It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Landmark Warrant Ruling Stuns Canadian Border Guards

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
They aren't going to change anything so what is the point of all of this? Political manouvering, that's all this is.



Intrepid I am surprised that you think this is not only just politics yet you still feel it is no big deal.

For one minute, put your self in their shoes. What would you do if all of a sudden they told you that you had to get a search warrant in order to search a prisoner? Keep in mind by the time you got one you might have a chive in your back.

Assuming your border guards are trained the same as ours to use their observations to determine whom and who not to search one would think you would be on their side. What this ruling has essentially done if it goes into effect it will greatly hamper their job by taking away their greatest asset that is human instinct and training.

Yeah I know they said they will not change anything but that could change in a instant if the judge issued a court order.

I have to ask you, is there no such thing as probable cause in Canada? The reason I ask is because knowing what I have read about smugglers they are known to hid things behind panels so if a customs agent observed a piece of cloth coming out between two panels wouldn't that be sufficient cause to remove the panel and take a look?


[edit on 7/18/2007 by shots]




posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 06:40 PM
link   
I guess we know how the next wave of terrorists are getting into the US.



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 06:43 PM
link   
I dont mean to sidetrack this but have Canadian Border Services Agency officers been issued firearms yet? How are they expected to protect Canada if they cant even protect themselves?



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 07:18 PM
link   
^^^^^

march 2008 was what i heard. you have to understand that that is a heavy piece of legislation in a country where police are the only citizens that are alowed to carry guns. The US secret service are not allowed to bring thier guns in protect polititians, our police supply them with security. the boarder guards will need to be trained the same way police are i suspect before they are legally alowed to point a firearm at another person.



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by tom goose
^^^^^

march 2008 was what i heard. you have to understand that that is a heavy piece of legislation in a country where police are the only citizens that are alowed to carry guns. The US secret service are not allowed to bring thier guns in protect polititians, our police supply them with security. the boarder guards will need to be trained the same way police are i suspect before they are legally alowed to point a firearm at another person.

I assume that the RCMP plays a big role in border protection these days?

We do have unarmed cops here in the US, its just very rare.

- New York State University Police were unarmed at all campuses until 1999.
- US Department of Veterans Affairs Police were unarmed until 2002.
- New York State Office of Mental Health Police are unarmed.
- Many college and university police/public safety forces are unarmed although this may change with the aftermath of the VT Shooting.
- Many town and village level law enforcement officers here on Long Island are unarmed ex. Town of Islip Park Rangers, Town of North Hempstead Bay Constables, etc.



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 07:37 PM
link   
^^^

at this point, the RCMP do keep a clear channel for any problems at the boader, they will never claim to be too busy, which is why i never understood the big huff about the boarder cross shut down last summer that another member mentioned hear, although he made it sound like it happens all the time it happened once to my knowledge.

Personally i think that RCMP should be in charge of the boarder, but like Intrepid mentioned, it is a powerfull union the boarder guards belong to and i cant see them going through RCMP training to keep their job. a simple cerificate will probably be all that is required, maybe a little more to keep the anti-gun peeps happy.



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 08:14 PM
link   
I have to agree with intrepid, this is about dismantling vehicles. The judge put that in her comments. From the original link:


"A warrantless dismantling can be described only as a search carried out in an unreasonable manner," she said.


They can still go through luggage and all that without a warrant because we do have probable cause in Canada; we just call it reasonable grounds instead.



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 08:20 PM
link   
I think a country has a right to police its borders and chose who it admits and who it turns back. While terms of admission shouldn't be arbitrary, there should be a mutually approved secure method of identification. I have my passport...cuz I'm going to the Bahamas soon, and it's recommended. And if Uncle Sam wants to see it before I go back to the Poconos...well it's his call, right? And if our guys figure they need to carry guns, well I'm ok with that.

But despite what what our neo-con nutbar government is contemplating...U.S. cops should leave their guns at home.



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Nothing unusual here. The ruling is the correct one. If the individual is not charged with anything, why not let him contact a lawyer? Sounds unreasonable to hold someone and rip apart his car just because he seems nervous, and on top of that not allow him to contact a lawyer. If it only takes 5 minutes to get a warrant, what's the big deal?
Of course, in the US the atmosphere is much different. There, most people are accustomed to acquiescing to any and all demands by authority. And only very rarely are they "called" on their actions. While Canadians are appalled at this kind of unwarranted search, Americans don't see it as unusual.



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azure_Oak
Americans are worried about Mexicans, they should also be worried about Canadians, and vice versa.

IMO, Canadians should be more concerned about the US than vice versa...After all, Canada's already housing a lot of US draft dodgers, ya' know.


Though I still think that Border Patrols, Canadian or American, should be able to use reasonable suspicion as enough to be able to call on the telephone for obtaining a warrant for further search...Again, "reasonable suspicion" should involve more than a hunch. There should be at least some visible & physical evidence before detaining in order to get a warrant.

In the case Shots mentioned about the Ag Agents...They should be dragged into court, simply because they conducted an extensive & damaging search without a warrant. Those 2 gals should have pressed charges & I sure hope they did.


Originally posted by TheComte
While Canadians are appalled at this kind of unwarranted search, Americans don't see it as unusual.

Which is sad because if we don't stand up for our Rights, the Government will assume we don't want them...And then treat us accordingly.



posted on Jul, 19 2007 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Confused here, Canadian charter of rights applies to citzens in Canada.

To get in canada you have to pass the borders - so was this guy in canada or not?



posted on Jul, 19 2007 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by puzzled2
Confused here, Canadian charter of rights applies to citzens in Canada.

To get in canada you have to pass the borders - so was this guy in canada or not?

When entering Canada you go through Canadian border guards, so yes, you are subject to Canadian laws. When entering USA, you are searched by American border guards, and subject to American laws.
Correct me if I am wrong.



posted on Jul, 20 2007 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheComte
If it only takes 5 minutes to get a warrant, what's the big deal?


I doubt there is any place in the world one can get a warrant in 5 Minutes. That too me was an over exageration on someones part. What the court did here was essentially put handcuffs on th border agents so they cannnot use their training to catch cmugglers as they are supposed to do.



posted on Jul, 21 2007 @ 10:11 AM
link   
My Opinion


I dont understand what their complaining about, they need to get a warrant

now, it's not like their being asked to walk 200 miles of anything.



posted on Aug, 10 2007 @ 02:40 AM
link   
I totally agree with the judges ruling. When I was a young fella, I went with some friends to see a concert in Detroit. Not a big deal. But coming back through Canadian customs, they stopped and detained us and then proceeded to disassemble all 5 of our motorcycles. We were riding Hondas and Yamahas, not Harleys, and had all the proper lisencing and insurance, etc. After a whole day of being yelled at, cursed at and accused of some really horrible stuff, we were told to leave and take our bikes off the premises. We went out to find them scattered in peices across the inspection bay. There was no apology, or offer of help. They actually got mad at us because we wouldn't vacate the premises. I finally got hold of a friend in London, Ont. who came out with a pick up truck and rescued us.
When we made an official complaint, we were told in no uncertain terms that it was tough luck. Nothing would be done about it.
With the amount of BS Homeland Security retoric coming from south of the border, I can imagine that this is alot more common than it was then, and I had heard about it before we went to Detroit. We just figured that it couldn't happen to five clean cut guys on well kept motorcycles, hell we're Canadians, not freaks..



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join