Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s push to amend Canada’s Criminal Code to strengthen protections for homeowners who confront intruders has sparked concern among legal experts, who argue the change would bring little real benefit and could put people at greater risk.
Poilievre’s comments came after a 44-year-old man in Lindsay, Ontario, was charged for allegedly attacking a home intruder. Speaking in Brampton on Friday, he called for an amendment to presume that any use of force against someone who breaks into a home and threatens those inside is automatically reasonable.
But criminal law specialists say the law already tilts in favour of homeowners. Under Section 34 of the Criminal Code, Canadians are protected from criminal liability if they use reasonable force to defend themselves or others. McGill University law professor Noah Weisbord explained that in such cases, it is the prosecution’s job to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the force used was excessive.
Defence lawyer Kim Schofield cautioned that Poilievre’s idea would create a “slippery slope,” potentially encouraging unnecessary violence. She noted that simply confronting someone at your door does not justify violent action, stressing that the law already demands reasonableness in self-defence.
Poilievre argued that Canadians under threat don’t have time to think through the nine factors courts use to assess what counts as “reasonable.” Yet Schofield countered that those conditions are not for people in the heat of the moment but for judges who assess cases afterward.
Experts also warned that adopting U.S.-style “Stand Your Ground” provisions, which offer blanket legal immunity for using deadly force in self-defence, could have troubling consequences in Canada. Studies from Florida, where such laws exist, show an increase in homicides after implementation. Weisbord warned this type of policy could disproportionately harm marginalized communities, pointing to past cases such as the 2018 acquittal of Saskatchewan farmer Gerald Stanley in the shooting death of Colten Boushie, a Cree man.
He added that dangerous individuals might exploit such laws, claiming fear for their lives while using them as cover for violent behaviour. Legal scholars agree that while Poilievre’s rhetoric appeals to emotions around safety, the proposed changes may create more danger than security for Canadians.