|
|
Post by Cranky on Jul 23, 2010 14:00:13 GMT -5
I put up wind turbines and sometimes I have to go into the forest to see what's there in case I have to put a road through it. We are not talking about the Amazon jungle, just woodlots or small forests. Fine. No problem. Last year, while trekking along, I come across a pissed off rattler. In the book called Human Versus Rattler, Human beats a hasty retreat and all is well. The about 4 months ago, I came across a very annoyed buck (mating season?) and once again, another hasty retreat.
Just to even up the odds a bit, I bought a 2 foot machete. What I really wanted to do is carry a .357. Light and fairly effective against anything short of a big bear. But alas, that would be too much for the liberally infected minds of Canada. After all, up here, anyone who even considers carrying a gun must be a mass-murderer-in-waiting.
Fast forward.....
On Monday, I have a flat tire and while changing it by the side of the road, a cop car pulls up. The cop walks up, about ten feet from my van, he stops, says nothing and goes back to his car. I didn't think much about it until I noticed that he was still there several minutes later. Still didn't think much about it, waved to him, cleaned up and off I went.
Five minutes later.....
I'm driving along and see a bunch of lights flashing way behind me. WTF? I'm thinking there has to be something wrong up ahead. The next thing I know, there is a cop car in front of me, one on the side and one behind me. To say that I was surprised would be a epic understatement. I stop, they come out with guns withdrawn and order me out of the van. Of course I comply. What was this all about? When the cop approached my van, he saw the machete in the back. Instead of approaching me and making even the most rudimentary inquiry, he called for back up and all hell broke lose. It took ten minutes of explanation as to why I carried a machete. It took that long for them to figure out that mass murderers don't carry two lap tops filled with satellite shots, topo maps and advance GPS equipment. One item that absolutely baffled them was a scope mounted on a electronic level. I use it to measure height of trees and I had to give them trigonometry lesson on how it worked......and wasn't some kind of assassination device.
The entire affair ended as quickly as it begun....but.........
Days later, I'm wondering. Was this a good thing or a bad thing? Sure, we all want to feel a bit better protected but has it gone too far? Since when is a machete a "weapon". Does it stop there or are forks weapons too? One fork or many forks? Axes? As much as I want to live in a safe society, I do not want to give the cops so much liberty or authority. In fact, I feel that we are sacrificing too much liberty and authoritarianism in the name of "safety". After all, if we act like a society that has to adapt a prison mentality about safety, then the "bad guys" have won.
Opinions?
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jul 23, 2010 14:37:12 GMT -5
"Since when is a machete a weapon" - Are you serious HA?
In the wrong hands it's a lethal weapon.
|
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Jul 23, 2010 16:18:08 GMT -5
I don't blame the cops for taking precautionary measures. How many have been killed in seemingly routine pull-overs? "He was a quiet man......"  Cops, like most of society in the big picture, are on heightened awareness, too....and like you say, jkr, machetes are lethal (yes, so are forks )....and have been involved in many a crime. And if one has a machete in full view, what else does one have? Not criticizing you, HA, but "better safe than have my young family come to my funeral" is in play here, that's all. 10 minutes of explanation/education is all it took....that's not too bad. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Jul 23, 2010 18:31:24 GMT -5
"Since when is a machete a weapon" - Are you serious HA? In the wrong hands it's a lethal weapon. For all intents and purposes, so is an ax, a chainsaw, a brush cutter and a thopusand other items. My issue is not the material (ax), my issue is where does it lead? |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Jul 23, 2010 18:47:05 GMT -5
I don't blame the cops for taking precautionary measures. How many have been killed in seemingly routine pull-overs? "He was a quiet man......" Cops, like most of society in the big picture, are on heightened awareness, too....and like you say, jkr, machetes are lethal (yes, so are forks )....and have been involved in many a crime. And if one has a machete in full view, what else does one have? Not criticizing you, HA, but "better safe than have my young family come to my funeral" is in play here, that's all. 10 minutes of explanation/education is all it took....that's not too bad. \ This thing ended as quickly as it begun......but I am also a white, blue eyed white male that is the opposite end of the threat spectrum of racial profiling....BUT... What if I was black? What if my name was Mohamed? There was no action or cause to justify the search. Where are my right against that search? Here is our Charter language. 8. Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.Since the machete is openly sold and there is no legal restrictions to it, why should the cops have a right to stop me? If it is because it's a machete, then what about an axe? Chain saw? Where it their legal limit to their power of restraint and search? I would understand it if there was prior history of violence (G8) or known potential threat, but in this case, there was not even a remotly justification for it. Then why is it okay? And where does it step over the bounds of individual freedom? For me, THIS is the issue. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jul 23, 2010 20:04:00 GMT -5
A few things HA
First, in Canada you can carry a machete ... but you can not carry a concealed weapon, which takes precedence over any charter against search and seizure. I am not sure I quite understand the the story, but the way you explained it sort of infers that the cop that stopped on the side of the road may have seen the machete in the van ... that's probable cause to stop you.
Here in NL, we are having another debate about stopping drunk drivers. The argument always has been when does a cop have probable cause to stop a driver he suspects may be drunk. Can he stop and search the car, detain the driver if he is driving straight and is still over the legal limit? I think they should have that power since driving is a privilege not a right ... but the courts always walk that fine line and rule on the drunks side time and time again. So now in NL, the police have the authority to pull you over and submit anyone to a breathalyzer ... I like it, but I have a feeling it will not last.
Another case here in NL. An American lady shot her husband while bear hunting late in the evening. The prosecution thinks she did it on purpose, but I wont get into that ... the point is, carrying guns can be dangerous, and any reasonable person (ie the court's test) can see that.
|
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Jul 23, 2010 23:45:26 GMT -5
I get you, HA....by that standard, every landscaping truck openly carrying shovels, rakes, axes, etc. should be pulled over on a regular basis....which doesn't happen. Heck, they may even have a machete or two to cut down thick grass/brush.
To me, it sounds as if the machete was being profiled....not the race/gender of its owner. I wonder what the stats are for machete crimes.
If you've got nothing to hide, though (and you didn't) then there's no need to worry.
But I hear ya.....where does the suspicion/fear scale stop sliding in terms of our rights?
Good topic.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jul 24, 2010 6:48:50 GMT -5
and as you say, HA, you're a cranky white male . . . it's likely you would have been profiled entirely differently if you weren't cranky . . . likely the 10 minute conversation wouldn't have been so calm [yes, I'm profiling the cops!]. just be glad you weren't wearing black!
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jul 24, 2010 11:47:59 GMT -5
Couple of years ago, I'm travelling through central BC and stop at a nice neighbourhood pub for supper. This guy in a Harley, leathers, skull cap, etc pulls in around the same time. He goes in, orders a burger and then takes out his lap top and starts 'working'. Biker gang guy. Probably. Sure looked like it. Lap top? Yep. Probably checking his itinerary to see where the next set of kneecaps were.
Was it a white van, HA? White vans are bad news and add to the profile. Having said that, I wonder if cops could just talk more and try to get a feel for what's happening...first. I can understand them a bit, though. When one of them gets killed by someone in a car by the side of the road, it would get you fairly nervous about any car on the side of the road. I'm curious as to how they're trained to deal with that. I'm reminded by that seasoned police officer who was killed in Ontario by some old guy who was annoyed at something. What is safe?
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jul 24, 2010 12:16:16 GMT -5
A few things HA First, in Canada you can carry a machete ... but you can not carry a concealed weapon, which takes precedence over any charter against search and seizure. I am not sure I quite understand the the story, but the way you explained it sort of infers that the cop that stopped on the side of the road may have seen the machete in the van ... that's probable cause to stop you. Here in NL, we are having another debate about stopping drunk drivers. The argument always has been when does a cop have probable cause to stop a driver he suspects may be drunk. Can he stop and search the car, detain the driver if he is driving straight and is still over the legal limit? I think they should have that power since driving is a privilege not a right ... but the courts always walk that fine line and rule on the drunks side time and time again. So now in NL, the police have the authority to pull you over and submit anyone to a breathalyzer ... I like it, but I have a feeling it will not last. Another case here in NL. An American lady shot her husband while bear hunting late in the evening. The prosecution thinks she did it on purpose, but I wont get into that ... the point is, carrying guns can be dangerous, and any reasonable person (ie the court's test) can see that. Our vice president Chaney shoots people. Machete? I can't get on an airplane when I'm brandishing nail clippers. Invasive search and seizure? I enjoy taking off my belt and shoes, collecting my change and keys while carrying a bag and laptop, wallet and magazine; waiting in line for two hours for a one hour flight. Where did I leave my boarding pass and passport? The inmates are running the asylum. |
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Jul 24, 2010 12:18:38 GMT -5
...it sort of infers that the cop that stopped on the side of the road may have seen the machete in the van ... that's probable cause to stop you. Uh, but he was ALREADY stopped...crouched-down at the side of the road - a very non-threatening posture - certainly not to a fully trained and ARMED police officer. The cop could and should have made his inquiries then; why in hell would he need to call for "back-up" in this instance. Did the thought of a high-speed chase wherein the potential for disaster (far too often innocent motorists/pedestrians are victimized by this stupid and often unnecessary act) excite him? Sure it's better to be safe than sorry - but where was this idiot's training? His keen eye of perceptiveness? The items in the vehicle, as described, should certainly have suggested no threat...as was the case. If nothing else, take note of his name, plate number, his destination - hell, even follow him for a few km's. I'm with H.A. and the author of this piece; this was waaaaaaaaay over-the-top "policing" IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Jul 24, 2010 12:52:33 GMT -5
A few things HA First, in Canada you can carry a machete ... but you can not carry a concealed weapon, which takes precedence over any charter against search and seizure. I am not sure I quite understand the the story, but the way you explained it sort of infers that the cop that stopped on the side of the road may have seen the machete in the van ... that's probable cause to stop you. . You are contradicting yourself. In fact, it is not considered a weapon and that is why it's sold over the counter. Seeing a machete in the back of a van, in it's sheath with no danger posed to anyone is not grounds to stop and search. The issue is not the circumstance but the action itself. There is a statement.... "THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. THEN THEY CAME for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. THEN THEY CAME for me and by that time no one was left to speak up." Let's move fast forward to now. They stopped me, guns drawn and searched my van with no probable cause. What about if I had stopped in my driveway? My garage? What if I had walked into my house? Where exactly is the limit to police powers if under the name of "safety" the police feel they can ignore the Charter? Here is a question..... What are you rights to unlawful detention and seizure? If a policeman came to your door and asked to search your house, can you refuse him? Can you refuse to answer any of his/their questions? If youare asked to come to the station, can you refuse him/them? |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Jul 24, 2010 13:08:36 GMT -5
Couple of years ago, I'm travelling through central BC and stop at a nice neighbourhood pub for supper. This guy in a Harley, leathers, skull cap, etc pulls in around the same time. He goes in, orders a burger and then takes out his lap top and starts 'working'. Biker gang guy. Probably. Sure looked like it. Lap top? Yep. Probably checking his itinerary to see where the next set of kneecaps were. Was it a white van, HA? White vans are bad news and add to the profile. Having said that, I wonder if cops could just talk more and try to get a feel for what's happening...first. I can understand them a bit, though. When one of them gets killed by someone in a car by the side of the road, it would get you fairly nervous about any car on the side of the road. I'm curious as to how they're trained to deal with that. I'm reminded by that seasoned police officer who was killed in Ontario by some old guy who was annoyed at something. What is safe? What is reasonable in the name of safety? Is there ANY line in the sand? Does the charter apply or is there no limits under the name of "safety". After all, we would all be a lot umm......safer if we were embedded with electronic tags and cops could read then from a safe distance. I am a "law and order" guy, probably more then most, but I believe that it should be applied to those who BREAK the law, or at the very least, probable intent (G8) and not before, otherwise I have visions of police state pounding in my head. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jul 24, 2010 16:10:17 GMT -5
i guess I didn't really reply to your question. I brought up a circumstance in which an officer was killed by someone you wouldn't normally think was dangerous. More to your point, no, it was overkill. Way too much like that poor Polish guy in the Vancouver airport, who committed the deadly sin of not being able to speak English and was Tasered by some trigger happy officers of the law, who probably were itching to use their new toy. I spoke to an auxiliary cop and a retired senior cop after that happened and both said those guys just didn't sit down and talk to the guy, which would have been the right thing to do. Four of them vs one hungry, sleep deprived new immigrant and they still used poor judgment. Thank got it didn't come to that for you, but how close was it? Only those officers will really know I don't think you can ever eliminate cops being killed by unstable or dangerous people parked by the roadside, but you can reduce the number of silly things such as happened to you, if the authorities were willing to just talk and ask questions. I've had to deal with a few unstable characters at my bank branch, but amazingly, if you listen to them, treat them with some respect, but explain that wild behaviour isn't helping me deal with their issue, they calm down and you can get something done. I don't necessarily solve their problems, but they usually leave without slamming the door. Yes, there are limits, and the cop in your case exceeded them. Now what? Do we write Stephen Harper?  |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jul 25, 2010 7:55:58 GMT -5
So many issues tied up in that little story... that I decided to tell two of my own...
First story; I was driving a cube truck a few years back on the Decaire Expressway when suddenly there was a loud bang, and the truck went from 60 to 0 in about, oh 3 seconds. I managed to get to the side of the road, got out, and crawled under the truck to see what was up. Two minutes later an SQ police cruiser comes screaming up the highway doing Mach 3, followed closely by an ambulance two minutes after that.
Second story; Few years before THAT happened I was driving around Verdun late one night with a friend of mine, after a night on the town. He was drunk, I was not. It was summer time, also known as Construction Season, and anybody who has ever been caught in Verdun during Construction Season knows what a mess that is. After a dozen wrong turns and twice as many expletives, I pass a cop car sitting at an intersection who pulls in behind me. Simultaneously at the next intersection two more cop cars pull out, one to block the road, the second to pull beside me on the opposite side of the street (much like your scenario). Six officers get out, and while no guns were drawn me and my buddy weren't stupid and both of us immediately put our hands on the dashboard, in plain site. Our crime? Burnt out headlight.
So where am I going with this? Context. Without knowing why the officers reacted the way they did it's hard to make any sweeping judgments on what really happened. In the first story somebody blowing by my disabled truck on the highway had seen me lying underneath it and assumed I had been run over. One panicked 911 call later and I was an "all hands" emergency response. In the second story I left out the part where three days earlier a Verdun cop had been killed by his own gun after making a routine traffic stop late at night. His killer had not been found at the time I was pulled over.
So I guess where I am going with this is this; we don't really know why your police officers reacted the way they did. Perhaps somebody had called 911 reporting a strange man walking through their back lots with a machete. Perhaps a local woman had a restraining order against her ex-husband and police were told he may be on his way to the area. Perhaps the first cop to see your machete had already been in a fight with a deranged motorist earlier that day and decided enough was enough, having back-up is never a bad thing. I don't know. Without knowing the context its hard to make a judgment call.
Having said that, that's not really your question is it? The larger issue is still out there. Personally, I believe we've become a culture of fear; fear of terrorists, fear of germs, fear of having our kids abducted, fear of being mugged, of robbed, of raped, of being ripped off by the government. But where is the line between prudence and paranoia? If you are a cop in largely black neighborhood known for crime, drugs and drug gangs, and you see two young black men in an SUV slowly cruising up and down a street late one night, is it racial profiling to pull them over? Or is it smart policing, knowing your neighborhood, your beat? Why do people lock their doors at night? How many robbers, rapists, murderers actually sneak into people's houses late at night? Or is the number so low because people DO lock their doors at night? One shoe bomber and millions of people are now suspect? Prudence, or paranoia? I'm a member of a triathlon forum, and a recent thread there asked how many people "carried" while training. A surprising number did. To me, carrying a handgun in your bicycle shorts while training in largely suburban areas seems ludicrous. Triathletes belong to a largely white, middle-to-upper class sport, who tend to stick to areas and routes they know. But these people felt the need for protection in their spandex. I didn't get it, but they did.
I don't know. I think we've swung too far over to the fear factor myself, but where that line is, I don't know.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jul 25, 2010 8:36:34 GMT -5
Personally, I believe we've become a culture of fear; fear of terrorists, fear of germs, fear of having our kids abducted, fear of being mugged, of robbed, of raped, of being ripped off by the government. But where is the line between prudence and paranoia? How many robbers, rapists, murderers actually sneak into people's houses late at night? excellent, BC. my question is . . . is there really more crime now than 25 . . . 35 . . . 50 years ago? or is it more media reported? in likelihood numbers have gone up, but [and pure speculation on my part] I don't think percentage has gone up. but the perception is there, and that's all that counts. can't argue with that. I remember being reamed half-royally by my mom because I sauntered in at 12:30 am one night when I was 12 [and yes, I do still remember it]. I'd gone to an early movie, it was a double-bill and I didn't realize it and stayed for the second, then walked slowly home, stopping in on a friend on the way. walked into the house, she was visiting with friends, loudly asked where I'd been and said I shoulda phoned [pre-cellphone days, obviously] and that was the end of it. Today . . . she'd called the cops 'cause I was abducted or something. less fearful days then for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Jul 25, 2010 13:40:41 GMT -5
Having said that, that's not really your question is it? The larger issue is still out there. Bingo! Do the cops have a right to stop someone carrying a legal item? Where does article 8 ofthe Charter come in? What would happen if I wasn't white? Where were we, were are we and were are we headed in the name of "security"? |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jul 25, 2010 14:48:25 GMT -5
Cranky's new avatar:  |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Jul 25, 2010 15:13:58 GMT -5
Cranky's new avatar: Are you accusing me of turning into a lefty? A LEFTY? That's worse the calling me a Kitten Killer or a Puppy Basher!  I am all for that conversation. In fact, I have posted this same story in a right wing forum with the intent of questioning what law and order means to conservatism. Where does the line between "law and order" stop and "freedom" begin? How can you support and demand the growth of the ultimate expression of big brother, those guys in blue, and still believe you have "freedom"? Where is the old liberal cry of "big brother" stop and where does their love of big brother telling everybody what to do start? This story has an evil plot behind it!  |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jul 25, 2010 16:24:54 GMT -5
Are you accusing me of turning into a lefty? A LEFTY? That's worse the calling me a Kitten Killer or a Puppy Basher! ah, there's the old cranky we know and love [in a very HabsRus kind of way, of course  ] what's that old expression: "the right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." I wonder [and so do you]. there needs to be a bit more space than a hair between my fist and your nose; there needs to be a bit of space between law and freedom . . . but where is the boundary? and is pre-emptive action acceptable? In fact, isn't that what the people arrested [unjustly is the claim] at the G20 conference are asking? oh . . . a machete is indeed a weapon, as well as a tool, just as is a tire iron in the [right? wrong?] hands, as is a pen [I've watch those Arnold movies!]. perspective. but I like your question: where is the line?I think it moves, depending on the day and the hour and the circumstance. and I would never consider you a lefty, even though you have embraced solar energy [interesting how one can make words say what one wants, isn't it? by ignoring or leaving out a fact or condition I can make you sound not only left, but green!] |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jul 25, 2010 16:47:47 GMT -5
...it sort of infers that the cop that stopped on the side of the road may have seen the machete in the van ... that's probable cause to stop you. Uh, but he was ALREADY stopped...crouched-down at the side of the road - a very non-threatening posture - certainly not to a fully trained and ARMED police officer. The cop could and should have made his inquiries then; why in hell would he need to call for "back-up" in this instance. Did the thought of a high-speed chase wherein the potential for disaster (far too often innocent motorists/pedestrians are victimized by this stupid and often unnecessary act) excite him? Sure it's better to be safe than sorry - but where was this idiot's training? His keen eye of perceptiveness? The items in the vehicle, as described, should certainly have suggested no threat...as was the case. If nothing else, take note of his name, plate number, his destination - hell, even follow him for a few km's. I'm with H.A. and the author of this piece; this was waaaaaaaaay over-the-top "policing" IMO. All you have to do is look at any drinking and driving case to know that the officer has to have some probable cause ....the vehicle was stopped, ergo, as sad as it may sound, the sad fact is that HA could always say it was someone else's machete. When he is driving, it doesn't matter, since you are suppose to know what is in your car ... or prove you didn't know. Sad yes ... but there you go. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jul 25, 2010 16:53:31 GMT -5
Having said that, that's not really your question is it? The larger issue is still out there. Bingo! Do the cops have a right to stop someone carrying a legal item? Where does article 8 ofthe Charter come in? What would happen if I wasn't white? Where were we, were are we and were are we headed in the name of "security"? Again I am going to have to chime in here and say that while a machete is legal to buy, it is not a legal item. Let me explain. You are allowed to possess tools of your trade in your vans. The tool are not in themselves illegal to purchase or own, but are illegal to carry around in public. The reason being, you can not carry any concealed weapon in Canada. You can walk into Canadian Tire and buy a hammer to your hearts content, but if you hide it in your jacket it is a concealed weapon .... try walking onto a plane with a hammer in your jacket. What??? But it is a legal item your honour ... I dont think that arguement will get you far. It is only legal for its intended use ... and I guess the officer asked himself "What in God's name is he doing with a machete" ... that very thought in an officer's head is probable cause. He acted correctly ... if you don't think he did, I suggest you bring it to court ... I'll certainly follow the case. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jul 25, 2010 16:58:35 GMT -5
A few things HA First, in Canada you can carry a machete ... but you can not carry a concealed weapon, which takes precedence over any charter against search and seizure. I am not sure I quite understand the the story, but the way you explained it sort of infers that the cop that stopped on the side of the road may have seen the machete in the van ... that's probable cause to stop you. . You are contradicting yourself. In fact, it is not considered a weapon and that is why it's sold over the counter. Seeing a machete in the back of a van, in it's sheath with no danger posed to anyone is not grounds to stop and search. By this logic, seeing a gun in the back of a van in a holster isnt any danger either ... you can buy gun over the counter too. You can refuse the search unless they have a warrant ... but if the officer has reason to believe a crime is being commited he doesn't need a warrant. You can refuse to answer any questions without legal representation ..... You can refuse to go to the station unless they arrest you ..... |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Jul 25, 2010 17:22:56 GMT -5
Uh, but he was ALREADY stopped...crouched-down at the side of the road - a very non-threatening posture - certainly not to a fully trained and ARMED police officer. The cop could and should have made his inquiries then; why in hell would he need to call for "back-up" in this instance. Did the thought of a high-speed chase wherein the potential for disaster (far too often innocent motorists/pedestrians are victimized by this stupid and often unnecessary act) excite him? Sure it's better to be safe than sorry - but where was this idiot's training? His keen eye of perceptiveness? The items in the vehicle, as described, should certainly have suggested no threat...as was the case. If nothing else, take note of his name, plate number, his destination - hell, even follow him for a few km's. I'm with H.A. and the author of this piece; this was waaaaaaaaay over-the-top "policing" IMO. All you have to do is look at any drinking and driving case to know that the officer has to have some probable cause ....the vehicle was stopped, ergo, as sad as it may sound, the sad fact is that HA could always say it was someone else's machete. When he is driving, it doesn't matter, since you are suppose to know what is in your car ... or prove you didn't know. Sad yes ... but there you go. In order to search a vehicle, they need probable cause. Probable cause is reasonable and probable grounds that an offense has been committed. No offense was committed. The item was not illegal. Here is a link. www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/championarticles/99apr11?opendocument |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Jul 25, 2010 17:40:03 GMT -5
You can refuse the search unless they have a warrant ... but if the officer has reason to believe a crime is being commited he doesn't need a warrant. You can refuse to answer any questions without legal representation ..... You can refuse to go to the station unless they arrest you ..... And the first one is what is what they violated. They had no probable cause and was defacto denied to excercise my rights when faced with the shock of instant and overwhealming deadly force. They openly and deliberatly violated my Charter rights. That is not really the big issue with me although I love to take it to court. The problem is that it will cost me a huge bundle of money and without the publicity of dead puppies/kittens/babies/Cranky, even if I win, it will make page 39 of some legal review. It will not serve a larger issue of forcing "where is the line" question that I want Canadian society to ask. AND the other question, if it wasn't a white guy, what would happen? |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jul 25, 2010 18:51:43 GMT -5
I'm with H.A. and the author of this piece; this was waaaaaaaaay over-the-top "policing" IMO. On the surface I agree with both of you. Me, though, I'm wondering just how experienced the officer was. Did he go through in previous days that might have influenced his decisions to call backup and eventually draw his sidearm? As an aside, I have a small sword collection; a Samurai sword set and a German medieval broadsword (made on an original forge ... Google Geroldsecker Waffenschmiede). I wanted to get the broadsword appraised by a local 'expert' if I could find one here in Kingston. I found one through a shop that sold decorative weapons and phoned them to make an appointment. The owner advised me that if I was to walk through the mall to his store, I should carry the sword out in the open; don't wrap it in a blanket, don't try to conceal it. The reason? That broadsword could possibly be considered a weapon. The blade isn't sharp, but concealing it might not be a good idea. I thought it was good advise. I never brought it in even when the store owner suggested I bring it around to the back door. Why? I didn't need the hassle. HA, you mentioned an axe, a chainsaw, a brush cutter, etc. I'm wondering if that machete just sent the wrong message to the cop. Don't get me wrong, I'm not excusing his actions; I agree with you and CO in that the cop over-reacted. But, I'd suggest that there's a negative connotation associated with a machete. I wonder if this guy might have reacted the same if he had seen a broadsword, battle axe, what have you. But, still ... I also wonder what the cop had been through before that. Too many movies? ;D Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Jul 25, 2010 22:25:46 GMT -5
Are you accusing me of turning into a lefty? A LEFTY? That's worse the calling me a Kitten Killer or a Puppy Basher! ah, there's the old cranky we know and love [in a very HabsRus kind of way, of course ] I know what you mean. *slowly backs to a wall* but I like your question: where is the line?I think it moves, depending on the day and the hour and the circumstance. If the line moves then it's not a right or a law, it's a line in the sand that can be abused by those with authority and money. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jul 25, 2010 23:09:26 GMT -5
that line has never been static . . . it constantly moves, century to century, generation to generation, election to election.
the goal is to have it move slowly, and/or to keep it within certain parameters so that despots and tyrants cannot rule with impunity . . . so that a Hitler or a Mao or a Lenin does not take leadership. which means that we must constantly speak out, and hold our leaders to account.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jul 26, 2010 7:19:32 GMT -5
All you have to do is look at any drinking and driving case to know that the officer has to have some probable cause ....the vehicle was stopped, ergo, as sad as it may sound, the sad fact is that HA could always say it was someone else's machete. When he is driving, it doesn't matter, since you are suppose to know what is in your car ... or prove you didn't know. Sad yes ... but there you go. In order to search a vehicle, they need probable cause. Probable cause is reasonable and probable grounds that an offense has been committed. No offense was committed. The item was not illegal. Here is a link. www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/championarticles/99apr11?opendocument ... or is going to be committed. It is also probable cause if there was an alert on for crimes committed with machetes. In which case, he can search you or your van even though you are perfectly innocent. Can you be certain this is not the case .... isn't it possible that the officer when he approached you spotted the machete. Walked back to his car, and got on the radio to inquire into any reports of macheted committed crimes / APBs .... there could have very well been ONE in the USA or Canada. Stopping you then is definitely on probable cause. A quick google search shows that the state of Massachusetts is considering banning the machete because "according to police reports, since the start of 2008, there have been at least seven machete attacks in Boston, Lynn, Springfield and Chicopee. The brazen and bloody assaults include a daytime attack on a 15-year-old on City Hall Plaza in Boston, an after-school brawl that nearly severed the right thumb of a 16-year-old Lynn boy and a nighttime ambush on two people in Springfield. In total, the attacks have sent nine people to the hospital with serious injuries. A sharpened machete can be a deadly weapon. Nationally, attacks have been reported against police in New York and in Connecticut, Florida and California." I believe the article quoted above was written in 2009 ... I could not find a date on it (Its from the Hinterland Gazette) ... but the reporter states that he walked into a store and bought a 18 inch blade for $25 from the Kenmore Army & Navy Store. The thing that boggles my mind is that the Criminal Code of Canada does list some items considered to be weapons ... mostly martial arts weapons. However, while the Criminal Code of Canada has no section outlining knives or their lengths (other than to say that a switchblade/spring loaded blade it illegal, and to say that any blade "prescribed to be a weapon" is illegal) but there are many informal blade length rules around the country in an attempt to distinguish a pocket knife from a fighting knife ... Maybe I'm out to lunch .... but I'd rather a cop stop someone with backup and question why someone is carrying something than to just brush it off. We are not that far removed from the guy that beheaded the person on the bus on the west coast ... |
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Jul 26, 2010 9:26:42 GMT -5
Again, why in hell did he need "back-up" in order to further "investigate/interrogate/etc"?
He's got a machete - you've got a 9mm.
He's crouched-down - you're standing and approaching with caution and at-the-ready.
He's a civilian - you're a highly-trained law enforcement officer.
Why the need to call-in backup!!??
|
|
]