Poilievre wants ‘reasonable’ self-defence defined in Criminal Code

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said anyone who is applying for immigration while in Canada and commits a crime should be ‘deported.’

OTTAWA — The federal government needs to amend the Criminal Code so the use of force, including lethal force, is considered reasonable to defend your home and family if someone breaks into it, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said Friday.

Poilievre called a news conference in Brampton, Ont., amid an outcry over assault charges that were laid against an Ontario man who encountered another man who allegedly broke into his apartment while carrying a crossbow.

Justice Minister Sean Fraser said on social media that Canadians already have the right to defend themselves under a law brought in by former prime minister Stephen Harper, “with Poilievre’s support.”

The Criminal Code says someone can defend themselves if they believe force, or a threat of force, is being used against them, as long as their actions are “reasonable in the circumstances.”

The law lays out nine factors to consider when determining reasonableness, including the nature of the threat, whether there were other means to respond to it, whether the incident involved a weapon, as well as the size, age and gender of the people involved.

Poilievre said these conditions are too complicated to consider in the moment if facing an intruder.

“If you’re defending your house, you don’t have time to think through nine different conditions. You have one condition -- to protect yourself and your kids,” he said.

Poilievre said if the government doesn’t introduce its own amendment, his party will introduce a private member’s bill to define what “reasonable” means.

He said that bill would have two tests to determine when it would be permissible to use force against an intruder.

“Two things, if someone enters your home illegally and uninvited, and two, you reasonably believe they are a threat to your family then it is assumed that all the force you use against that person is reasonable and legal. That is the test that our bill will bring in,” Poilievre said.

In his social media response to Poilievre, Fraser said that he trusts police to lay charges and judges to consider the evidence.

“This isn’t the Wild West. It’s Canada,” Fraser wrote. “Canadians deserve real solutions that make us safer, not slogans that inspire fear and chaos for Pierre’s political survival.”

Public debate about self-defence laws soared in Canada in recent days, after 44-year-old Jeremy David McDonald, was charged with assault in Lindsay, Ont., after an alleged break-in at his apartment on Aug. 18.

The alleged intruder, 41-year-old Michael Kyle Breen, was airlifted to hospital in Toronto with life-threatening injuries. He has been charged with break and enter, possession of a weapon for dangerous purpose, and mischief under $5,000.

Kawartha Lakes Police Chief Kirk Robertson wrote in a statement on Wednesday that he recognizes the incident has generated significant public interest and “emotional” responses, but called some of the reaction “unjust and inaccurate.”

Robertson wrote that individuals have the right to defend themselves and their property, but the law requires that any defensive action be proportionate to the threat faced.

“This means that while homeowners do have the right to protect themselves and their property, the use of force must be reasonable given the circumstances,” he wrote.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford blasted the decision to charge the apartment resident, saying last week that it shows “something is broken.”

Melina Macchia, a defence attorney with Schofield Macchia in Toronto, said that charges like the one faced by McDonald are rare.

“To capitalize or change the law or propose (an) overhaul without knowing more at this stage, I think is premature,” she said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

Macchia said reasonableness under the current law can be interpreted as not escalating the level of violence presented.

She said that if someone enters your home with both hands on a baseball bat, it would be reasonable to use a similar item to defend yourself.

Macchia said if a homeowner were to shoot someone with both hands on a baseball bat, that would likely be seen as unreasonable because there isn’t an obvious threat the intruder will shoot the homeowner.

“I think it is hard understand, but (the law is) designed so that people don’t just shoot people or stab people as soon as an intruder enters their home,” Macchia said.

In his press conference, Poilievre referred to a 2023 case of Ali Mian, a Milton, Ont. man who shot and killed one of five people who broke into his home. Poilievre said one of the intruders had a “nine millimetre handgun.”

Mian was charged with second degree murder, but the charge was later dropped.

“That is why Conservatives are standing here today, based on the principle that your home is your castle,” Poilievre said.

Colton Fehr, an assistant law professor at the University of Saskatchewan, said that the current self-defence legislation comes from a 2012 Conservative bill.

“It is, on the whole, a very good piece of legislation in my view that is capable of responding flexibly to unique circumstances such as the one giving rise to the charges in Ontario recently,” Fehr said in an emailed reply.

“Any more radical suggestion that a person should be able to do anything to anyone who breaks into their home (the “defend your castle” doctrine)... presents a variety of problems as the state is effectively giving a person a license to kill.”

— With files from Vanessa Tiberio in Brampton and Maan Alhmidi in Toronto.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 29, 2025.

David Baxter, The Canadian Press