Terry Posted June 27, 2017 Report Posted June 27, 2017 I want them to come to everyone's house and check in your bedroom and your draws That's how you catch the bad guys Not
BillM Posted June 27, 2017 Report Posted June 27, 2017 So much drama. Sometimes I think we're dealing with teenage girls, not grown men.
fishermccann Posted June 27, 2017 Report Posted June 27, 2017 Some people always take things the extreme. They can check your boat on the water any time they want, why not on the trailer?
Terry Posted June 27, 2017 Report Posted June 27, 2017 i for one do not want to live in a police state you have a boat, so they can check anywhere any time you shop can they search you for stealing any time you walk can they stop you anytime they want to make sure you follow the rules you have a long gun can they come into your home night and day any time they want for no reason other then you have a gun i say no, but you are welcome to spread eagle for them, i will resist
BillM Posted June 27, 2017 Report Posted June 27, 2017 (edited) I can't imagine what it's like living life worried that at any moment I might be checked when driving down the highway because I'm towing a boat, or stopped while walking out of Shoppers Drug Mart, or walking down the street worrying about being harassed/arrested by the cops, or cops coming into my house and taking my rifles/shotguns. Paranoia is running rampant! Are you going to be the guy we all see on the news going ape ***** because the MNR is conducting a spot check? lol Edited June 27, 2017 by BillM
grimsbylander Posted June 27, 2017 Report Posted June 27, 2017 ^^^^ Bill, just beware. You're sinking into the same quicksand of absurdity as I did. Abandon logic and save yourself! lol
Terry Posted June 27, 2017 Report Posted June 27, 2017 no your the ape and i am not afraid, i dont sit up at night worrying , i dont wear a tin foil hat. i just dont like seeing morons encouraging a police state
fishermccann Posted June 27, 2017 Report Posted June 27, 2017 It is a law, the LEO has a right to check, don't like that law, run for parliament and try to change it. Nobody is spreading anything, but defy their right to check at your own peril, otherwise you just might be spreading.
jonasdry Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 It is a law, the LEO has a right to check, don't like that law, run for parliament and try to change it. Nobody is spreading anything, but defy their right to check at your own peril, otherwise you just might be spreading. Section 9 of the Canadian Charter of Rights states "Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned." which means that without suspicion of committing a crime you cannot be held. Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights states "Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure." which means that without suspicion of committing a crime you cannot be searched. Your statement that an LEO has a right to check anything without reasonable grounds to suspect you of committing a crime is spreading misinformation and falsehoods.
fishermccann Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 Explain how that is affected by post #103?
smitty55 Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 Maybe if folks would just ignore that twit and not respond to his inane chatter he will just go away.
jonasdry Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 (edited) Explain how that is affected by post #103? Post 103 includes section 89: Inspection of conveyance 89 (1) A conservation officer may stop a conveyance if he or she has reasonable grounds to believe that stopping the conveyance would assist in determining whether there is compliance with this Act or the regulations. 2009, c. 33, Sched. 22, s. 2 (22). Operator to stop (2) On the conservation officers signal to stop, the operator of the conveyance shall immediately stop and produce for inspection any wildlife, invertebrate, fish, document or other thing requested by the officer for the purpose of this Act. 1997, c. 41, s. 89 (2); 2009, c. 33, Sched. 22, s. 2 (23). Reasonable grounds... key words right there. They must believe you may be breaking a law in order to inspect you. The simple fact of towing a boat, or having fishing gear or fishing stickers or anything of the type is not "reasonable grounds". If they or someone "saw" you doing something wrong and reported it, that is reasonable grounds. Simply driving with a boat in tow is 100% arbitrary. Checking for a license is 100% permissible because while you are fishing you are required by law to have a fishing license. Never during a license check are you being searched or detained. If the CO notices something illegal while they are doing the license check, now they have reasonable grounds for detainment and search/seizure. Edited June 28, 2017 by jonasdry
fishermccann Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 (edited) Thanks for proving my point, it is all in the wording.I read it and it says,......... has RESONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT STOPPING THE CONVEYANCE WOULD ASSIST IN DETERMINING WHETHER THERE IS COMPLIANCE........ Does anyone believe that stopping the vehicle would not assist to determine compliance? Pretty hard to look in the boat while it is moving down the road. Reasonable grounds, NOT to believe that they were in compliance with the law, BUT reasonable grounds to expect that stopping said vehicle would aid in determining compliance. Edited June 28, 2017 by fishermccann
Terry Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 shall immediately stop and produce for inspection any wildlife, invertebrate, fish, document or other thing requested by the officer for the purpose of this Act. and it still does not give them the right to search, you have to show them and fish you have if you have them
fishermccann Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 (edited) Without a doubt ,according to law, it does give them the right to stop you. I guess that is why they have the game and fish sniffing dogs with them , for what is in the storage that you don't show them. Also on Page 32 of the hunting regs , gives the power to search without a warrant, in circumstances requiring immediate action. I think that if you are about to drive away with any evidence of your law breaking ,that would constitute a circumstance requiring immediate action, and you will be searched without a warrant. Edited June 28, 2017 by fishermccann
manitoubass2 Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 (edited) I hate the idea of a "police state", much like Terry But I will pull over, it's a minor inconvenience. The term "probable cause" is the real problem That basically means anything goes. Legally it's the most idiotic term IMO Edited June 28, 2017 by manitoubass2
fishermccann Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 (edited) Yup, it could just be to the CO, that something smelled 'fishy', and they will search. Edited June 28, 2017 by fishermccann
manitoubass2 Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 (edited) Yup, it could just be to the CO, that something smelled fishy.It very well could be.and by fishy, maybe you beat his high school baseball team 20 years ago? His probable cause is you are towing a boat. That's rediculous Edited June 28, 2017 by manitoubass2
fishermccann Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 (edited) If you say go ahead search, they probable won't ,say no and they will for sure. Something must be up requiring immediate action. Edited June 28, 2017 by fishermccann
manitoubass2 Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 If you say go ahead search, they probable won't ,say no and they will for sure. Something must be up requiring immediate action. Yes, excercising your freedoms lol (or lack thereof) But.... Like I said, it's a minor inconvenience, no worries for me. ....still haven't found my modified .50 cal so that's cool
BillM Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 (edited) no your the ape and i am not afraid, i dont sit up at night worrying , i dont wear a tin foil hat. i just dont like seeing morons encouraging a police state Yeah, we're the morons in all of this, lol Post 103 includes section 89: Reasonable grounds... key words right there. They must believe you may be breaking a law in order to inspect you. The simple fact of towing a boat, or having fishing gear or fishing stickers or anything of the type is not "reasonable grounds". If they or someone "saw" you doing something wrong and reported it, that is reasonable grounds. Simply driving with a boat in tow is 100% arbitrary. Checking for a license is 100% permissible because while you are fishing you are required by law to have a fishing license. Never during a license check are you being searched or detained. If the CO notices something illegal while they are doing the license check, now they have reasonable grounds for detainment and search/seizure. What other 'reasonable grounds' do you think the MNR should use for a highway check? Eeny, meeny, miny, moe? Edited June 28, 2017 by BillM
jonasdry Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 Part 2 of that law which allows a CO to stop someone is in direct reference to part 1 where the CO has reasonable grounds to inspect someone. That is why it is part 2 and not part 1. The CO has to have reasonable grounds to inspect you at which point they can use part 2 to stop you. They can't stop you for an arbitrary reason and then decide to inspect you to "fish" for an offense. Bear in mind, no law can supersede your charter rights. Your charter rights can not be infringed by the government or any law they enact. So once again fishermccann, an LEO does not have a "right" to stop you or inspect you without reasonable grounds to do so for a fish and wildlife violation. If you choose to voluntarily stop and voluntarily be searched, giving up your basic rights, that is your choice but you are not required by law to do so. When I have passed a checkpoint with my boat I have never been chased or stopped. If I am chased and stopped and have to explain my right to not be arbitrarily detained or searched it will be a bad day for that officer.
jonasdry Posted June 28, 2017 Report Posted June 28, 2017 (edited) What other 'reasonable grounds' do you think the MNR should use for a highway check? Eeny, meeny, miny, moe? They are fishing for suckers who don't know their own charter rights. People who think they are required to stop and be checked but don't realise there is no legal requirement for them to do so. Edit: reasonable grounds, if you really don't know is the some sort of evidence that you have violated a law. Does towing a boat seem like evidence that you have broken a law? That would be much akin to saying you may be a rapist because you have a tally-whacker. Doesn't work now does it? Edited June 28, 2017 by jonasdry
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now