Improbable but entertaining scenario....

I was discussing this with Freedom1man and AC back last october during the october OC meet up, but we never really came up with an answer, maybe someone here has an idea

OK lets say you're OCing and minding your own business in peace park in Blaine WA which literally sits on the border with canada, it's like this open sports type field, and there's this ditch that marks the border and on the otherside of the ditch is a residential neighborhood in BC. so you're on the Washington side OCing lawfully and lets say an angry or drunk canadian shows up with a gun, and starts shooting across the border, at you. so you hit the deck draw your firearm and return fire. well lets change it a little, lets say he points a gun at you and before he fires you draw and fire. who's juristiction is this and what's likely to happen?

See the trees in this photo? notice the houses on the other side of the trees, the houses are in Canada and the trees in WA

Simple answer....international incident...SHTF you go to jail pending investigation.

Is there video evidence to prove that you were drawn down on, resulting in your likely justifiable response to a lethal threat with lethal force?

I am guessing that the Canadians would be better shots, and so it would be all over with quickly.

They have more experience hunting game too, since there is more game to hunt up in O Canada.

And the last time the USA went to war in Canada in 1812 the Canadians drove the US out.

The History Channel had a great documentary on it not long ago.

Same as the Chinese track record against the USA in Korea and Viet Nam.

There are some places where the USA has just been flat unlucky all the time.

OC for ME said:

Is there video evidence to prove that you were drawn down on, resulting in your likely justifiable response to a lethal threat with lethal force?

Click to expand...

lets assume... no.

since it's my hypothetical scenario I'll say the evidence is this, it was early morning. one hysterical witness on the canadian side, we'll say canadian with a loaded rifle (meaning you reasonably believed you would be shot in the back while running since a rifle can fire at a long distance and you got 50 yards of open field with no cover.

so one witness, loaded rifle, your shots, dead body are the evidence.

EMNofSeattle said:

I was discussing this with Freedom1man and AC back last october during the october OC meet up, but we never really came up with an answer, maybe someone here has an idea

OK lets say you're OCing and minding your own business in peace park in Blaine WA which literally sits on the border with canada, it's like this open sports type field, and there's this ditch that marks the border and on the otherside of the ditch is a residential neighborhood in BC. so you're on the Washington side OCing lawfully and lets say an angry or drunk canadian shows up with a gun, and starts shooting across the border, at you. so you hit the deck draw your firearm and return fire. well lets change it a little, lets say he points a gun at you and before he fires you draw and fire. who's juristiction is this and what's likely to happen?

See the trees in this photo? notice the houses on the other side of the trees, the houses are in Canada and the trees in WA

Click to expand...

Trees are no longer there.
DHS are on a major deforestation campaign.

skyisfalling said:

Trees are no longer there.
Dept. of Motherland security are on a major deforestation campaign.

Click to expand...

Whatever it takes to keep Arab Muslim gihadists out.

It was never rocket science to figure out that the easiest way into the USA is by way of O Canada, rather than by Mexico or Cuba.

You took a pistol to a rifle fight (most Canadians do not have pistols), you are most likely dead so you will not care about jurisdiction, prosecution etc.

Jeff Hayes said:

You took a pistol to a rifle fight, you are most likely dead so you will not care about jurisdiction, prosecution etc.

Click to expand...

I can fill pages of people holding rifles who've lost rifle fights to guys with pistols if you want to play that game...

EMNofSeattle said:

I can fill pages of people holding rifles who've lost rifle fights to guys with pistols if you want to play that game...

Click to expand...

A handgun can be drawn and fired faster than a long gun, and so the handgun protects the long gun from close-up assailants.

But ultimately the long gun will defeat the handgun at any range beyond 50 yards.

But how will that factor in to the legal side if you fire a bullet in self defense across an international border?

EMNofSeattle said:

But how will that factor in to the legal side if you fire a bullet in self defense across an international border?

Click to expand...

Probably the same way as it would across the DMZ in Korea, as TriggerDr supra already pointed out for you.

The North Koreans would probably fire their missiles at you.

The Canadians might throw hockey pucks.

Bill Jordan tells the very entertaining story of a cross-border shooting in his book No Second Place Winners. Jordan was a fast-draw demonstrator and member of the Border Patrol back in the day, say 1940's - 60's.


Mexico. Rio Grande. The Border Patrol would stake-out in shrubs near where smugglers tended to cross.

There was a certain etiquette to these encounters. Unspoken rules of the game. The BP would announce themselves and declare the arrest. The smugglers would run or not according to chances. Although both sides were armed, shots were never exchanged. The smuggler group even had armed guards separate from the carriers.

Then one night, during an encounter, somebody broke the rules--by firing a shot.

The smugglers were indignant at this breach of etiquette, and, assuming the BP had fired first, returned fire, running back across the river.

A gun fight ensued. Across the river. BP on one side, Mexicans on the other. Nobody was hitting anything. The fight went on for hours. As you read the account, it quickly becomes apparent that it wasn't really a fight. Nobody seemed to be actually hitting anything. They were just shooting for the fun of it.

In fact, locals from both sides of the river, hearing the shots, came to join in. It went on so long, that BP had to make multiple trips to headquarters for more ammo. Jordan makes it sound like there were forty or fifty people shooting back and forth across the Rio Grande.

In the morning, the BP supervisor called one of his men into his office for an explanation. The officer tried to explain in a serious way, making it sound like they had no choice and could not disengage. The supervisor saw through this, and commented, "You returned for ammunition four times."

EMNofSeattle said:

I was discussing this with Freedom1man and AC back last october during the october OC meet up, but we never really came up with an answer, maybe someone here has an idea

OK lets say you're OCing and minding your own business in peace park in Blaine WA which literally sits on the border with canada, it's like this open sports type field, and there's this ditch that marks the border and on the otherside of the ditch is a residential neighborhood in BC. so you're on the Washington side OCing lawfully and lets say an angry or drunk canadian shows up with a gun, and starts shooting across the border, at you. so you hit the deck draw your firearm and return fire. well lets change it a little, lets say he points a gun at you and before he fires you draw and fire. who's juristiction is this and what's likely to happen?

Click to expand...

It would seem that no one is seriously answering the question at hand. Honestly, I don't know what would happen. I would suspect that the Canadians would accuse you of violating their laws in some way since you would have killed one of their citizens on their soil and attempt an extradition (I don't think the Canadians would care where the shot originated from). However rifle vs. pistol at 50 yards or more -- I would be running zigzag all the way back to my car. (I think I would have a better chance of survival that way IMO - staying relatively static while engaging a rifleman with a handgun at range = you're gonna have a bad time)

Then again, maybe the Canadians won't do anything -- publicly say that they are appalled, and privately say "maybe those US gun laws are worth something" and do nothing.

But .. that is not to say I wouldn't build a range with the backstop against the border just to mess with em a little.

acmariner99 said:

It would seem that no one is seriously answering the question at hand. Honestly, I don't know what would happen. I would suspect that the Canadians would accuse you of violating their laws in some way since you would have killed one of their citizens on their soil and attempt an extradition (I don't think the Canadians would care where the shot originated from). However rifle vs. pistol at 50 yards or more -- I would be running zigzag all the way back to my car. (I think I would have a better chance of survival that way IMO - staying relatively static while engaging a rifleman with a handgun at range = you're gonna have a bad time)

But .. that is not to say I wouldn't build a range with the backstop against the border just to mess with em a little.

Click to expand...

Why would you consider hockey pucks as not a serious response?

Shoobee said:

Why would you consider hockey pucks as not a serious response?

Click to expand...

It is serious. I mean as Trigger Dr said I could be sent to jail.....

[video=youtube;3NNS_tLXBUQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NNS_tLXBUQ[/video]

Getting back to the OP's outlandishly devilish (so he thinks) scenario -

The tort takes place in Canada when the guy with the rifle points it at you (assault with a deadly weapon generally).

What are the Canadian laws about the use of deadly force to repel deadly force?

If the OP survives (or his heirs and assigns have documentation of the assault) charges are filed in Canada against the guy with the rifle - either for assault/attempted killing of the OP, or killing of the OP.

Depending on the laws on the use of deadly force to counter deadly force, Canada does or does not seek extradition of the OP to face Canadian justice.

Washington State, at the same time, may have a charge or two related to the OP discharging a firearm in a park. Documentation of the Canadian being charged by Canada for assault/attempted killing of the OP, or killing of the OP probably would constitute justification/excuse for the discharge if the Washington law does not already do so for self defense.

To the OP - seriously, you need to work on dreaming up a scenario that might pose some challenge to figuring out jurisdiction. Of course, it may have helped that I used to need to know where and how 35 different police departments, plus the security services of every embassy/consulate had, assumed, and exerted jurisdiction in DC.

stay safe.

Shoobee said:

Why would you consider hockey pucks as not a serious response?

Click to expand...

Sounds plausible to me.

Sent from my SCH-R720 using Tapatalk 2

skidmark said:

Getting back to the OP's outlandishly devilish (so he thinks) scenario -

The tort takes place in Canada when the guy with the rifle points it at you (assault with a deadly weapon generally).

What are the Canadian laws about the use of deadly force to repel deadly force?

If the OP survives (or his heirs and assigns have documentation of the assault) charges are filed in Canada against the guy with the rifle - either for assault/attempted killing of the OP, or killing of the OP.

Depending on the laws on the use of deadly force to counter deadly force, Canada does or does not seek extradition of the OP to face Canadian justice.

Washington State, at the same time, may have a charge or two related to the OP discharging a firearm in a park. Documentation of the Canadian being charged by Canada for assault/attempted killing of the OP, or killing of the OP probably would constitute justification/excuse for the discharge if the Washington law does not already do so for self defense.

To the OP - seriously, you need to work on dreaming up a scenario that might pose some challenge to figuring out jurisdiction. Of course, it may have helped that I used to need to know where and how 35 different police departments, plus the security services of every embassy/consulate had, assumed, and exerted jurisdiction in DC.

stay safe.

Click to expand...

Best answer, so far.

Good job Skidmark.

However I continue to maintain that if it was in Korea then the North Koreans would fire their missiles at you.

I do not believe we have an extradition treaty with them.

Can't happen, the Canadians had all their handguns taken away.