Broken Justice - these infuriating cases have it all

[guyser]

Guyser, this is the question that you didn't answer in post 61. We need tougher sentences and more prison space so violent criminals of all stripes get more than slaps on the wrist.

I see the error. I did not answer it as I did not see the relevance in connection to the rest of the thread. But even I may have contributed to this.

Ok. I have no problem with severe penalties for child rapists, but then again, I dont think I ever argued anything against that .

Child rapists? Throw away the key.

[Argus]

I see the error. I did not answer it as I did not see the relevance in connection to the rest of the thread. But even I may have contributed to this.

Ok. I have no problem with severe penalties for child rapists, but then again, I dont think I ever argued anything against that .

Child rapists? Throw away the key.

What about murderers? What about armed robbers and pimps and drug dealers?

[guyser]

What about murderers? What about armed robbers and pimps and drug dealers?

OK...will there be more?

Murder , sure , armed robbery sure, pimps sure and drug dealers not so much. Drugs should be legalized .

On another note I can report that the Supreme Court is upholding the rights of citizens and just announced they have reached a decision that searchs by police dogs at a Sarnia highschool were unlawful.

Breach of privacy was cited.

http://canadianpress.google.com/article/AL...y3Va4ReDaFfifdw

[HisSelf]

What I see here is a lot of agreement that the justice system (in Canada) is broken. So how should it be fixed?

[Wilber]

On another note I can report that the Supreme Court is upholding the rights of citizens and just announced they have reached a decision that searchs by police dogs at a Sarnia highschool were unlawful.

So dealing drugs on school property is now sanctioned by the highest court in the land. Just peachy. You can dress it up any way you want but that is the result. Sure glad my kids are grown up but I sure fear for theirs.

[guyser]

So dealing drugs on school property is now sanctioned by the highest court in the land.

Certainly not. Whatever gave you that notion?

[Wilber]

Certainly not. Whatever gave you that notion?

The notion that a school cannot ensure that drugs or weapons or anything else are not brought into a school. You make a big deal about a druggies rights being upheld but you don't seem to give a shit about a kids right to go to a school free of the god damned things. It you think this is wonderful news, I think you are an idiot.

[Peter F]

The notion that a school cannot ensure that drugs or weapons or anything else are not brought into a school. You make a big deal about a druggies rights being upheld but you don't seem to give a shit about a kids right to go to a school free of the god damned things. It you think this is wonderful news, I think you are an idiot.

So now Dogs are necessary to stop drug trafficing? Anything less is sanctioning of drug dealing?

You're an idiot.

[Wilber]

So now Dogs are necessary to stop drug trafficing? Anything less is sanctioning of drug dealing?

You're an idiot.

So you think kids should be able to bring their drugs to school. Are they so god damned addicted that they can't get through six hours of school without the bloody things? Let the little bastards leave them at home.

[guyser]

The notion that a school cannot ensure that drugs or weapons or anything else are not brought into a school. You make a big deal about a druggies rights being upheld but you don't seem to give a shit about a kids right to go to a school free of the god damned things. It you think this is wonderful news, I think you are an idiot.

Actually Wilber this is great news for you too. Drugs were at high school when you were there, and apparently you are still living.

But attacks at my idiocy aside, if the police had cause to come to find that drug dealing and weapons offences were present, then they would have just cause to get a warrant and deal with the issue. Should the kid get busted that way , then fine.

But for the police to go on fishing expeditions on a captive audience is dumb, and.....wait for it....against the charter of rights that you and I, and the rest of us , have.

I know I dont want a police state , nor do you I would bet.

If the idea of police searches is your liking, then lets take a couple of points from the Gov't budget and hire a couple hundred thousand police dogs and have them on the corner of every street. Leave your front door locked, oh, and your car since they will want to look in there too.

Dont think in the small ways, look at the bigger picture. My idiocy is protecting your rights Wilber.

[guyser]

So you think kids should be able to bring their drugs to school.

This is where your argument fails Wilber. No one has suggested that. If you were to ask me, well, sure if they want to and accept the risk.

The teachers are allowed to.

Want to bet no dog went near the staffroom? I wonder why, and if it did, the teachers were warned of this.

[Wilber]

Actually Wilber this is great news for you too. Drugs were at high school when you were there, and apparently you are still living.

Actually they weren't. Pot use was not smoked any where near the school and other drugs such as LSD didn't come into use until later. You sure as hell couldn't buy it in the school.

If the idea of police searches is your liking, then lets take a couple of points from the Gov't budget and hire a couple hundred thousand police dogs and have them on the corner of every street. Leave your front door locked, oh, and your car since they will want to look in there too.

What I care about is my grand kids going to school without some drug dealer trying to sell them the stuff on school property. Good god, have we reached a point where we are not even allowed to do that?

Dont think in the small ways, look at the bigger picture. My idiocy is protecting your rights Wilber.

You may think a kid not being exposed to drug dealers in a school yard a small thing, I do not and I don't want someone like you protecting my rights.

Want to bet no dog went near the staffroom? I wonder why, and if it did, the teachers were warned of this.

I don't see what that has to do with the courts decision but any so called "teacher" found with drugs on school premises should get their ass fired out of the place instantly.

Edited April 25, 2008 by Wilber

[guyser]

Actually they weren't. Pot use was not smoked any where near the school and other drugs such as LSD didn't come into use until later. You sure as hell couldn't buy it in the school.

My apologies then. I will take it that you are a fair bit older than I.

That said, your kids lived through the high school years and it would not be a secret to them as to where to get it. ( I admit I went to school in the city-perhaps yours was a country school)

What I care about is my grand kids going to school without some drug dealer trying to sell them the stuff on school property. Good god, have we reached a point where we are not even allowed to do that?

You may think a kid not being exposed to drug dealers in a school yard a small thing, I do not and I don't want someone like you protecting my rights.

It may seem arrogant to you , but yes you need someone ,if not me, protecting your rights.

You make leaps into scenarios that are not relevant to this.

If a dealer is making unwanted contact to students on school property then in all liklihood the admin of the school, and the police, already know about this . A police watch or sting will uncover the dealers and they are arrested.

I honestly doubt you want your grandkids (or you) being subject to searches of their personal property at anytime or anywhere.

I don't see what that has to do with the courts decision but any so called "teacher" found with drugs on school premises should get their ass fired out of the place instantly.

Nothing, but it does bring in the double standard. I will bet the teachers were forewarned of the inspection.

[Wilber]

I honestly doubt you want your grandkids (or you) being subject to searches of their personal property at anytime or anywhere.

Not anywhere but schools are an exception. We expect them to protect our kids. The court had a clear choice here, protect the kids from drugs or protect the dealer. They chose the dealer.

[guyser]

The court had a clear choice here, protect the kids from drugs or protect the dealer. They chose the dealer.

I am sorry but that is not what they had to decide. The SCC had to decide whether or not to uphold rights of an individual.

That they chose to is good news for democracy. What he had in that backpack is immaterial to the decision.

I think we will have to agree to disagree.

[Wilber]

I am sorry but that is not what they had to decide. The SCC had to decide whether or not to uphold rights of an individual.

That they chose to is good news for democracy. What he had in that backpack is immaterial to the decision.

I think we will have to agree to disagree.

No Guyser, you can dress it up anyway you want but that is what happened. The kids came second.

[guyser]

No Guyser, you can dress it up anyway you want but that is what happened. The kids came second.

NO dressing at all. Look at the facts and that conclusion is impossible.

[Wilber]

NO dressing at all. Look at the facts and that conclusion is impossible.

If you consider teaching our children that anyone can take anything, anywhere as long as the wrong people don't see it, I suppose you are right.

[Oleg Bach]

If you consider teaching our children that anyone can take anything, anywhere as long as the wrong people don't see it, I suppose you are right.

Inept and out of touch. Need I say more about our Judicary? How can some guy or girl that attended private school and never had to worry about one single material thing or creature comfort....really care about the unwashed masses - personally I believe if it is sublime or with direct intent..THAT - these judges are a little sadistic and take great glee in releasing the hounds of crimminality on society...kind of some weird power thing and very perverse - what esle could it be...they are not stupid? Or are they?

[FTA Lawyer]

I really wish that more people would read the actual judgments before going off about how outrageous and out of touch judges are. And frankly, if you don't read them, then you are just like the non-voter who complains about the government...your opinion counts for nothing as far as I am concerned.

R. v. A.M. (School Search)

R. v. Kang-Brown (Bus Depot Search)

It is totally false to suggest that the Court in any way was saying it's okay to deal drugs in school or to transport drugs by bus.

What the Court did say is that police officers are not allowed to randomly accost people with dogs and then search their bags when they have no evidence whatsoever to even give them a suspicion that a criminal offence is taking place.

I accept the youth court judge’s finding of fact that this was a random speculative search. What was done here may have been seen by the police as an efficient use of their resources, and by the principal of the school as an efficient way to advance a zero tolerance policy. But these objectives were achieved at the expense of the privacy interest (and constitutional rights) of every student in the school, as the youth court judge and the Court of Appeal pointed out. The Charter weighs other values, including privacy, against an appetite for police efficiency. A hunch is not enough to warrant a search of citizens or their belongings by police dogs.

What people seem to forget is that to protect citizens from living in a police-state, we have to protect all citizens...even the ones doing bad things (it's an unavoidable side-effect).

I particularly like this quote from the school case:

Students are entitled to privacy even in a school environment (R. v. M. (M.R.), [1998] 3 S.C.R. 393, at para. 32). Entering a schoolyard does not amount to crossing the border of a foreign state. Students ought to be able to attend school without undue interference from the state, but subject, always, to normal school discipline.

FTA

[guyser]

It is totally false to suggest that the Court in any way was saying it's okay to deal drugs in school or to transport drugs by bus.

What the Court did say is that police officers are not allowed to randomly accost people with dogs and then search their bags when they have no evidence whatsoever to even give them a suspicion that a criminal offence is taking place.

What people seem to forget is that to protect citizens from living in a police-state, we have to protect all citizens...even the ones doing bad things (it's an unavoidable side-effect).

You said it better than I.

It seems some people do not want our collective rights upheld.

[Wilber]

It seems that in this case the police were responding to an invitation from the school.

FTA, if you think that kids are going to take anything from this other than the knowledge they can take what they want, where they want, as long as the wrong people don't see them, you are out of touch.

Would it be acceptable to you if students were searched for drugs or weapons before they entered school as long as they knew those were conditions of going to school. I would hope so because if not, no child has the right to go to a school free of drugs or weapons.

We have indeed become a society of FU I have rights and everything else is secondary. Why else would courts blatantly ignore criminal activity and it's victims in the name of some creeps rights?

[guyser]

It seems that in this case the police were responding to an invitation from the school.

Wilber , lets say you and your wife, the kids, grandkids, dogs are all sitting arund the dinner table enjoying a special occasion meal.

All of a sudden the police come in, usher you all into a tiny room, or separate some of you, and proceed to turn your house upside down. You are left in the room for an hour or so, and you can hear the furniture being tossed over, the drawers being dumped and so on.

I am your neighbour , I invited them. I thought I smelled a vinegar type smell.

What now ?

[Wilber]

Wilber , lets say you and your wife, the kids, grandkids, dogs are all sitting arund the dinner table enjoying a special occasion meal.

All of a sudden the police come in, usher you all into a tiny room, or separate some of you, and proceed to turn your house upside down. You are left in the room for an hour or so, and you can hear the furniture being tossed over, the drawers being dumped and so on.

I am your neighbour , I invited them. I thought I smelled a vinegar type smell.

What now ?

Now you are being ridiculous, we haven't been discussing anything like this. We are not talking about and individual's home but a public school. What about the right of all the students who attend the place to not be exposed to drug peddling or gun carrying creeps? You defend the rights of assholes but care nothing for the rights of the people who have to put up with them.

[guyser]

Now you are being ridiculous, we haven't been discussing anything like this. We are not talking about and individual's home but a public school. What about the right of all the students who attend the place to not be exposed to drug peddling or gun carrying creeps? You defend the rights of assholes but care nothing for the rights of the people who have to put up with them.

It is a bit over the top I grant you. But a public school is private property.

Students , anymore than you and I , do not have any right to be free of peddlars or gun carrying creeps. As for being on school property it is the teachers who must remain vigilant.

Unintended consequences . Assholes have rights too , the same as the kids . It is just that I want protection of all rights , yours mine and everyone elses.

You seem okay with denying rights based on some whim of yours. I, as does the SCC , do not agree. I hope your position is in the minority.

Would you really want a majority to agree with you?

There is a case that will go to court in the US. The police executed a no knock warrant based on a contractor who had been in the house to fix the furnace. He smelled a vinagery smell and when he left he called the cops. (meth will smell like vinegar when cooking)

Sadly the contractor did not realize the person had an aquarium. Thus the smell.

They kicked in the door at 6AM , handcuffed the middle age couple and proceeded to turn the house upside down. They found absolutely nothing.

You are of course okay with this being your house?

So, if you want to abrogate your rights.......because this can and does happen and is becoming more frequent.

Edited May 1, 2008 by guyser