Nah, I'm no grammar Nazi (well, I am, but this one was my misunderstanding, not your writing).philip964 wrote:His would refer to the closest subject in the sentence which is robber. If there are English scholars out there, please correct me if I'm wrong as I want to improve my writing as it always needs help. Obviously repeating robber would have improved the comprehension.Vol Texan wrote:When I first read this, I thought it referenced that the homeowner got his OWN gun and shot him. But after reading the story, it appears that the homeowner got the bad guy's gun and used it.philip964 wrote:
No place but Canada. Three armed men break into home, homeowner struggles with robber, gets his gun and shoots him.
If it had been the former, I would understand why some of the charges might be applied to a person using his own gun in a gun free world (note that I still disagree with them, but at least I recognize the basis in their laws - he would have been a lawbreaker to begin with, and the home invasion uncovered that fact for them).
However this was not the case! He used the bad guy's gun against the bad guy! How in the world can the authorities sleep at night, knowing that he simply used the tool that was brought to the location by the bad guy to be used against him!?!
And yeah charging a homeowner for possession of a gun that was taken from a robber during a robbery is a gross miscarriage of justice even for gun hating Canidians.
Butt aye will tos yew under the buss fer mis spelling!
