Canadian Law protecting Criminal and persecuting the innocent?

Well, we have laws here. We have due process that must be followed. This looks like a case of a store owner trying to take the law into his own hands, and going a little overboard.

"On May 23, police said, Chen and two employees chased Bennett as he fled the store, forced him into a vehicle, tied him up and assaulted him."

This is not considered a reasonable response. You have a right to protect your business, yes - but everything done must be within reason. That's the issue here; the response is way out of proportion.

The second issue is the idea of Citizen's Arrest. The law states that:

"(2) Arrest by Owner etc., of Property:

Any one who is

(a) the owner or a person in lawful possession of property, or

(b) a person authorized by the owner or by a person in lawful possession of property

may arrest without warrant a person whom he finds committing a criminal offence on or in relation to that property."

You have to catch them in the act. But even then, what the shopkeeper did could be considered unreasonable.

I can't make a judgement as to what went on - and neither should you -unless we actually have the court records to look at. This is an interesting case; the fact that he is not only being charged with "kidnapping" but also forceible confinement, assault etc. makes me think there is something more to this case than The Star is letting on.

Personally, I try to avoid using the media in general as a source for many topics. Usually they're full of sh*t, taking statements out of context or leaving certain bits out whenever it suits their aims. That's a fact of life - The Star is notoriously skewed in favour of the left. Most news sources are in Canada.

But as I said, just wait until you can get your hands on a copy of the official records before making any rash statements.

maximum criminal rules a great deal impression minorities. maximum criminals are decrease socioeconomic communities that are the two welfare state recipients or come from a technology of those that burden the gadget they stay in. despite the fact that maximum of you are going to be able to think of this sounds racist, actual that those communities over characterize all wrongdoers in our society. i'm no longer speaking approximately bigger echelon criminals, ones who don't immediately commit crimes visibly in our neighborhoods. yet answering your question, liberals worry that if the known public could awaken and say adequate is adequate, that those communities that over actively make our each and daily lives grotesque, that make our neighborhoods become worse, and that eliminate our experience or risk-free practices, that we the final public, non criminals and for many area regulation abiding, could activate those minority communities that have been objective communities continuously. the effect must be entire vigilante justice against a collection that enjoys a unfastened existence in US. much greater social rejection or maybe violence to them.