Knock Knock guess who?

[shortlived]

Sorry, it is not a violation of anyones rights.

Should this come to fruition, it would amount to an agent of the govt knocking on the door to check, if someone opens the door then no violation occurs.

The same way the cops can come in your house if you open the door and invite them in, and same with consenting car drivers make when asked to have the car searched. The law states that 'plain view' evidence means a cop or other authority can do a search and seizure without warrant. Think cops, MNR police when looking for hunters and their game while travelling on a road. They can pull you over and search the vehicle at anytime...no warrant needed.

Go ahead and put the sign up, but case law shows some people do not need to heed that warning, including the general public who may trespass.

Plenty of authority figures can come onto private property for various reasons.

Yes when the law give them that authority in contrast to the criminal code.

You have something like - fire inspectors, police with search warrants, or beleif of a crime occuring.

If you have utilities they may be able to go on property for servicing issues, although even they are suppose to give prior notice.

However if you don't have utilities then no

there is no one else within civil law that can.

So you are quite mistaken if anyone goes on your property without a warrant (or fire inspection or utility repair with notice, except in emergency response) you can arrest them for trespass if a prohibition notice either in writing or posting is done.

It is called trespass and government employees don't have a passcard. They need a court order(warrant) or a state of emergency on your property or relating to your property to do so. Even the hours of warrants are limited and in general cannot be so early or so late as to cause a disturbance.

If anyone tries to gain access to your property grounds refuse and tell them to leave if you don't want them there, if they do not oblige either arrest them, or if you feel unable to arrest them call the cops and inform them of an intruder to your property who has refused to leave the premisis.

Edited February 23, 2013 by shortlived

[michelpaulanderson.ndp]

EI is an insurance policy not a bank account. Some policing has to be done to minimize corruption.

I agree that some policing against fraud is necessary. I believe that the big deal here is due to the dramatic shift in policing. People just weren't and aren't ready for a government official to come-a-knockin' to ask if you've applied for a job in the last 24hrs. I think a more practical approach to policing the EI system could start at the application stage and not once Service Canada is already giving out the money. Perhaps if Service Canada had a better mechanism in place to identify potentially fraudulent claims there wouldn't need to be secondary policing (or door-to-door government agent interviews).

I don't believe the government has done a good enough job labelling whom they deem to be EI offenders. What about contract teachers? They surely aren't abusing the EI system. Unlike a tenured teacher contract teachers do not get paid over the summer break. They are fully trained and educated int he teaching profession and are thus quite likely to acquire another teaching contract the following year (maybe even a tenured position). Should a contract teacher find another job between July and August? I don't know many employers that will hire someone for 6 weeks.

[jacee]

So we are back at this? How is there anything even remotely fair about many people paying in to a benefit they will likely never see only to have few people use said benefit year after year?

If you're lucky enough to be healthy, you don't use your health insurance as much as someone with multiple health problems. That's how insurance programs work.

They're there if you need them.

[jacee]

If anyone tries to gain access to your property grounds refuse and tell them to leave if you don't want them there, if they do not oblige either arrest them, or if you feel unable to arrest them call the cops and inform them of an intruder to your property who has refused to leave the premisis.

You could try that, but they'll likely cut off your ei.

Nobody says you have to be home when they come calling, nor do you have to invite them in.

Edited February 23, 2013 by jacee

[Muddy]

From what I understand is EI is an insurance to temporarily hold one over till you can find another job. It used to be that people would come into my business looking to have a paper signed that they were looking for work. When ever I suggested I had a job available they were no longer interested in my signing their EI job search paper. Wonder why they stopped coming around ? They always seemed disheveled and it was always in the afternoon.

I have a suggestions for those who really want a job. Decide where you want to work and who is looking for help in the field you want. With resume in hand be at the place of business before it opens all spiffy and good manners in tow. If you don`t get in ,go back the next day. An employer appreciates moxey and someone willing to get out of bed in the morning and appear bright eyed and bushy tailed. Thats just some free advice for those truely seeking work.

Yes,people pay into EI and then have a feeling of intitlement to collect. I understand that ,but those who do not try and get off EI by seeking work are the ones responsible for EI going up to everyone who is working. Honesty and integrity is being left behind in this discussion. I worked for fifty five years. I had various careers. Never was out of work unless I wanted to be. Never collected EI. To damn proud !

Young folks have to ask themselves a few questions if they can`t find a job. Do you wake up at 2 or 3 in the afternoon ? Has nobody knocked on your door offering you work ? Are you addicted to soap operas ? Are you still living at home ? Do you have a great social life in the darkness of night ? Every Night ! If you answer yes to any of those questions you are not likely to find a job any time soon.

There are no bad jobs. I am retired now and I don`t need money ,but I have been thinking about getting a job flipping burgers just for the fun and experience of meeting new people and being a productive member of society once again. Of course I would not take a job that would conflict with my volunteer work.

[guyser]

Yes when the law give them that authority in contrast to the criminal code.

You have something like - fire inspectors, police with search warrants, or beleif of a crime occuring.

If you have utilities they may be able to go on property for servicing issues, although even they are suppose to give prior notice.

However if you don't have utilities then no

there is no one else within civil law that can.

So you are quite mistaken if anyone goes on your property without a warrant (or fire inspection or utility repair with notice, except in emergency response) you can arrest them for trespass if a prohibition notice either in writing or posting is done.

It is called trespass and government employees don't have a passcard. They need a court order(warrant) or a state of emergency on your property or relating to your property to do so. Even the hours of warrants are limited and in general cannot be so early or so late as to cause a disturbance.

If anyone tries to gain access to your property grounds refuse and tell them to leave if you don't want them there, if they do not oblige either arrest them, or if you feel unable to arrest them call the cops and inform them of an intruder to your property who has refused to leave the premisis.

You need to do some research if you think your interpretation of trespass would fly in court.

Lots of agencies and utilities can and do access property without warrants/appts.

And trespass laws are such that catching one person the first time would result in nothing more than a warning from police, and you could very well be in trouble for trying to arrest then for same.

Hell, you may wake up one day and find a mining company working on your land and there'd not be a damn thing you could do.

[Peanutbutter]

Hell, you may wake up one day and find a mining company working on your land and there'd not be a damn thing you could do.

That's why buying property in this country is a silly if not stupid thing to do. You have zero property rights here in Canada. The government or any company can do whatever it wants on your property and you cannot stop them. If you do try to stop them you'll be arrested. it's backwards but that's our Canada. That's what they don't tell you at the mortgage office.

[Michael Hardner]

That's why buying property in this country is a silly if not stupid thing to do. You have zero property rights here in Canada.

This is complete hyperbole. How is the situation you're describing different between Canada and the US ?

[guyser]

This is complete hyperbole. How is the situation you're describing different between Canada and the US ?

Not to mention completely wrong.

[Peanutbutter]

This is complete hyperbole. How is the situation you're describing different between Canada and the US ?

I don't think so. The government can come onto your property anytime it wishes to to drill for oil or set up a mine or build a sidewalk or widen a road and their's nothing you can do about it. What property rights do we have in Canada if we cannot stop trespassers from entering ones own property?

I'm only stating my opinion here, I'm sorry if I upset you Michael.

[michelpaulanderson.ndp]

I don't think so. The government can come onto your property anytime it wishes to to drill for oil or set up a mine or build a sidewalk or widen a road and their's nothing you can do about it. What property rights do we have in Canada if we cannot stop trespassers from entering ones own property?

I'm only stating my opinion here, I'm sorry if I upset you Michael.

You're opinion is wrong. The government cannot simply dig up your sidewalk to check for oil reservers nor can they dig up your lawn to put in a sidewalk! I'd like to know how you came to believe this.

[guyser]

You're opinion is wrong. The government cannot simply dig up your sidewalk to check for oil reservers nor can they dig up your lawn to put in a sidewalk! I'd like to know how you came to believe this.

Pretty sure they can do that, of course with notice etc, because of the 33 (some places 40) foot from crown of road is the muni's to do with it what they want.(like cut trees, trim bushes, put in sidewalks)

[Peanutbutter]

You're opinion is wrong. The government cannot simply dig up your sidewalk to check for oil reservers nor can they dig up your lawn to put in a sidewalk! I'd like to know how you came to believe this.

Yes it's quite true.

[guyser]

What property rights do we have in Canada if we cannot stop trespassers from entering ones own property?

Put up a fence, put signs up with no tresspassing on them, and after once warning tresspassers have them arrested next time !

[guyser]

Yes it's quite true.

Have a link for us to verify?

[Peanutbutter]

U can do nothing to stop them from putting in sidewalks or.widening roads. Nothing at all.

[guyser]

U can do nothing to stop them from putting in sidewalks or.widening roads. Nothing at all.

Who's arguing with you?

You dont own that property anyway. Geez....I guess no cite once again?

[Topaz]

If you live out in rural Ontario and if you put a auto with a sign for sale on the front part of your property, you can get a fine from the county or municipality you live in. The MTO owns rights of 6-8 feet on both sides and I think its the same in the towns and cities , where the government owns so much of the front of one's property.

[Peanutbutter]

Ur trying to argue against me for some reason. They can tear up ur front lawn. Park heavy machinery on it and nothing u can do. So much for property rights eh?

Edited February 25, 2013 by Peanutbutter

[guyser]

Ur trying to argue against me for some reason. They can tear up ur front lawn. Park heavy machinery on it and nothing u can do. So much for property rights eh?

Wrong...once again.

If you are correct, please provide a cite. Thanks in advance

[Peanutbutter]

Wrong...once again.

If you are correct, please provid

e a cite. Thanks in advance

U cannot stop them from putting in sidewalks or widening roads onto ur property. Nothing.

[shortlived]

You need to do some research if you think your interpretation of trespass would fly in court.

Lots of agencies and utilities can and do access property without warrants/appts.

And trespass laws are such that catching one person the first time would result in nothing more than a warning from police, and you could very well be in trouble for trying to arrest then for same.

Hell, you may wake up one day and find a mining company working on your land and there'd not be a damn thing you could do.

No they can't if a prohibition notice is given read the TPA act ontario.

Very few can without notice and/or permission, and that is generally reserved to only emergency situations, or in the case of utilities repair work. Government agents just can't walk onto your property to ask question for investigation if there is a tresspass prohibition notice prohibiting them access to your property.

You may like to think they can, but legally they can't. You can arrest them if they enter your property and refuse to leave on your notice.

Government agents don't have legal immunity for asking questions and any ingorance to that is just representative of green and blue wall corruption that destroys society.

Entry to question someone requires a warrant, and they in the event of police questioning have right to counsel, and do not have to say anything.

Trespass is illegal. In order to enter a property to investigate you need a warrant, in the event of a tresspass notice in form of a sign, spoken or written communication, including a trespass prohibition notice given in advance of attempted entry to the government.

You are being stupid.

An emergency is not the same as investigation.

police officer, or the occupier of premises, or a person authorized by

the occupier may arrest without warrant any person he or she believes on

reasonable and probable grounds to be on the premises in contravention

of section 2. R.S.O. 1990, c. T.21, s. 9 (1).

Trespass an offence

2. (1) Every person who is not acting under a right or authority conferred by law and who,

(a) without the express permission of the occupier, the proof of which rests on the defendant,

(i) enters on premises when entry is prohibited under this Act, or

(ii) engages in an activity on premises when the activity is prohibited under this Act; or

( does not leave the premises immediately after he

or she is directed to do so by the occupier of the premises or a person

authorized by the occupier,

is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $2,000. R.S.O. 1990, c. T.21, s. 2 (1).\

The only laws are in regard to emergency situations for police and firefighters, ---- inspection WITH NOTICE by fire marshals---- and possibly some bylaws from place to place. it requires a warrant, to investigate a property that a trespass notice exists for. It is trespass otherwise, as well as a violation of unreasonable search

A police officer, believing a crime to be in progress may enter a property to stop the commission of an offence, a citizen may enter a property if an indictable offense is being committed to make an arrest. (however the issue still remains that the individuals may still be liable to charges, much like a police officer, if they arn't right or use force based on unreasonable grounds)

Edited February 25, 2013 by shortlived

[guyser]

You are being stupid

Really?

But you posted material that agrees with me, So really......who is the stupid one? Too funny, but thanks, been a long day.

Here it is......the part where you agree with me....

Every person who is not acting under a right or authority conferred by law and who,

(a) without the express permission of the occupier, the proof of which rests on the defendant,

(i) enters on premises when entry is prohibited under this Act, or

(ii) engages in an activity on premises when the activity is prohibited under this Act; or

( does not leave the premises immediately after he
or she is directed to do so by the occupier of the premises or a person
authorized by the occupier,

In other words, you wont get away with just arresting them.

You have a nice day now ...k ?

[shortlived]

Really?

But you posted material that agrees with me, So really......who is the stupid one? Too funny, but thanks, been a long day.

Here it is......the part where you agree with me....

In other words, you wont get away with just arresting them.

You have a nice day now ...k ?

No, a prohibition notice in advance is sufficient, you don't need to double tell them, the telling them to leave part is only in the event of a prohibition notice not being given in advance.

NOTICE THE OR?? NOT AND..

if you are given notice by the owner of a property not to go on the property and you do you can be arrested, like I said you are just being stupid. This doesn't have to be before, it can be in the form of a no trespass sign or a letter given 20 years in advance,

Edited February 25, 2013 by shortlived

[guyser]

Ok, english is a problem for you but thats ok.

Anyhow, trespass law is funny that way, and the authorities recognize it as such. If one claims no sign was seen or was not posted where they entered, then nothing can be done to them other than to be made to leave the property.

Been through it before.

Anyhow, you can keep on deluding yourself that anyone, anywhere on any property with even just one No Trespass sign is fair game to be arrested.

I suggest you give it a try!

if you are given notice by the owner of a property not to go on the property and you do you can be arrested, like I said you are just being stupid.

ahhh.....I see you are now argreeing with me.

Well done ol' chap !

Edited February 25, 2013 by guyser