Interesting day on PCR and F&W

[gl2]

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

No doubt that a lot of poachers are caught this way, but what about the law abiding citizens (definitely MOST fishermen) who are having their property searched? Why is that of no concern to you?

If I don't like you, should the police be able to pull you over and rip your car apart on the side of the road based on a phone call from me? Oops, sorry officer, I thought FOR SURE that I saw him put a bag of coke in his trunk!

law abiding citizens have nothing to worry about and nothing to hide. we open the doors to our trucks when asked and let them look.

lets go to the airport and i will tell customs you have a bag of crack shoved up your as* and i bet you were wishing he was searching your truck...lol. do you have a problem with how airport security is? cause i want to know when my plane takes off its gonna land at the airport.

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by horsetrader

Some times we have to give a little to gain a lot. will I give the F&W the right to search my truck that is sitting where i'm fishing even though i've done nothing wrong YES .why is because the next truck they search may be full of poached fish. but thats just me

Then that would be the same as allowing the police to search your house because you have nothing to hide, and because when they search your neighbors house, they might find a truckload of dead hookers in the basement.

Bottom line is I don't want to be searched unless there is some reasonable suspicion that I have committed a crime. Some are willing to allow the government to search, just to prove they have nothing to hide, but that gives away a right that we have. I like my rights. I want to keep them.

[BeeGuy]

People have fought hard for centuries to get us the rights and freedoms we have.

There is no way in hell I am giving these up in order to catch a few extra poachers.

F&W can do their jobs fine within the confines of the law.

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by gl2

law abiding citizens have nothing to worry about and nothing to hide. we open the doors to our trucks when asked and let them look.

lets go to the airport and i will tell customs you have a bag of crack shoved up your as* and i bet you were wishing he was searching your truck...lol. do you have a problem with how airport security is? cause i want to know when my plane takes off its gonna land at the airport.

Flying on a plane isn't a right, it's a service provided by a company and we have to abide by the rules or not use the service.

[BeeGuy]

Originally Posted by gl2

law abiding citizens have nothing to worry about and nothing to hide. we open the doors to our trucks when asked and let them look.

lets go to the airport and i will tell customs you have a bag of crack shoved up your as* and i bet you were wishing he was searching your truck...lol. do you have a problem with how airport security is? cause i want to know when my plane takes off its gonna land at the airport.

I think I'm done on this one.

You guys can continue to debate why we should give up our rights and freedoms, but there isn't any example which will convince me to give up either of them.

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by gl2

law abiding citizens have nothing to worry about and nothing to hide. we open the doors to our trucks when asked and let them look.

lets go to the airport and i will tell customs you have a bag of crack shoved up your as* and i bet you were wishing he was searching your truck...lol. do you have a problem with how airport security is? cause i want to know when my plane takes off its gonna land at the airport.

This is an assumption. Not all law abiding citizens allow uninhibited access to our personal property to the government, just to prove we are doing nothing wrong. I am innocent. Prove otherwise. Don't place the burden on me to prove that I am innocent.

[gl2]

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

This is an assumption. Not all law abiding citizens allow uninhibited access to our personal property to the government, just to prove we are doing nothing wrong. I am innocent. Prove otherwise. Don't place the burden on me to prove that I am innocent.

thats a shame you feel that the people that are entrusted to uphold the laws are such a burden to you. I hope that you never need this service. i will ask you one more question. i was driving through alberta and a amber alert was issued for a missing girl. i went through a check stop and they asked me to open the back of my truck. what would you have done? i let them in and i hope they caught the perp responsible. by the time they got your precious search warrant a girl could have died.

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by gl2

thats a shame you feel that the people that are entrusted to uphold the laws are such a burden to you. I hope that you never need this service. i will ask you one more question. i was driving through alberta and a amber alert was issued for a missing girl. i went through a check stop and they asked me to open the back of my truck. what would you have done? i let them in and i hope they caught the perp responsible. by the time they got your precious search warrant a girl could have died.

In that situation, I honestly would have let them look in my trunk. Walleye vs human being.

The people entrusted to uphold laws aren't a burden to me, I just expect them to follow the law, the same as they expect from me.

[gl2]

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

In that situation, I honestly would have let them look in my trunk. Walleye vs human being.

The people entrusted to uphold laws aren't a burden to me, I just expect them to follow the law, the same as they expect from me.

so you will personally deem who's job is worth doing. thanks for clarifying. i am not saying that anybody needs to break laws to enforce them but why make a over worked co's job harder just because you feel superior and want to make your self feel better. let them look, be respectful and get on with your business. taking up their time and all of our resource cause you want to pump your chest is ignorant in my opinion.

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by gl2

so you will personally deem who's job is worth doing. thanks for clarifying. i am not saying that anybody needs to break laws to enforce them but why make a over worked co's job harder just because you feel superior and want to make your self feel better. let them look, be respectful and get on with your business. taking up their time and all of our resource cause you want to pump your chest is ignorant in my opinion.

Because I don't want to be illegally searched, doesn't mean that I feel superior or want to make myself feel better. Exercise your rights or lose them.

This is all moot I believe because I am pretty sure that, like flying, fishing in Alberta is a privilege, not a right, and we have to adhere to the fisheries act. Just like we can't deny a search at the airport, I don't think we can deny a search while using a fishing license. Although I still don't think they should be allowed to search me because I have a fishing rod or someone calls F&W on me, which the fisheries act allows.

I still don't know for sure though if our Charter rights are superseded by the fisheries act when it comes to searches.

Is the government allowed to pick and choose who has a fishing license? Is it a right or a privilege for a citizen to fish in Alberta??

[gl2]

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

Because I don't want to be illegally searched, doesn't mean that I feel superior or want to make myself feel better. Exercise your rights or lose them.

This is all moot I believe because I am pretty sure that, like flying, fishing in Alberta is a privilege, not a right, and we have to adhere to the fisheries act. Just like we can't deny a search at the airport, I don't think we can deny a search while using a fishing license. Although I still don't think they should be allowed to search me because I have a fishing rod or someone calls F&W on me, which the fisheries act allows.

I still don't know for sure though if our Charter rights are superseded by the fisheries act when it comes to searches.

Is the government allowed to pick and choose who has a fishing license? Is it a right or a privilege for a citizen to fish in Alberta??

we will just have to agree to disagree then. we in alberta are privileged.

[chubbdarter]

LOL....whats really funny is Your baking and broiling a CO, yet at NO time did you hear his side of the story and you publically never will.

Talk about infringing on personal rights and someones right to be innocent until proven quilty.

You hear one side of a story and suddenly the other side is Guilty!!!!!!!!

I wont post anymore on this topic, Good luck with your witch hunt

[BeeGuy]

No witches were harmed in the filming of this thread.

[artrye]

Originally Posted by Bigdad013

I find it funny that people still think a purse is sacred territory..

F&W only doing there job, maybe could have approached it better with some good questions first, ask the kid questions, they don't lie, they will tell you everything, what they are catching how many etc...with great pride....

F&W is just doing their job... but any husband should know a wife's purse IS Sacred Territory. LOL without an expensive purse for the wife, I wouldn't have the expensive Fishing gear!

As a law abiding citizen and paying for licenses with WIN cards... No one really knows what our true rights are when it comes to situations like this. I know for a fact if CPS goes through your vehicle for whatever reason, they have to have a warrant to do so lawfully. I don't think these guys need one to do so.

[BeeGuy]

Is Quilty an art or a craft?

[BeeGuy]

Originally Posted by artrye

F&W is just doing their job... but any husband should know a wife's purse IS Sacred Territory. LOL without an expensive purse for the wife, I wouldn't have the expensive Fishing gear!

As a law abiding citizen and paying for licenses with WIN cards... No one really knows what our true rights are when it comes to situations like this. I know for a fact if CPS goes through your vehicle for whatever reason, they have to have a warrant to do so lawfully. I don't think these guys need one to do so.

Yes, it is hard to say. Section 27 (searches), and section 48 (inspection) seem to be in somewhat of a conflict.

I will ask a CO next time I see one. Sadly, most will not be terribly familiar with the legalese.

[Bush]

I might not be 100 percent correct but from what I've read years ago....

You do have the right to deny access to any thing of yours and that is why they then have the right to seise any of your properties.

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

LOL....whats really funny is Your baking and broiling a CO, yet at NO time did you hear his side of the story and you publically never will.

Talk about infringing on personal rights and someones right to be innocent until proven quilty.

You hear one side of a story and suddenly the other side is Guilty!!!!!!!!

I wont post anymore on this topic, Good luck with your witch hunt

Where you drunk when you posted this? A witch hunt?? We are just discussing our legal rights, not trying to get a CO in trouble or anything.

Don't be so dramatic.

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by Bush

I might not be 100 percent correct but from what I've read years ago....

You do have the right to deny access to any thing of yours and that is why they then have the right to seise any of your properties.

I can't see us having the right against a search, only to have it seized.

[horsetrader]

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

Flying on a plane isn't a right, it's a service provided by a company and we have to abide by the rules or not use the service.

Fishing is not a right either it is a privilege and you have to abide by the rules also.....

[horsetrader]

Originally Posted by BeeGuy

I think I'm done on this one.

You guys can continue to debate why we should give up our rights and freedoms, but there isn't any example which will convince me to give up either of them.

If you figure you are giving up your rights by allowing a F&W officer to search your vehicle then you are in a sorry state. And i'm sure your not done you will post more unrelated post i'm sure.

[horsetrader]

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

Where you drunk when you posted this? A witch hunt?? We are just discussing our legal rights, not trying to get a CO in trouble or anything.

Don't be so dramatic.

Chubbs point is well taken we are arguing over wether the F&W officer had the right to search and we have no idea what evidence he had we do know that there was open beer which would give a right to search there but we know nothing else. And I think we all got a little dramatic on this one ..

[canadiantdi]

No one is on a witch hunt, his comments were just inflammatory.

Originally Posted by horsetrader

Chubbs point is well taken we are arguing over wether the F&W officer had the right to search and we have no idea what evidence he had we do know that there was open beer which would give a right to search there but we know nothing else. And I think we all got a little dramatic on this one ..

Some, not all.

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by horsetrader

Fishing is not a right either it is a privilege and you have to abide by the rules also.....

Ya, I pointed that out a few posts back.

[Sledder1]

Originally Posted by BeeGuy

Yes, it is hard to say. Section 27 (searches), and section 48 (inspection) seem to be in somewhat of a conflict.

I will ask a CO next time I see one. Sadly, most will not be terribly familiar with the legalese.

The two have different connotation. Here's a brief overview of the two. And its a case by case type of thing. Case law has really helped define them.

Search is when an officer has reasonable grounds to believe an offence has been committed. Therefore, an investigation is taking place. Search is also when an officer is searching/digging into things, for example; taking the bed liner out of your truck. Plain view is not search. But if an officer has to start using binoculars to look into your house from the road, that might be considered searching, because the officer is using an extra means to look (the binos), not just his eyes.

Inspection is when an officer is conducting routine checks on things that are regulated in the legislation, such as checking licences, fishing gear (barbed hooks) and measuring your fish. If it's plain view or you tell the officer about it, and part of a regulated activity, it can be inspected. Also, things that might reasonably have inspectable things in them can be opened, such as coolers. It's reasonable to expect anglers to have fish in a cooler when on the lake.

That's a very very very brief overview of the difference between the two.

[Dan Foss]

Originally Posted by BeeGuy

So, was the F&W eye witnesses in this situation?

If they were they would not have had to search everything.

They were acting on hearsay evidence, aka the tip provided by some mistaken fisherman.

So by that logic, If I phone into the poilice that I just saw (for example) Horsetrader get shot in the chest by kokanee9, that information is just no more than "heresay" unless a police officer is the one to witness it...... Come on man.....

[Dan Foss]

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

No doubt that a lot of poachers are caught this way, but what about the law abiding citizens (definitely MOST fishermen) who are having their property searched? Why is that of no concern to you?

If I don't like you, should the police be able to pull you over and rip your car apart on the side of the road based on a phone call from me? Oops, sorry officer, I thought FOR SURE that I saw him put a bag of coke in his trunk!

if you have nothing to hide then what do you care if you let someone else do their job. Unfortunately in this world, in order for the authorities to have the ability to catch illegal activities, law abiding citizens do have to surrender some of their rights as well. what else are can be done? pass a law that states, people obeying the law are not to be search and only those committing illegal activities are to be searched? How do you think they are to separate the two. Would you also argue that you should not have to walk through a metal detector and have your bag scanned at the airport, just because you haven't done anything wrong? Criminals do not walk around with tatoos on their heads that say "I break laws". There for everyone unfortunately has to surrender SOME of their rights in order for the laws to be enforced, and the "world be made a better place"

I swear, reading some of the opinions in this thread really scare me and make me concerned about the people I meet on a daily basis. I can't imagine what it must be like to live in such paranoid fear of the law and invasion of your "personal rights" when you know you have done nothing wrong.

End rant


EDIT: I wanted to address the second part of your post and got caught up in my rant. So regarding people calling in because they dont like you..... That is against the law. Our rights to look after ourselves in society include the right to contact the authorities regarding suspected crimes. We are entrusted as civilians to use our own proper judgment when filing a complaint or concerns about illegal activities. This is key in order to reduce the number of "innocent bystanders" being searched. So the long of the short of it is, it is your civic duty, and the law is entrusting you only to report information that is as accurate AS POSSIBLE. sometimes people are wrong. They are human. But there is a difference between calling the cops because you witnessed someone catch and retain an illegal fish and someone just catching a fish. it is upto the civilian to determine if they have accurate enough information to call RAP.

[TJG]

Fish have been found under the hoods, under spare tires, interior compartments and under seats. My personal favourite is sauger fillets in a travel mug!
I must be the only one in this discussion that found this funny!!!

A buddy of mine was confronted by fish cops at the confluence below Dickson dam. They were in the honey hole catchin walleye like no ones buisness, when two fish officers asked for their lics and win cards. The officers said they got a call that my buddy and his son were stashing walleye in his backpack, where the lunch was and in his truck, where the cooler was. His son identified himself as an RCMP officer from Sask, but that made no differance to the fishcops. After finding nothing, they followed them to his home and asked to look in his frezzer, saying that if he refused, he would be admitting guilt! Thats not right.

[Bush]

Dan foss. You just put truck loads of water on a wood fire
The end to an awesome thread

[Gust]

I thought the surrender of rights happens when you're incarcerated and even then you still have rights. We know such little of the true law that we do allow authority to run racksack much of the time. Not sure why general law and labour law aren't taught in school from Grade 5 up.

To the O.P,,, there should have been a bit of tact exercised and I hope it didn't put you off fishing,,, with your family.