: Wierdness in Ontario


kps
Nov 14th, 2011, 10:53 PM
Surprised our conspicuously absent Mayor didn't post this:

Echos of "I'll be back" LOL

TheRecord - Crash at police HQ ?targeted? (http://www.therecord.com/news/local/article/624343--crash-at-police-hq-targeted)

Wonder what "architectural" modifications they'll be making...hope it's not anything like what the idiot councillors in Clarington are proposing:

DurhamRegion Article: Clarington residents prohibited from turning homes into 'fortresses' (http://www.durhamregion.com/feature/article/1241947--clarington-residents-prohibited-from-turning-homes-into-fortresses)

Pretty good eh? Can't protect your home and you have to give up your rights on top of it. Might as well just leave your door wide open for the thieves, cops and by-law officers. :lmao:

Lichen Software
Nov 15th, 2011, 07:48 AM
It would appear that your home is not your castle. I would think if one had deep pockets, one could challenge it on constitutional grounds around issues of security of person.

I am sitting in a subdivision home here in Barrie and (a) I have often thought that in times of trouble it would be totally undefndable and (b) that with one particular neighbor, I would dearly love survelliance.

There are two schools in the immediate area. In both cases the landscaping is designed specifically to prohibit people driving into the building with a roundabout on one and large rock barriers on the other. I bet there are similar installations on schools or sensitive commercial buildings in Clarrington. We also have a BMO data centre that I would think is pretty well ram proof with berms, concrete barriers and security fencing.

kps
Nov 15th, 2011, 10:11 AM
The "Castle Doctrine" rooted in the 900 year old English Common Law does exist in Canada as well as the US and many other countries, but in many cases it's severely crippled by amendments and localised regulations.

Finally things are looking up in this country and judges are accepting self defence of person and property as something that is a right of the citizen.

In reaching this conclusion, the judges cited a prior case in British Columbia in which the judge had declared that, when under attack in your own home, you may stand your ground and fight because "one's home is already one's last line of defence against an assailant." Exactly right.

Turning a home into a castle (http://www.financialpost.com/todays-paper/Turning+home+into+castle/5411312/story.html)

So how can a local municipal council infringe on your common law and charter rights and be in a legal position? I don't think it can, but they have your tax dollars at their disposal to fight you in the courts, while you dont.

wonderings
Nov 15th, 2011, 11:08 AM
The "Castle Doctrine" rooted in the 900 year old English Common Law does exist in Canada as well as the US and many other countries, but in many cases it's severely crippled by amendments and localised regulations.

Finally things are looking up in this country and judges are accepting self defence of person and property as something that is a right of the citizen.



Turning a home into a castle (http://www.financialpost.com/todays-paper/Turning+home+into+castle/5411312/story.html)

So how can a local municipal council infringe on your common law and charter rights and be in a legal position? I don't think it can, but they have your tax dollars at their disposal to fight you in the courts, while you dont.

I think I heard somewhere that it was put in place to try and combat groups like the Hells Angels with there clubs houses. I don't agree with it, and it seems to be a common thing in Ontario to put up laws based on small isolated things.

Kosh
Nov 15th, 2011, 01:05 PM
Yeah, it sounds like the bylaw was written up with the Hell's Angels in mind. Banning landmines, electric fences, and observation towers may make sense (although I can see the councillors concern about observation towers - they could be valid). But it does seem to go too far in certain circumstances. Window bars, electronic surveillance, and steel plates for doors seem to be reasonable security measures that any house owner should have the option to have.

Macfury
Nov 15th, 2011, 03:19 PM
Honestly, I don't even agree with preventing the Hell's Angels from doing it. Innocent until proven guilty. The club is not illegal.

Kosh
Nov 15th, 2011, 04:13 PM
I guess bomb shelters and panic rooms would be out as well, as they are typically built to withstand impact from a handheld ram if not a vehicle ram. Or even a walk-in safe.

kps
Nov 15th, 2011, 05:58 PM
Hmmmm, the good old Hell's Angels conveniently used to erode your rights, freedoms and security. And most of the sheeple just nod their heads like those little figures you put on the dash of your car and sing well that's ok, that sounds reasonable. Yes we do want to be reasonable, yadda, yadda, yadda, blah, blah, blah... Reasonable to the point of giving up most of your rights?

So the cops want an easy job of it and feel safe dealing with perhaps the one and only HA clubhouse in an 100sq mile area while striping thousands of law abiding citizens of their security and possibly even charter rights by passing by-laws which help no one yet empowers by-law enforcement officers who wouldn't dare approach a Hell's Angeles clubhouse for fear of their lives, harass every law abiding citizen who installs video surveillance or a window barrier in a young child's bedroom.

Do you think the Hell's Angeles give a rat's ass about by-laws? They have resources to fight this for years, but guess who doesn't....yup, that's right...you.

...and if you think I'm worthy of a tin foil hat and a conspiracy theory badge....I've seen this already in the firearms community. That's how Alan Rock got C68 through...all with: "ah come on guys be reasonable"....:rolleyes:

One last reminder:;):lmao:
*
*

kps
Nov 16th, 2011, 01:21 AM
You guys are no fun at all....:D

SINC
Nov 16th, 2011, 04:48 AM
You guys are no fun at all....:D

It's pretty tough to dispute the truth kps! ;)

wonderings
Nov 16th, 2011, 11:01 AM
So the cops want an easy job of it and feel safe dealing with perhaps the one and only HA clubhouse in an 100sq mile area while striping thousands of law abiding citizens of their security and possibly even charter rights by passing by-laws which help no one yet empowers by-law enforcement officers who wouldn't dare approach a Hell's Angeles clubhouse for fear of their lives, harass every law abiding citizen who installs video surveillance or a window barrier in a young child's bedroom.

*

I agree with your post, though the police are not the ones who make the laws and strip them away from us. They just enforce.

Easy to take our freedoms, almost impossible to get them back.

FeXL
Nov 16th, 2011, 11:16 AM
I agree with your post, though the police are not the ones who make the laws and strip them away from us. They just enforce.

I'd disagree with you on this.

They can present a significant lobbying force. In recent memory are police chiefs endorsing the long gun registry.

kps
Nov 16th, 2011, 10:23 PM
I agree with your post, though the police are not the ones who make the laws and strip them away from us. They just enforce.

Easy to take our freedoms, almost impossible to get them back.

FeXL's is right, this was passed at the request of the Durham police.

Quoted from the second paragraph of the article:

Clarington council passed the fortification bylaw at the request of Durham Regional Police.

The biggie is this...no warrant needed and you can't stop them.

Furthermore, the bylaw allows any police officer or municipal enforcement member to enter onto any property in Clarington at any "reasonable" time to check for compliance. In such instances, residents are prohibited from restricting access onto their properties.

...and if you think that's taking your rights to the trash, how about this:

If residents are found to be in violation of the bylaw, they will be asked to comply by a specified date. If a property owner does not comply by the specified date, municipal staff may have the work done, at the expense of the owner. If work is undertaken by municipal staff, the cost of the work plus a 25-per cent administration fee will be added to the owner's property taxes for that year. Further, anyone who does not comply with the bylaw may be charged and fined under the Provincial Offences Act.

And the sheeple just take it...

wonderings
Nov 17th, 2011, 09:14 AM
I'd disagree with you on this.

They can present a significant lobbying force. In recent memory are police chiefs endorsing the long gun registry.

I stand corrected.

Kosh
Nov 17th, 2011, 12:39 PM
Ok, I was with KPS until the last part.

Yes it should take a warrant to enter my property. But if you have a warrant and you find me in violation of a bylaw, then yes, I should have whatever needs fixing by a certain date or the city should come in and fix it. And fine the bugger as well for not following the bylaw.

Trust me, as a neighbor, you want your neighbors to be following bylaws. And you want the city to enforce or act upon those, if your neighbor doesn't follow them.

Of course I'm in agreement that this should never have been a bylaw.

eMacMan
Nov 17th, 2011, 04:13 PM
My reaction to the title was: "Sounds normal to me."

kps
Nov 17th, 2011, 05:38 PM
My reaction to the title was: "Sounds normal to me."

Yes, only the cops and the banks can protect their property and themselves. You as a tax paying citizen can go naked into the wilderness.

Remember: When seconds count, the cops are minutes away.

eMacMan
Nov 17th, 2011, 09:41 PM
Yes, only the cops and the banks can protect their property and themselves. You as a tax paying citizen can go naked into the wilderness.

Yep was just watching the Lame-stream media claiming that the Wall Street protests had turned violent. Only violence anyone could cite were Storm Troopers assaulting clearly identified reporters, stealing camera gear and taking down pedestrians who committed the dastardly crime of stepping or being jostled off the curb. I believe two NYC council members were among those arrested. But the Banksters and their fraudulent taxpayer funded bonuses are indeed perfectly intact.

kps
Nov 17th, 2011, 10:03 PM
Yep was just watching the Lame-stream media claiming that the Wall Street protests had turned violent. Only violence anyone could cite were Storm Troopers assaulting clearly identified reporters, stealing camera gear and taking down pedestrians who committed the dastardly crime of stepping or being jostled off the curb. I believe two NYC council members were among those arrested. But the Banksters and their fraudulent taxpayer funded bonuses are indeed perfectly intact.

Can't wait to see how Tranna deals with it....