Of course he has a problem with that, as do i, and as should *you* as well. Section 182, like a lot of laws nowadays, fails to take proper context in consideration. Yeah, punishing someone for sending death threats or serious harm is, as a rule of thumb, a good thing... Problem is however, every rule has their exceptions. Jailing a concerned father for defending his 14-year-old daughter against a sexual predator praying on his child is nothing short of absurd... Sure, he might have implied on his messages that he'd take extreme measures if worst comes to worst, but i ask you, what father wouldn't? Are we really going to start concerning about what a clearly distraught father says online to some creep, that is preying on his children?!
As someone excellently pointed out above, laws must concern the intent of the agent, not be an all-encompassing institution that will inevitably lead to injustices committed for the sake of our children's protection (heh, how ironic...)