Police 'carding'

[guyser]

Police officers have very strong unions and support compared to potential perps.

All true., And they defend cops who defy the Supreme Court as in this case.

Shouldnt happen but it does,

[adalinaabella]

Good point. The officers should have been disciplined. Then other cops would be more careful about harassing innocent kids.

Exactly, first they need tyo be disciplined there after, tought to others how to be in desciplined.

The main issue comes due to their shameless acts. :-/

[Donavann]

Well under the charter, of rights you have the right simply to walk easily. You can not be randomly stopped, and explored unless the police man has reasons to suspicious you are involved in the percentage of an offence.

Edited March 19, 2014 by Donavann

[Rue]

Well under the charter, of rights you have the right simply to walk easily. You can not be randomly stopped, and explored unless the police man has reasons to suspicious you are involved in the percentage of an offence.

That's an interesting way of phrasing it yes. Under the Charter it does have a section that in theory says you can't be stopped arbitrarily by the police and asked to identify yourself. Yes. Its also true the courts, particularly the Supreme Court of Canada have an obligation when interpreting the Charter to give it the widest possible application possible in any given situation.

That said that is theory. It may work to get some charges thrown out under criminal law. However, and I now come with the big HOWEVER, there is another practical reality and that is when the police are walking the beat, or have been given a tip from an informant, or know the streets and the players on that street who sell the drugs, pimp out the crack kids, engage in petting smash and grabs from cars to pay for their habit, might be known to the police as sex offenders, ie., convicted in the past for sex assault, rape, violent crimes, pedophile crimes, or are known to be in gangs, the police keep watch and part of their job is to make contact verbally with these people to let them know they are being watched.

You know I appreciate some of you care about the innocent and I get that, but also on the streets are people who are waiting to commit crimes or encourage others to. That is the reality of the streets. Having zero contact with such people because it might infringe on their rights is bad policing and this is precisely why in the last 6 months the criminal courts are now empty. well certainly a hell of a lot less busy especially Youth Court and this means the bad guys are getting away with a lot of things now.

Its a balancing act. By protecting the innocent which I understand, we have also made it easier for the bad guys to operate without fear of scrutiny.

Its the times we live in. You walk the street now there are all kinds of underage prostitutes on the streets now that were not there 6 months ago. Certain low level pimps and drug pushers are laughing as the police cars drive by.

Within a year or so the same people bitching about carding will be bitching about an increase in smash and grabs, break ins, drug pushers in their neighbourhood, etc.

Police have in the past always played a cat and mouse game on the street and the game of shake down. For the most part it worked.

if you were a young black man, yes you get stopped often for no reason other than being black and with more than another black person. Blacks in groups automatically got shaked down. Its true. Its racist profiling yes.

Did it work. Well the young black people being shaken down felt it unfair. The frightened citizens in their neighbourhood of the same colour did not see it as a bad thing. It all depends on your perspective.

In the past we depended on police shaking down known sex offenders walking in certain areas of the neighbourhood. We did not want them near schools, day care places, playgrounds, MacDonald's with the playrooms. Was it unfair. You bet. The police would ask them where they were going,w hy were they in the park, why they had a camera, etc. Sometimes they would find these offenders violating their terms of release by being in the wrong place and they may have stopped a predator from molesting a child.

I know cops using the shake down who would get run aways off the street before the pimps at the bus station on Dundas got to them.

I know cops who did not care and would not do this and others who did. Their shake downs kept an eye on the mentally ill and homeless two sets of people often the same who were vulnerable.

A godo cop intereacts on the street. He makes himself known. I am a huge proponent of beat walking, bicycles, cops on horses. I am a huge supporter of police on the streets physically being seen and interacting. I do not like police cars. They put a distance between the police and public and fuel this us against them perspective.

I have had the police shake me down when I was young. Totally unfair and totally uncalled for and that cop knew I was in trouble and told him what was going on and he helped which is one reason I got into law. I have sen bad ones, good ones, all kinds. All I am saying is shake downs or carding goes both ways. It could be a way to harass but it could also be active policing that helps cops get to know people and vice versa.

In the days of beat cops, that flat-foot knew everyone. You acted like a jack ass, he dealt with it. Might not have been by the books but it worked.

Do I condone breaking the law, no I am an officer of the court, I am not allowed and I am sworn to uphold it as police are. Do I condone violating people's rights or a police state, no. Do I think police should be able to ask you your name and where you live, yes.

Edited March 12, 2014 by Rue

[Michael Hardner]

However, and I now come with the big HOWEVER, there is another practical reality and that is when the police are walking the beat, or have been given a tip from an informant, or know the streets and the players on that street who sell the drugs, pimp out the crack kids, engage in petting smash and grabs from cars to pay for their habit, might be known to the police as sex offenders, ie., convicted in the past for sex assault, rape, violent crimes, pedophile crimes, or are known to be in gangs, the police keep watch and part of their job is to make contact verbally with these people to let them know they are being watched.

After reading that line, it makes me start to believe in mandatory 'sentencing'... heh heh...

[GostHacked]

Do I condone breaking the law, no I am an officer of the court, I am not allowed and I am sworn to uphold it as police are. Do I condone violating people's rights or a police state, no. Do I think police should be able to ask you your name and where you live, yes.

This should be a youtube video. Something not working right here.

Edited March 12, 2014 by GostHacked

[Michael Hardner]

Who is this person ? I need to know what qualifications they have, since without any qualifications, I don't know whether this is nonsense or something real. The risk is that we end up with in-person trolls vs online trolls.

[GostHacked]

Who is this person ? I need to know what qualifications they have, since without any qualifications, I don't know whether this is nonsense or something real. The risk is that we end up with in-person trolls vs online trolls.

One thing is to note the difference between types of police. Are they peace officers or law enforcers?

[Michael Hardner]

I just don't know where to put these ideas if they're from some random source.

[GostHacked]

I just don't know where to put these ideas if they're from some random source.

It's a meeting at Toronto City Hall. And if you don't know, try searching the answer for yourself instead of relying on someone possibly misleading you.

[Michael Hardner]

It's a meeting at Toronto City Hall. And if you don't know, try searching the answer for yourself instead of relying on someone possibly misleading you.

I have nothing to Google. "Random guy in Toronto" doesn't seem to be useful. I try to filter my information, so I waste less time that way.

[GostHacked]

I have nothing to Google. "Random guy in Toronto" doesn't seem to be useful. I try to filter my information, so I waste less time that way.

Don't search for the guy, instead search what he is talking about.

[Michael Hardner]

I ended up on this site:

http://www.detaxcanada.org/

Did you know Income Tax is illegal ? Also that crazy websites, like crazy people, are easily identified by how they stand out visually ?

[Michael Hardner]

More:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land

This fringe stuff is interesting, and if/when it comes to pass I'll be living elsewhere - Australia or New Zealand maybe.

[GostHacked]

More:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land

This fringe stuff is interesting, and if/when it comes to pass I'll be living elsewhere - Australia or New Zealand maybe.

Actually this 'Freeman on the Land' movement is present in NZ and Australia too.

[Rue]

How this person arbitrarily decided that police engage in maritime law (that is what we call it maritime law) is anyone's guess. I am thinking me may have water on his brain.

Criminal law is exclusively federal jurisdiction so its based on the Criminal Code enforced across Canada. If it was strictly common law we would have no code..

Common law refers to the system of case law precedent, no more, no less. It refers to the exercise of looking at the decisions of cases in similar fact situations to see how the particular statute or code was interpreted and where applicable borrow the reasoning from a previous decision to apply to the arguments in a present case or the reasoning used by the Judge. Its sometimes called star decisis or the case precedent system.

In Canada we use case precedent to see how the wording in statutes or codes has been interpreted but we are not strictly common law.We are in fact a mix of common and codified law.. To call criminal law common law is not accurate. For it to be common law it would solely defined by cases and there would be no code.

Civil law which refers to contract, tort, insurance law or private disputes between individuals somestimes is also used in another context to used describe the privste laws of Quebec derived from the Civil Code of Procedure of Quebec which originated in France with Napoleonic laws which come from Roman laws. Most of Europe uses this system of law where case decisions were used but the Judges mostly relied on their own reading of the Code. In this system of law Judges were trained separately from lawyers specifically to be Judges unlike in Britain. In Europe with this civil law, when its applied to common law, you are guilty until you can prove you are innocent.

When police engage in police enforcement in Quebec, Ontario, anywhere in Canada, they follow the Criminal Code and of course the Charter of Rights which supercedes the Criminal Code. Whether one is in Quebec or Ontario, we enforce the Criminal Code the same way and this the presumption of innocence and the exact same rules for evidence and procedure..

The Police Act in each province and the procedures they are used are in all intents and purposes the same.

Carding is a non legal term. Carding, or in fact what we really mean, asking someone for their identification or asking someone questions about what they are up to and that is not codified. If a defence lawyer raises a charter challenge to try throw out evidence obtained by a police officer as illegally obtained it might become an issue dependent on looking at at previous case son this matter since its not codified.

I has nothing to do with the Magna Carta act or Quebec Civil law and yes we know what common law is-it means simply relying on case law to help us understand how to apply the Charter to situations to determine if the police questioning was reasonable or obtained through coercion.

The repeat reference to "you guys" should have told you this individual was no expert witness. I suspect its one of our forum contributors. He sounds familiar.

Edited March 12, 2014 by Rue

[Michael Hardner]

Actually this 'Freeman on the Land' movement is present in NZ and Australia too.

I don't think it will ever go away.

[Michael Hardner]

The repeat reference to "you guys" should have told you this individual was no expert witness. I suspect its one of our forum contributors. He sounds familiar.

It's very refreshing to read something so lucid and logical. Thanks for posting this review of our nameless witness' assessment of our legal system.

[Rue]

It's very refreshing to read something so lucid and logical. Thanks for posting this review of our nameless witness' assessment of our legal system.

Well he spellz better n me no doubt.

[guyser]

Its the times we live in. You walk the street now there are all kinds of underage prostitutes on the streets now that were not there 6 months ago. Certain low level pimps and drug pushers are laughing as the police cars drive by.

Wow, 6 months ago we never had any of this huh?

Any overage hookers or are they all young?

In the past we depended on police shaking down known sex offenders walking in certain areas of the neighbourhood. We did not want them near schools, day care places, playgrounds, MacDonald's with the playrooms. Was it unfair. You bet. The police would ask them where they were going,w hy were they in the park, why they had a camera, etc. Sometimes they would find these offenders violating their terms of release by being in the wrong place and they may have stopped a predator from molesting a child.

Quite a funny term, no less coming from a Lionel Hutz guy, who frankly should....er I mean would know (if in fact had any Lawyer training) that the shake down is not occuring on known sex offenders.

Its called policing, insofar as the Cops have the right to stop those they know are sex offenders and can do check ups on them anytime anywhere.

And no the Cops wouldnt ask them those questions since all the places you listed would be verboten for any sex offender to be. They would be arrested.

But only Lionel Hutz would make that mistake.

Do I condone breaking the law, no I am an officer of the court, I am not allowed and I am sworn to uphold it as police are. Do I condone violating people's rights or a police state, no. Do I think police should be able to ask you your name and where you live, yes.

Isnt that wonderful, you say you are a lawyer, you say No to violating peoples rights, then immediately say yes to violating peoples rights.

Really need to find a better faux gig, this Lionel Hutz thing is exposing you...............bad !

Aint fooling anyone.

[Rue]

Guyser can you please respond to the issues and not make this about me personally or try insult my profession or my level of training. The personal attacks only deflect from the issues and lower the level of discourse. Thank you,

I believe that not all shake downs are evil or a violation of rights. You have misstated my position because it appears from your misstating what I actually said that you believe any shake down or carding is a violation of someone's rights. I do not. I think when used properly carding or shakedowns are good policing. I believe when used appropriately shakedowns or carding or pro-active questioning is one of many tools a good police officer uses to stay connected to his beat. No I do not believe police should stay in police cars and stare at you through the window and never talk to you.

I think criminology and sociology studies have shown when a cop gets out of his car and walks the street and pro-actively interacts with the people on the street it enhances trust in police and breaks down barriers of fear of police by bridging that distance through human contact,.

Have some police used excessive force in shaking people down, yes. Have other police used it as a way to get info on a new run away on the street, a new underage hooker, a pedophile in the wrong place violating probation, yes. Have police used it to shake down hookers and keep them or drug pushers or their pimps moving yes. Police use it to keep tabs on whether the homeless have proper shelter or are eating. They keep tabs on mentally ill people vulnerable to the weather and others. They stop women who look like they have been beaten or children out of school.

I believe the current black and white thinking about shakedowns and carding has enabled people who once had to look over their shoulder to now let their guard down and feel empowered to be doing things on the street they once did not. I believe you missed the point I made and that is that pimps and drug pushers, underage runaways and hookers, are now less likely to be given the message they had better watch what they are doing. Carding and shakedowns were an essential tool in containing street gangs and keeping them off competitor gang streets and keeping everyone under check.

You missed the point. Never once did I say hooking or drug pushing never existed. What I stated is that now the shakedown and carding is more restricted, police don't bother with it, and this means less interaction an the entrenching of a distance between the cop and the person on the street which then reinforces the us against them mentality.

Neighbourhood community organizations have stated time and time again that they want community policing and as part of that community policing getting police on the streets talking to people and asking them questions, coming to schools to talk, playing sports with the youth, engaging their communities in charity activities-and the police in all major cities know this is an important approach to policing. Beat cops, cops on bicycles and horses, cops in small stations in shopping malls, its all part of that approach. Its tryng to bring the police to the people.

Yes I want a police officer walking through a park and asking a man sitting with a camera in a children's park alone what he's up to.

Now this statement you made that police only stop pedophiles that have no records is bizarre. I have no idea what point you were trying to make but I can tell you this-I and many others want police walking the streets and keeping an eye on sex offenders out on day releases or on probation or any other criminals out on day release or probation. That is what they do and that was my point. I have no idea what your point was.

Police used to do that contrary to whatever it is you are getting at. Now they feel restricted from doing that,

Now I will repeat my position-no I do not think a police officer asking you your name and for some sort of identity card is violating your rights. If he goes on to violate your rights and obtain evidence illegally you have the right to argue in court he obtained the evidence illegally and throw out your charges.

I have no problems with a police officer asking me who I am, where I live. He's doing his job. You disagree with that then you ignore them but don't suggest to me I support them violating anyone's rights or make inferences I do not understand the law, etc. because I think asking me my name is o.k.

Edited March 15, 2014 by Rue

[GostHacked]

Now I will repeat my position-no I do not think a police officer asking you your name and for some sort of identity card is violating your rights. If he goes on to violate your rights and obtain evidence illegally you have the right to argue in court he obtained the evidence illegally and throw out your charges.

I have no problems with a police officer asking me who I am, where I live. He's doing his job. You disagree with that then you ignore them but don't suggest to me I support them violating anyone's rights or make inferences I do not understand the law, etc. because I think asking me my name is o.k.

Papers please.

[guyser]

Guyser can you please respond to the issues and not make this about me personally or try insult my profession or my level of training. The personal attacks only deflect from the issues and lower the level of discourse. Thank you,

Well, to be honest I was insulted that someone wrote such tripe. It brings the discourse down.

I believe that not all shake downs are evil or a violation of rights. You have misstated my position because it appears from your misstating what I actually said that you believe any shake down or carding is a violation of someone's rights. I do not. I think when used properly carding or shakedowns are good policing. I believe when used appropriately shakedowns or carding or pro-active questioning is one of many tools a good police officer uses to stay connected to his beat. No I do not believe police should stay in police cars and stare at you through the window and never talk to you.

The word 'shakedown' means to get thru extortion or threat, so applied to any person walking the street minding their own business then it is evil and a violation of their rights.

Surely a lawyer would know that much.

So much for misstating anything. Own your words.

I think criminology and sociology studies have shown when a cop gets out of his car and walks the street and pro-actively interacts with the people on the street it enhances trust in police and breaks down barriers of fear of police by bridging that distance through human contact,.

You are probably right.

But wait, they ( and you) apparently like using shakedowns so that trust has now gone.

Have some police used excessive force in shaking people down, yes. Have other police used it as a way to get info on a new run away on the street, a new underage hooker, a pedophile in the wrong place violating probation, yes. Have police used it to shake down hookers and keep them or drug pushers or their pimps moving yes. Police use it to keep tabs on whether the homeless have proper shelter or are eating. They keep tabs on mentally ill people vulnerable to the weather and others. They stop women who look like they have been beaten or children out of school.

Ahh...the old emotional one sided angle. They only (the Cops) use it for altruistic reasons. How quaint.

But they also use it for shaking down innocent people out doing nothing wrong. There goes that trust shite again, but then most police as a whole now realize that almost no one likes them , nor respects them , and they do fear them since we now know that cops will lie and the the thin blue line is something to be feared.

I believe you missed the point I made and that is that pimps and drug pushers, underage runaways and hookers, are now less likely to be given the message they had better watch what they are doing. Carding and shakedowns were an essential tool in containing street gangs and keeping them off competitor gang streets and keeping everyone under check.

You said in the last 6 months this stuff has exploded. You opine this happened because of carding ....LOL...yea sure! Crimes dropping, so you best post a cite that shows this conclusion of yours.

You missed the point. Never once did I say hooking or drug pushing never existed. What I stated is that now the shakedown and carding is more restricted, police don't bother with it, and this means less interaction an the entrenching of a distance between the cop and the person on the street which then reinforces the us against them mentality.

No missed point at all.

Apparently (and in your words) the last six months things have exploded. Why? No reason given .

Neighbourhood community organizations have stated time and time again that they want community policing and as part of that community policing getting police on the streets talking to people and asking them questions, coming to schools to talk, playing sports with the youth, engaging their communities in charity activities-and the police in all major cities know this is an important approach to policing. Beat cops, cops on bicycles and horses, cops in small stations in shopping malls, its all part of that approach. Its tryng to bring the police to the people.

I doubt anyone would not agree with this.

Yes I want a police officer walking through a park and asking a man sitting with a camera in a children's park alone what he's up to.

Ok

He'll answer none of your business and the cops best keep on moving.

Now this statement you made that police only stop pedophiles that have no records is bizarre.

Huh?

Read your own words. You said 'In the past we depended on police shaking down known sex offenders walking in certain areas of the neighbourhood. We did not want them near schools, day care places, playgrounds, MacDonald's with the playrooms. Was it unfair. You bet. The police would ask them where they were going,w hy were they in the park, why they had a camera, etc. Sometimes they would find these offenders violating their terms of release by being in the wrong place and they may have stopped a predator from molesting a child.'

Police have every right to stop known sex offenders, they are on parole. Ergo they cannot be anywhere near those places as you should be aware as a lawyer, but perhaps not.

I have no idea what point you were trying to make but I can tell you this-I and many others want police walking the streets and keeping an eye on sex offenders out on day releases or on probation or any other criminals out on day release or probation. That is what they do and that was my point. I have no idea what your point was.

Im afraid you dont know what point you were trying to make. You flipped flopped so much its hard to keep track.

Now I will repeat my position-no I do not think a police officer asking you your name and for some sort of identity card is violating your rights.

And this is why deragotry names get dropped on you.

A lawyer would know that Sec 8 is illegal. Apparently...again....you claim no knowledge of same. How come? You are a lawyer....right?

I have no problems with a police officer asking me who I am, where I live. He's doing his job. You disagree with that then you ignore them but don't suggest to me I support them violating anyone's rights or make inferences I do not understand the law, etc. because I think asking me my name is o.k.

You support people having to show ID cards. No doubt about that.

Ghosthacked put it into succinct no misunderstood words...Papers please.

You support illegal activity. As a lawyer too !

Not my problem, its yours.

Edited March 17, 2014 by Guyser2

[GostHacked]

Here is an example of 'papers please'. This is in Tennessee, but these types of actions are being done by police in many 'free' countries, including Canada.

These guys at CopBlock have been doing some really good videos.

[Wilber]

Jeez GostHacked, you don't think someone who is driving a car should need to show they have a license to drive one? Why get one at all? Whenever I got ramped by the feds and asked to show my pilots license, you think I should tell them to go to hell, I don't need to show them no damn license, fire up the aircraft and bugger off? Keep that in mind the next time you get on an aircraft or ship. They guys running it might just be exercising their rights.

Edited March 28, 2014 by Wilber