, regardless of whether that is in addition to the murder charge, or whether you are acquitted of the murder because it was self-defence.
    – user
    Jan 13, 2018 at 19:35


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.