|
|
09-20-2018, 09:39 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,310
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkhunter11
So where does this leave the check stops, where the police and F&W pull over hundreds of vehicles with no probable cause? Come New Years eve, are we going to see no more check stops?
|
Alberta's check stop program is legal. Lots of info on the web.
http://libertylaw.ca/alberta-checkst...aired-driving/
F&W check stop program is OK according to the Solicitor General
Quote:
Operate check stops to ensure compliance with hunting and angling legislation and regulations, including transportation and appropriate documentation. This is often done in partnership with other enforcement agencies.
|
https://www.solgps.alberta.ca/progra...eOfficers.aspx
Random stops of vehicles without cause is not legal.
|
09-20-2018, 09:41 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sylvan Lake
Posts: 3,430
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hal53
Some peoples replies on this thread make me wonder why more people don't take the CO's to court when they are stopped and checked and everything is alright.. why wouldn't you go after the officer for illegally pulling you over?
|
Because of time and money. I thought hard about it on one occasion and if money wasn't for time and money I would have filed a formal complaint. 45 minutes freezing on the side of the road while somebody tries to figure out how a shotgun works.
|
09-20-2018, 10:09 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Rocky Mnt House
Posts: 936
|
|
ITs not that most of us care that we get randomly pulled over, the fact is that it is illegal, and the laws would have to change to make it legal.
I know that fish and wildlife get a raw deal and they are understaffed and under appreciated, but the law is the law, and they need to follow it.
It sucks, but it is the way it is.
IF the government changed the laws for just fish and wildlife, it would open a big ugly can of worms. And president could be set for other enforcement agencies, and no one wants that.
Move to Japan then you will understand what I mean. If you are asked to supply your papers and you left them at home, you are detained and deported. They don't care, they can do random searches. Any enforcement agency. Look at what was in Germany during WW2, random searches anytime. No one wants this, and yes that is exactly what our laws are soposto prevent.
|
09-20-2018, 10:13 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 689
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeelmer
ITs not that most of us care that we get randomly pulled over, the fact is that it is illegal, and the laws would have to change to make it legal.
I know that fish and wildlife get a raw deal and they are understaffed and under appreciated, but the law is the law, and they need to follow it.
It sucks, but it is the way it is.
IF the government changed the laws for just fish and wildlife, it would open a big ugly can of worms. And president could be set for other enforcement agencies, and no one wants that.
Move to Japan then you will understand what I mean. If you are asked to supply your papers and you left them at home, you are detained and deported. They don't care, they can do random searches. Any enforcement agency. Look at what was in Germany during WW2, random searches anytime. No one wants this, and yes that is exactly what our laws are soposto prevent.
|
I can appreciate what your pointing out. But as long as there are those officers out there who will pull me over randomly I won't be complaining. Its really one of the few ways they will ever catch anyone breaking the law.
|
09-20-2018, 10:16 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 338
|
|
Baaa Baaa
Baaa Baaa! I can’t believe the amount of ‘sheep’ on this thread who think it’s ok for someone’s rights to be infringed upon like this! Boo boo, the Co’s are underpaid and overworked, well so is the rest of the world so suck it up and do your job properly. If an officer does not understand that the Canadian Charter of Rights protects citizens from unreasonable search and seizure then he has no business in law enforcement of any kind.
|
09-20-2018, 10:16 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 997
|
|
"I can appreciate what your pointing out. But as long as there are those officers out there who will pull me over randomly I won't be complaining. Its really one of the few ways they will ever catch anyone breaking the law."
by breaking the law themselves
not all enforcement officers are saints. daily news shows us this. the laws are such to keep the unsavoury and zealous enforcement offers out there accountable.
|
09-20-2018, 10:21 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 689
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sportsman
Baaa Baaa! I can’t believe the amount of ‘sheep’ on this thread who think it’s ok for someone’s rights to be infringed upon like this! Boo boo, the Co’s are underpaid and overworked, well so is the rest of the world so suck it up and do your job properly. If an officer does not understand that the Canadian Charter of Rights protects citizens from unreasonable search and seizure then he has no business in law enforcement of any kind.
|
And I can't believe the number of guys here (not gonna stoop to your level and call names) who think that breaking the law and getting off on a technicality is ok either. By the sounds of it you have a mind for law enforcement or how it could be done better...how would you recommend the CO in this case could have done "his job" better or differently to end up with the same charges?
|
09-20-2018, 10:22 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 689
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Black
"I can appreciate what your pointing out. But as long as there are those officers out there who will pull me over randomly I won't be complaining. Its really one of the few ways they will ever catch anyone breaking the law."
by breaking the law themselves
not all enforcement officers are saints. daily news shows us this. the laws are such to keep the unsavoury and zealous enforcement offers out there accountable.
|
So the CO in this instance falls into the category of unsavoury and zealous?
|
09-20-2018, 10:23 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,168
|
|
The OP broke the law. The CO broke the law. The law breaking ended up getting nullified in court. The OP is still out the lawyer fees so it is not like he got away completely.
__________________
Moral indignation is a technique used to endow the idiot with dignity.
Marshall McLuhan
|
09-20-2018, 10:31 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 689
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjemac
The OP broke the law. The CO broke the law. The law breaking ended up getting nullified in court. The OP is still out the lawyer fees so it is not like he got away completely.
|
I could maybe understand the OP for being upset had he not broke any laws. But the fact he did get caught in contravention to two offences angers me that he'd even think about challenging them in court based on the fact the CO stopped him "illegally". Then comes on to the forum here and publically brags about it.
|
09-20-2018, 10:50 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 997
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJS
So the CO in this instance falls into the category of unsavoury and zealous?
|
zeal
noun
great energy or enthusiasm in pursuit of a cause or an objective.
in this case, so much so, he broke the law. so yes. zealous
|
09-20-2018, 10:54 AM
|
|
Gone Hunting
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lougheed,Ab.
Posts: 12,736
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Black
zeal
noun
great energy or enthusiasm in pursuit of a cause or an objective.
in this case, so much so, he broke the law. so yes. zealous
|
How would you suggest the CO's perform their duties?
__________________
The future ain't what it used to be - Yogi Berra
|
09-20-2018, 10:59 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 997
|
|
i dont know.
maybe start by not breaking the law????????
|
09-20-2018, 11:03 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: CNP
Posts: 3,760
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Black
i dont know.
maybe start by not breaking the law????????
|
Perfect.
__________________
You are what you do, not what you say.
|
09-20-2018, 11:18 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,230
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hal53
Some peoples replies on this thread make me wonder why more people don't take the CO's to court when they are stopped and checked and everything is alright.. why wouldn't you go after the officer for illegally pulling you over?
|
It's pretty tough to get standing for a constitutional challenge when you haven't been charged with anything.
Maybe a Human Rights tribunal. Claim social profiling, blah blah blah..... that could work.
-------
Let's acknowledge that the majority of our hunting regulations are vetted through court decisions, mostly from "poachers" and people that made honest mistakes.
What is important for Us hunters is the possibility that there has been a favourable ruling to limit expanding leeway given to governments to treat hunters and fishers with lesser rights than everyone else.
What we need now is to see the case documents. That would be helpful to determine if the OP's claim is correct.
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -
"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
|
09-20-2018, 11:36 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 689
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Black
i dont know.
maybe start by not breaking the law????????
|
Great answer if your actually not wanting to answer the question. The first part of your answer tells us more to be honest.
I'll ask again...how would you go about doing his job in the situation the OP was in?
|
09-20-2018, 11:37 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 689
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Black
zeal
noun
great energy or enthusiasm in pursuit of a cause or an objective.
in this case, so much so, he broke the law. so yes. zealous
|
We'll have to agree to disagree.
|
09-20-2018, 11:54 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Rocky Mnt House
Posts: 936
|
|
If the officer in this case had thought that the OP had broken the law. As I stated above, he could have just followed the OP to his house, and watched him start to unload, then walked up and questioned him.
The charges then would have stuck, and the OP would have been screwed.
That is the way our laws are written.
Now had someone called into report a poacher, and reported that someone poached a deer, and the OP truck matched the description, or he was in the area exact same, then the CO would have had his reasonable grounds to pull him over.
RCMP are tasked the same.
I believe that as sportsmen, we have been accustomed to have random searches done, and believe if you are doing the right thing it is no big deal.
But that costs us our freedom.
Again, look at what would happen if the RCMP did random searches of our homes. Same thing applies, well if you have nothing to hide then whats wrong with it??
Now do I agree that the OP got off? Yes because his constitutional rights were infringed on.
Now had the CO done things properly the OP would have been charged and convicted, and I think all of us here would be pleased that the Fish and Wildlife Enforcement caught a guilty party and the charges stuck.
|
09-20-2018, 11:54 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 997
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJS
Great answer if your actually not wanting to answer the question. The first part of your answer tells us more to be honest.
I'll ask again...how would you go about doing his job in the situation the OP was in?
|
hey, if your ok with law enforcement breaking the law to do their job, more power to you.
im not.
how about this. get out of your shinny warm chevy, put on some miles, and enforce the rules of hunting IN THE FIELD.
hmmm, guess i do know,,,,,,
|
09-20-2018, 12:00 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 147
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJS
Great answer if your actually not wanting to answer the question. The first part of your answer tells us more to be honest.
I'll ask again...how would you go about doing his job in the situation the OP was in?
|
The CO should have kept driving. He had no reason to pull the OP over.
|
09-20-2018, 12:06 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 689
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Black
hey, if your ok with law enforcement breaking the law to do their job, more power to you.
im not.
how about this. get out of your shinny warm chevy, put on some miles, and enforce the rules of hunting IN THE FIELD.
hmmm, guess i do know,,,,,,
|
Actually, I have ran into COs much more out in the field on foot or on an ATV for that matter where they are anything but warm and comfortable. Ive been stopped on the road all of two times in 20 years of hunting but numerous times out away from any road. Not sure there's anyone who could argue with that. But I'm guessing your the type that would find something wrong being stopped by a CO out in the field as well. Regardless, your right, that is one way the CO could have found the untagged deer.
|
09-20-2018, 12:08 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 689
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slvdout
The CO should have kept driving. He had no reason to pull the OP over.
|
Until it turned out the guy he was pulling over had broken two laws. But lets jump on law enforcement. Seems to be what we do in the 21st century.
|
09-20-2018, 12:13 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 338
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJS
And I can't believe the number of guys here (not gonna stoop to your level and call names) who think that breaking the law and getting off on a technicality is ok either. By the sounds of it you have a mind for law enforcement or how it could be done better...how would you recommend the CO in this case could have done "his job" better or differently to end up with the same charges?
|
How about they just follow the Law as it’s written. The fact is these random stops should not be happening.
|
09-20-2018, 12:15 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 689
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sportsman
How about they just follow the Law as it’s written. The fact is these random stops should not be happening.
|
The fact is that random stops are a loop hole for criminals to get around. How many of you would be in favour of a change to this law? Make it legal for COs and RCMP to make random stops?
|
09-20-2018, 12:18 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,939
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hal53
Some peoples replies on this thread make me wonder why more people don't take the CO's to court when they are stopped and checked and everything is alright.. why wouldn't you go after the officer for illegally pulling you over?
|
Because when you are driving the police can stop you for no reason:
http://svan.ca/police-rights/
|
09-20-2018, 12:29 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,052
|
|
If the officer was in the wrong then good on you for challenging it. What I don't understand about this entire story is:
1) your truck was "X" km away from highway on back road or trail
2) You most likely are wearing camo clothes or an orange vest or something related to hunting
3) it's hunting season in the area you were stopped and checked
How does the officer not have the right to complete a compliance check or random stop? All indications would have been that your hunting?
I'm just a little confused as to how the officer was in the wrong with this story.
__________________
Fire up the grill cause deer huntin ain't catch and release
|
09-20-2018, 12:30 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: McBride/Prince George
Posts: 14,585
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJS
The fact is that random stops are a loop hole for criminals to get around. How many of you would be in favour of a change to this law? Make it legal for COs and RCMP to make random stops?
|
Oh b.s..... drive an 81 trans am across the city at 2:00am, then do the same thing in a 2014 Ford Focus. Difference is, it took the tranny an hour longer to do because he was pulled over 4 times. Take your commy random stops and stick it.
|
09-20-2018, 12:54 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 997
|
|
one thing we can all agree on.
the 81 tranny is a sweet ride
|
09-20-2018, 01:09 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Rocky Mnt House
Posts: 936
|
|
Now we might agree that Fish and Wildlife should be able to do random stops for compliance, but the constitutional fact is they cannot.
Until this is changed, the CO was breaking the law.
Most will claim that they had reasonable grounds to pull you over, but a lawyer app on cross examination, will find out the truth.
This is the fact.
|
09-20-2018, 01:26 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 689
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talking moose
Oh b.s..... drive an 81 trans am across the city at 2:00am, then do the same thing in a 2014 Ford Focus. Difference is, it took the tranny an hour longer to do because he was pulled over 4 times. Take your commy random stops and stick it.
|
Commy?! lol, good one. Even I laughed at that. Not trying to be anything of the sort. But there are times where random checks have a purpose. The instance of the original post clearly proves that.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:33 AM.
|