RCMP order plane towing a banner criticizing Harper to land

[cybercoma]

I think I have to disagree cc.

You don't legally have to show ID to police unless you're being charged.

You can walk away.

A kid in Scarborough did that.

Cops beat him up.

Case is in court.

It should clarify, but the kid (walking while black) knew the law and knew he could legally walk away.

If they have no grounds for charges, who you are is not their business.

You're just a taxpayer paying them to protect your rights.

And on topic ... the RCMP had no legal justification for grounding the plane, but he complied with their request.

You can disagree all you want, but I'm telling you that you're obligated to identify yourself to the police when asked. You're allowed to leave freely if they haven't charged you, but you must identify yourself to them.

Edited September 7, 2012 by cybercoma

[blueblood]

you're sounding like bambino and his constitutional can's and can not's....it's all bull shitte...in the real world they do whatever they like...

I've lost count how times I was pulled over for absolutely no reason, none, nada, zip...inquires why and the response varied from a shrug to shut up and show me your DL, any protest resulted in immediate threats of arrest and trip to the station for an overnight stay or if it's a friday night that meant monday morning release...now you can shout all you want they can not do it but they can and do, any reprimand they receive is minimal followed by a generic apology but you're out a day or two in the slammer(and if you're lucky you won't come out with any bruises)...that's the way it is in the real world.... :angry:

In SK they can check for DL, the TSA is very clear in the parameters police can perform a stop. It sucks, but its in the law and I haven't seen case law that put the brakes on that. What's the problem with showing the ID if asked, you show it your back on your way. That threat you showed is hilarious. Its only arrest able if you don't have a licence on the system or if your even stupider and don't provide your name if your not carrying. Not showing name and ID in an investigation is flirting with an obstruction charge which could mean handcuffs. However a remand for an obstruction charge would only work if buddy has warrants out (a big reason why they ask for ID) for his arrest and there was a concern for public safety.

If you are too braindead to provide a DL or if your not carrying a DL at least your name and DOB, you deserve to be lead away in cuffs or fined.

[blueblood]

You can disagree all you want, but I'm telling you that you're obligated to identify yourself to the police when asked. You're allowed to leave freely if they haven't charged you, but you must identify yourself to them.

Only in an investigation. IF your walking down the street and a P.O. arbitrarily asks for your name you can tell them to pound sand.

[WWWTT]

Only in an investigation. IF your walking down the street and a P.O. arbitrarily asks for your name you can tell them to pound sand.

I think this is false.

Name,DOB and address must be honestly given when asked.

It is the law in Canada to carry ID,but NOT the law to show it!

This is because on any photo ID there is also other information that the police do not have the right to see.Such as a drivers license,passport number or SIN.

WWWTT

[GostHacked]

In SK they can check for DL, the TSA is very clear in the parameters police can perform a stop. It sucks, but its in the law and I haven't seen case law that put the brakes on that. What's the problem with showing the ID if asked, you show it your back on your way. That threat you showed is hilarious. Its only arrest able if you don't have a licence on the system or if your even stupider and don't provide your name if your not carrying. Not showing name and ID in an investigation is flirting with an obstruction charge which could mean handcuffs. However a remand for an obstruction charge would only work if buddy has warrants out (a big reason why they ask for ID) for his arrest and there was a concern for public safety.

If you are too braindead to provide a DL or if your not carrying a DL at least your name and DOB, you deserve to be lead away in cuffs or fined.

When out for a short walk I leave my wallet at home. And you are ok with dragging people off to jail for simply refusing/failing to provide identification? Hope you have your papers on you at all times. Also you should get a drivers license to operate farm equipment on your own property.

[guyser]

I think this is false.

Name,DOB and address must be honestly given when asked.

http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/community/newcomer/guides/tps_guide_eng.pdf

DO I HAVE TO ANSWER THE OFFICER’S QUESTIONS OR

IDENTIFY MYSELF?

In general, you are under no obligation to identify yourself to a police

officer

[WWWTT]

http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/community/newcomer/guides/tps_guide_eng.pdf

Looks like according to your link you do not have to.

I thought Canadians had to when asked by an officer in public.I wonder if this is the cops protocol or actual law?

Thanks for providing the link by the way.

WWWTT

[wyly]

In SK they can check for DL, the TSA is very clear in the parameters police can perform a stop. It sucks, but its in the law and I haven't seen case law that put the brakes on that. What's the problem with showing the ID if asked, you show it your back on your way. That threat you showed is hilarious. Its only arrest able if you don't have a licence on the system or if your even stupider and don't provide your name if your not carrying. Not showing name and ID in an investigation is flirting with an obstruction charge which could mean handcuffs. However a remand for an obstruction charge would only work if buddy has warrants out (a big reason why they ask for ID) for his arrest and there was a concern for public safety.

If you are too braindead to provide a DL or if your not carrying a DL at least your name and DOB, you deserve to be lead away in cuffs or fined.

section 9 charter of rights -9. Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned.... "a detention in the absence of at least reasonable suspicion is unlawful and therefore arbitrary within s. 9"...

The police have a common law right to detain people for investigative purposes. The investigation must be based on a "reasonable suspicion that the particular individual is implicated in the criminal activity under investigation" for it to be considered lawful...walking down the street is not a reasonable suspicion...

only one of my encounters were part of any investigation and I had no issue producing ID, the rest of the instances were bored cops on a power trip looking for something to do...

Edited September 8, 2012 by wyly

[guyser]

Looks like according to your link you do not have to.

I thought Canadians had to when asked by an officer in public.I wonder if this is the cops protocol or actual law?

Thanks for providing the link by the way.

WWWTT

No probs.

Cops can ask, and they are taught to ask with force, but smile and walk away. They have no right to detain you unless they suspect something.

[blueblood]

section 9 charter of rights -9. Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned.... "a detention in the absence of at least reasonable suspicion is unlawful and therefore arbitrary within s. 9"...

The police have a common law right to detain people for investigative purposes. The investigation must be based on a "reasonable suspicion that the particular individual is implicated in the criminal activity under investigation" for it to be considered lawful...walking down the street is not a reasonable suspicion...

only one of my encounters were part of any investigation and I had no issue producing ID, the rest of the instances were bored cops on a power trip looking for something to do...

Your 100% right if your walking and there is no investigation going on.

If your in Tim hortons and nothing is going on and p.o. Doesn't know you from a hole in the ground, don't have to reveal identity.

[jacee]

No probs.

Cops can ask, and they are taught to ask with force, but smile and walk away. They have no right to detain you unless they suspect something.

Thanks for clarifying this guyser.

Protesters, people of colour and youth are routinely harassed for ID in an intimidating manner. It's important for people to know their rights.

Illegal but nonetheless ... police 'contact' lists - people they've harassed for ID - do figure in their future decisions and you may well find yourself arrested without reason. Jail and lawyer fees are no fun even if you are vindicated, so it's best to avoid showing your ID when you are not personally under suspicion.

Edited September 8, 2012 by jacee

[blueblood]

When out for a short walk I leave my wallet at home. And you are ok with dragging people off to jail for simply refusing/failing to provide identification? Hope you have your papers on you at all times. Also you should get a drivers license to operate farm equipment on your own property.

If you read the TSA operating farm equipment is exempt from needing a licence.

I clearly stated that going out for a walk doesnt require you to carry I.d. If it's an investigation going on it would beehoove you to produce I.d. Or if you don't have one your real name and DOB otherwise your flirting with obstruction.

[blueblood]

Thanks for clarifying this guyser.

Protesters, people of colour and youth are routinely harassed for ID in an intimidating manner. It's important for people to know their rights.

Illegal but nonetheless ... police 'contact' lists - people they've harassed for ID - do figure in their future decisions and you may well find yourself arrested without reason. Jail and lawyer fees are no fun even if you are vindicated.

Jacee have you read the criminal code?

If the law were enforced as per the criminal code the jails would be fuller than they are now and there would be a need for double the amount Of police.

[bleeding heart]

That's right, and soon enough simply being with-held for suspicion of dissidence instead of being tortured for it will seem lenient and coddlesome.

Yeah, those damn Hug-a-Dissident leftists don't care about the Government victims.

[bleeding heart]

They pulled the plane out of the air because of separate complaints of a plane potentially in restricted airspace. They are doing their jobs as investigators.

And because they claimed to be concerned about "hate speech."

A very separate matter...but it's their claim, not mine.

Nor yours, since you are avoiding the topic of one of the reasons they gave for the incident.

Is it your view that they are liars, desperately searching for an excuse, or both?

Edited September 8, 2012 by bleeding heart