Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Fishing Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 02-13-2012, 03:29 PM
fish farmer fish farmer is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 215
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canadiantdi View Post
That is interesting. Can you post up some information to support that? I will try to find some..
I will dig through my old school notes and criminal code and wildlife act stuff from when I was in college to become a F&W officer before I switched to other enviro stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-13-2012, 03:30 PM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,207
Default

Artrye,

Did the officers ask if they could search your vehicle?



The discussion is just conjecture without knowing if Artrye gave the CO's permission to search, or not.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-13-2012, 03:33 PM
canadiantdi's Avatar
canadiantdi canadiantdi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On top of sphagetti
Posts: 3,565
Default

I found this in the criminal code;

“peace officer” includes

(a) a mayor, warden, reeve, sheriff, deputy sheriff, sheriff’s officer and justice of the peace,

(b) a member of the Correctional Service of Canada who is designated as a peace officer pursuant to Part I of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, and a warden, deputy warden, instructor, keeper, jailer, guard and any other officer or permanent employee of a prison other than a penitentiary as defined in Part I of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act,

(c) a police officer, police constable, bailiff, constable, or other person employed for the preservation and maintenance of the public peace or for the service or execution of civil process,

(d) an officer within the meaning of the Customs Act, the Excise Act or the Excise Act, 2001, or a person having the powers of such an officer, when performing any duty in the administration of any of those Acts,

(d.1) an officer authorized under subsection 138(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act,

(e) a person designated as a fishery guardian under the Fisheries Act when performing any duties or functions under that Act and a person designated as a fishery officer under the Fisheries Act when performing any duties or functions under that Act or the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act,

So it looks like they are peace officers. Does this mean that they have full police powers?
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-13-2012, 03:33 PM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by artrye View Post
Don't get me wrong, I do not blame F&W at all for doing what they did. I knew something was up when they rushed us. Lol, should have seen them enter the lake, let's just say I wouldn't drive like that with my ddaughter in the truck on the ice. We had nothing to hide.. Just discouraging is all. They did what they had to do, no harm was done. Just please get the facts straight and true, rather than make stories up to harass a few guys and my family enjoying the day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeeGuy View Post
more or less
Stellar answer Beegy

That would give me the idea that the OP drove on the lake so his truck would have been on the ice. Not that it maters any vehicle you can in is subject to search.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-13-2012, 03:41 PM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canadiantdi View Post
Good point, I read the part about the personal dwelling, but forgot when I posted my point. Change it to car then. What if someone got mad at you because you cut them off and they decided to call the police and say you had drugs in your car? Or worse a gun? Would you be ok with the police pulling you over and searching all your belongings? Going through your wifes purse? I can understand getting pulled over, but I think that the initial investigation would have to introduce some sort of reasonable suspicion beyond the complaint for the officer to be able to perform an intrusive search.
Actually have had my car searched stuff removed from the trunk because the car looked like one they were looking for did not bother me at all. If they smell alcohol in the car they have probable cause.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-13-2012, 03:47 PM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canadiantdi View Post
It is not ridicules at all. To allow the government to search you just because you have nothing to hide is a very slippery slope. Would you be ok with random car searches? Random house searches? Random ID checks when walking down the street? Random weapons searches when walking down the street??

I know that these are extreme, but I hope you can see my point. We want to be free from illegal search and seizure.

We should require some sort of proof beyond someones unreliable word, before we have our stuff searched.
It is called probable cause by eye witness.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02-13-2012, 03:51 PM
canadiantdi's Avatar
canadiantdi canadiantdi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On top of sphagetti
Posts: 3,565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader View Post
Actually have had my car searched stuff removed from the trunk because the car looked like one they were looking for did not bother me at all. If they smell alcohol in the car they have probable cause.
Well I wouldn't be ok with the government ripping my car apart just because it looked like one they were looking for lol. A lot of cars look very similar thanks to the assembly line.

Not probable cause on it's own.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-13-2012, 03:52 PM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walking buffalo View Post
Artrye,

Did the officers ask if they could search your vehicle?



The discussion is just conjecture without knowing if Artrye gave the CO's permission to search, or not.
you are right if he gave permission they need no warrant.

But in a case of posable lose of evidence they still need no warrant.

from there on it is up to a judge what is admitted, if charges are filed
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-13-2012, 03:54 PM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canadiantdi View Post
I found this in the criminal code;

“peace officer” includes

(a) a mayor, warden, reeve, sheriff, deputy sheriff, sheriff’s officer and justice of the peace,

(b) a member of the Correctional Service of Canada who is designated as a peace officer pursuant to Part I of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, and a warden, deputy warden, instructor, keeper, jailer, guard and any other officer or permanent employee of a prison other than a penitentiary as defined in Part I of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act,

(c) a police officer, police constable, bailiff, constable, or other person employed for the preservation and maintenance of the public peace or for the service or execution of civil process,

(d) an officer within the meaning of the Customs Act, the Excise Act or the Excise Act, 2001, or a person having the powers of such an officer, when performing any duty in the administration of any of those Acts,

(d.1) an officer authorized under subsection 138(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act,

(e) a person designated as a fishery guardian under the Fisheries Act when performing any duties or functions under that Act and a person designated as a fishery officer under the Fisheries Act when performing any duties or functions under that Act or the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act,

So it looks like they are peace officers. Does this mean that they have full police powers?
They actually have more power then the police they can charge you with things a cop can't....lol
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02-13-2012, 03:55 PM
canadiantdi's Avatar
canadiantdi canadiantdi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On top of sphagetti
Posts: 3,565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader View Post
It is called probable cause by eye witness.
But an eye witness is so unreliable, (look at OP's story) that it is questionable as to whether or not that information can be used alone to conduct an intrusive search. Sure, further investigate by making contact, but if upon contact nothing else leads the officer to believe there has been an offense, the investigation should end there IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 02-13-2012, 03:56 PM
canadiantdi's Avatar
canadiantdi canadiantdi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On top of sphagetti
Posts: 3,565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader View Post
They actually have more power then the police they can charge you with things a cop can't....lol
Ya I am getting that now. Pretty confusing at first but now it's making sense. Still not sure about the searching part though.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 02-13-2012, 03:57 PM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canadiantdi View Post
Well I wouldn't be ok with the government ripping my car apart just because it looked like one they were looking for lol. A lot of cars look very similar thanks to the assembly line.

Not probable cause on it's own.
i'm afraid it is and even more so dealing with F&W they can do searches a cop can't.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 02-13-2012, 03:58 PM
camshaft camshaft is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 689
Default

Its mind boggling and amusing to think of the time people have spent posting their "closet lawyer" opinions. Even more so, are the responses it gets from the other half of closet lawyer people who think "they" have all the answers.

Very rarely do u actually read a post where someone actually "knows" what the law is surrounding a certain hypothetical situation, yet everyone chimes in with 50 different answers

I dont call my plumber for advice on my prostate, yet people continue to think a hunting/fishing forum is a sound place for legal advice
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:00 PM
canadiantdi's Avatar
canadiantdi canadiantdi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On top of sphagetti
Posts: 3,565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by camshaft View Post
Its mind boggling and amusing to think of the time people have spent posting their "closet lawyer" opinions. Even more so, are the responses it gets from the other half of closet lawyer people who think "they" have all the answers.

Very rarely do u actually read a post where someone actually "knows" what the law is surrounding a certain hypothetical situation, yet everyone chimes in with 50 different answers

I dont call my plumber for advice on my prostate, yet people continue to think a hunting/fishing forum is a sound place for legal advice
It's a conversation. I find it interesting to talk about this and try to figure stuff out. Is it really that mind boggling?
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:01 PM
canadiantdi's Avatar
canadiantdi canadiantdi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On top of sphagetti
Posts: 3,565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader View Post
i'm afraid it is and even more so dealing with F&W they can do searches a cop can't.
Can you post some info supporting this? If the cops are looking for a white toyota camry, I highly doubt they can stop all white toyota camrys they see and search them.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:06 PM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canadiantdi View Post
But an eye witness is so unreliable, (look at OP's story) that it is questionable as to whether or not that information can be used alone to conduct an intrusive search. Sure, further investigate by making contact, but if upon contact nothing else leads the officer to believe there has been an offense, the investigation should end there IMO.
but there was an investigation and i'm sure by the attitude of the OP he probably granted the search because he knew he was ok. had he not it is posable things could have changed but the out come the same.

you are right an eye witness is not always right but it is what they have to go on. But in turn if the police or F&W feel the eyewitness did it out of malice then he can be charged.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:07 PM
camshaft camshaft is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 689
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canadiantdi View Post
It's a conversation. I find it interesting to talk about this and try to figure stuff out. Is it really that mind boggling?
Not in its simplest form, but to act upon or make decisions based on information people who have no education or legal background have given you is hilarious IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:12 PM
canadiantdi's Avatar
canadiantdi canadiantdi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On top of sphagetti
Posts: 3,565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by camshaft View Post
Not in its simplest form, but to act upon or make decisions based on information people who have no education or legal background have given you is hilarious IMO.
We are taking information out of the criminal code and fisheries act to see what our legal rights are. Those documents are made public for us to read and adhere to.

Just how often do you call a lawyer?
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:16 PM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canadiantdi View Post
Can you post some info supporting this? If the cops are looking for a white toyota camry, I highly doubt they can stop all white toyota camrys they see and search them.
actually they can I'm originally from ONT. don't know if you have heard of the Bernardo case him and his wife kills some young girls including her little sister.
the police were looking for a light coloured camaro they stop and searched every light coloured camaro of a certain year they could find.


not the best story to read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Bernardo
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:18 PM
canadiantdi's Avatar
canadiantdi canadiantdi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On top of sphagetti
Posts: 3,565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader View Post
actually they can I'm originally from ONT. don't know if you have heard of the Bernardo case him and his wife kills some young girls including her little sister.
the police were looking for a light coloured camaro they stop and searched every light coloured camaro of a certain year they could find.


not the best story to read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Bernardo

A stop and question i can understand, see whos in the car. Thats not invasive, but a stop and search?
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:23 PM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canadiantdi View Post
We are taking information out of the criminal code and fisheries act to see what our legal rights are. Those documents are made public for us to read and adhere to.

Just how often do you call a lawyer?
I would not be to concerned about camshaft if you read any of his posts you will see that his speciality is giving advice to people that they are not qualified to give advice......... Just can't figure out why he figures he's qualified to give that advice......
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:29 PM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,207
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader View Post
They actually have more power then the police they can charge you with things a cop can't....lol



Don't stop now Horsetrader, you're killing me, might as well finish me off.

Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:32 PM
canadiantdi's Avatar
canadiantdi canadiantdi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On top of sphagetti
Posts: 3,565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walking buffalo View Post


Don't stop now Horsetrader, you're killing me, might as well finish me off.

Isnt it true though that they are peace officers and can enforce the criminal code?
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:35 PM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,207
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canadiantdi View Post
Isnt it true though that they are peace officers and can enforce the criminal code?
Yes.

But to infer ( as Horsetrader has done) that CO's have greater authority than Police is hilarious.

They are all limited in powers by the same provincial/federal legislations and by the Charter.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:36 PM
canadiantdi's Avatar
canadiantdi canadiantdi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On top of sphagetti
Posts: 3,565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walking buffalo View Post
Yes.

But to infer ( as Horsetrader has done) that CO's have greater authority than Police is hilarious.

They are all bound by the Charter.
I understood his comment to mean that CO's enforce the fisheries act AND the criminal code whereas police only enforce the criminal code. I have never heard of a police officer enforcing the fisheries act, but that doesn't mean they can't though.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:43 PM
Donkey Oatey Donkey Oatey is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canadiantdi View Post
I understood his comment to mean that CO's enforce the fisheries act AND the criminal code whereas police only enforce the criminal code. I have never heard of a police officer enforcing the fisheries act, but that doesn't mean they can't though.
RCMP officers are ex officio Fisheries Officers. Basically if there is a law in Canada, RCMP officers can enforce it.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:45 PM
canadiantdi's Avatar
canadiantdi canadiantdi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On top of sphagetti
Posts: 3,565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donkey Oatey View Post
RCMP officers are ex officio Fisheries Officers. Basically if there is a law in Canada, RCMP officers can enforce it.
Makes sense. And it's the same for CO's I assume?
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:46 PM
camshaft camshaft is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 689
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canadiantdi View Post
I understood his comment to mean that CO's enforce the fisheries act AND the criminal code whereas police only enforce the criminal code. I have never heard of a police officer enforcing the fisheries act, but that doesn't mean they can't though.
RCMP yes, local police no. That being said, they can if they have been "designated" by the Minister. And there are some actually.

Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader View Post
I would not be to concerned about camshaft if you read any of his posts you will see that his speciality is giving advice to people that they are not qualified to give advice......... Just can't figure out why he figures he's qualified to give that advice......
ouch, that hurt my feelers
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:48 PM
Donkey Oatey Donkey Oatey is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canadiantdi View Post
Makes sense. And it's the same for CO's I assume?
Fish and Wildlife Officers are concidered Peace officers under the Criminal Code and can enforce it. Fisheries Guardians and Wildlife Guardians can not enforce Criminal Code matters and are not given the powers or protection of Peace Officers under the Criminal Code. They are given that protection through the legislation that they are appointed under while enforcing those acts only.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 02-13-2012, 04:49 PM
canadiantdi's Avatar
canadiantdi canadiantdi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On top of sphagetti
Posts: 3,565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by camshaft View Post
RCMP yes, local police no. That being said, they can if they have been "designated" by the Minister. And there are some actually.
Did you call a lawyer and ask this?





I kid, I kid!!!!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.