Canadian Supreme Court = Freedom!

[Beirut]

Yes sir!


The Canadian Supreme Court has ruled that random school and public place inspections with drug sniffing dogs are unconstitutional.

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/st...b-05e8754897eb

I don't want drugs in school, but I don't want cops with dogs roaming the halls putting kids up against their lockers for no reason either. If you want to search someone, get a warrant, get a reason, or get the hell out. JFK said it best, "You can have freedom without peace, but you cannot have peace without freedom." Thank God we still have some freedoms in this country.

A fine day for all Canadians.

(We are still subject to random searches in airports, and that's ok with me.)

[Crazed Rabbit]

(We are still subject to random searches in airports, and that's ok with me.)

Lol at the irony.

CR

[Beirut]

Lol at the irony.

CR

Not sure I know which irony you speak of.

[Reverend Joe]

[Vladimir]

Lol at the irony.

CR

Think about who you're talking to.

[InsaneApache]

God bless Her Majesties constabulary.

[Beirut]

Think about who you're talking to.

Good Lord I must be thick, I still don't see what you're on about.

[Tribesman]

Good Lord I must be thick, I still don't see what you're on about.

Think about it , there was no irony in what you wrote except that which someone imagined .
However what they wrote is really ironic

[Adrian II]

Good Lord I must be thick, I still don't see what you're on about.

Neither do I.

1. Searching for bombs and guns and box cutter at airports is different from sending drug sniffers into skools, right?

2. And how would that be ironic because it's coming from Crazed Rabbit instead of someone else?

Guess I'm thick a well.

[ICantSpellDawg]

That sounds like a good decision. Airport security is one thing, putting kids into a police state is totally different.

[Beirut]

That sounds like a good decision. Airport security is one thing, putting kids into a police state is totally different.

Exactly.

Freedom has reasonable limitations. Section 8 of our Constitution protects us not from being searched, but from being unreasonably searched. Being searched before boarding an airplane does not, in my mind, constitute an unreasonable search.

Apparently the court hasn't made a final decision on airport searches but I can't believe they would disallow them. If they did, the government would use the Notwithstanding Clause in the Constitution and overule the court. It's been done before, but not often and always creates a huge fuss.

[KukriKhan]

Just a wild guess here, but our favorite dog-loving esteemed Moderator, with
"Unto each good man a good dog" as his sig, applauds a decision wherein drug-sniffing search dogs will lose some of their business...

might be considered mildly ironic.

Sure loses something in the 'splainin', eh?

Anywayyyyy:

...get a warrant, get a reason, or get the hell out

Amen, Brother.

[Redleg]

Exactly.

Freedom has reasonable limitations. Section 8 of our Constitution protects us not from being searched, but from being unreasonably searched. Being searched before boarding an airplane does not, in my mind, constitute an unreasonable search.

Apparently the court hasn't made a final decision on airport searches but I can't believe they would disallow them. If they did, the government would use the Notwithstanding Clause in the Constitution and overule the court. It's been done before, but not often and always creates a huge fuss.

I fly an alot with my new job, and at least in the United States Airlines are primary a private business with Governmental oversite. I am willing to bet, since I havent read the ticket that closely, that by the purchase of the ticket you are agreeing to be searched. Going to have to look into that to make sure.

So I am not sure if ruling a search of a school locker without a warrant as unconstitutional is ironic because if the state allows the agreement to be searched to be a precondition of the ticket purchase. That would constitute a reasonable expectation of being searched.

Now it all depends on how the constitution is worded also. From your describition of the Canadian constitution seems to cover the case of an airport search anyway as a reasonable search.

Now one could argue that searching students at school for contraband as listed on the school charter and rules document would be constitutional if it was alreadly established in its charter - because the expectation of a reasonable search would be there alreadly. Would all depend on the actual documents involved, and if the documents passed the courts review as being within the constitution.

Either way when the court rules to insure an individual rights over the state - its always a good thing.

[Beirut]

Now it all depends on how the constitution is worded also. From your describition of the Canadian constitution seems to cover the case of an airport search anyway as a reasonable search.

The relevant text from the Canadian Contstitution:

LIFE, LIBERTY AND SECURITY OF PERSON.

7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

SEARCH OR SEIZURE.

8. Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.

Now one could argue that searching students at school for contraband as listed on the school charter and rules document would be constitutional if it was alreadly established in its charter - because the expectation of a reasonable search would be there alreadly. Would all depend on the actual documents involved, and if the documents passed the courts review as being within the constitution.

The court ruled that a student has the same right of privacy regarding what's in his schoolbag as an adult has regarding their purse of briefcase. And you sure as shoot cannot stop a woman and ask what's in her purse without a helluva god reason. Even if you're married to her. (Especially if you're married to her.)

Either way when the court rules to insure an individual rights over the state - its always a good thing.

Amen indeed.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Oh, schools and airports are very different things of course.

But what was funny to me was Beirut acting excited about the court stopping random searches in schools, then proclaiming he had no problem with random searches in airports.

I don't know how those searches work in Canada, but here in the US it's mainly screening whoever's convenient - old grannies and the like - and the screeners also seem to fail whenever govt agents put on a covert 'exam' by trying to sneak things on planes.

And then there's always Richard Warman.

CR

[Beirut]

Oh, schools and airports are very different things of course.

But what was funny to me was Beirut acting excited about the court stopping random searches in schools, then proclaiming he had no problem with random searches in airports.

I swear the thickness of my skull must increase exponentially by the hour because I still don't see what you're getting at.

Your first sentence says that schools and airports are very different, which I agree with and already said. Then your second sentence says that you found it funny that I consider schools and airports to be very different.

Sorry to be a shmoo, but if you could spell out this irony in Grade 3 English, perhaps using fo-ne-tik spehling I wood apriciate itt.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Don't public searches like these tend to result in the confiscation of quite a lot of drugs though? They do that quite a lot here in the UK, mostly in pubs, and they tend to get good results.

The schoolchildren will be glad to get out of class anyway.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I swear the thickness of my skull must increase exponentially by the hour because I still don't see what you're getting at.

Your first sentence says that schools and airports are very different, which I agree with and already said. Then your second sentence says that you found it funny that I consider schools and airports to be very different.

Sorry to be a shmoo, but if you could spell out this irony in Grade 3 English, perhaps using fo-ne-tik spehling I wood apriciate itt.

Just an incongruity between the first part of your post - 'Yay for no random drug sniffing dogs!' and the last sentence - 'Random searches at airports are fine by me'.

CR

[Rhyfelwyr]

Just an incongruity between the first part of your post - 'Yay for no random drug sniffing dogs!' and the last sentence - 'Random searches at airports are fine by me'.

CR

Well as you said there's quite a difference between them.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Indeed. I'm not faulting his reasoning, just pointing out that it seemed ironic.

CR

[Beirut]

Indeed. I'm not faulting his reasoning, just pointing out that it seemed ironic.

CR

I kind of maybe perhaps see what you're getting at, but I fail utterly to see the comic irony in differentiating between two situations we both agree are worth differentiating between.

But I'm Canadian, and we're kind of slow, eh.

[Banquo's Ghost]

I kind of maybe perhaps see what you're getting at, but I fail utterly to see the comic irony in differentiating between two situations we both agree are worth differentiating between.

But I'm Canadian, and we're kind of slow, eh.

I suspect it's more because CR considers you a leftie, and therefore anything you say risible.

[Ice]

I suspect it's more because CR considers you a leftie, and therefore anything you say risible.

Those be fightin words.

[Whacker]

It's times like this that I have to stop giving my northern-dwelling brothers and sisters well-intended and well-meant crap, and a firm handshake instead. This is the kind of stuff that I keep wishing my country would do, instead of maintaining this "reasonable security measures" bullcrap which is just that... bullcrap.

Hats off to the 'nucks.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I kind of maybe perhaps see what you're getting at, but I fail utterly to see the comic irony in differentiating between two situations we both agree are worth differentiating between.

But I'm Canadian, and we're kind of slow, eh.

Yet connected with a common foundation - random searches.

But, meh, doesn't matter.

CR

[ICantSpellDawg]

So if I said "Yay for no flowing sewage through my front yard" it would be ironic if I said "I am for flowing sewage in our sewage systems?".

If the government forces you to go to school and school allows random, warrant less invasions of privacy with your "consent" upon entrance into school - the government has, in a way, forced warrant less invasions of privacy on private citizens. This would be, in effect, the government condoning what the constitution expressly forbids for a massive portion of your life.

School devastation poses nowhere near the risks that Airline transportation or even subway transportation poses. The government might as well allow full searches and seizures without a warrant anytime it wants.

There are serious differences in situations like these.

EDIT: the discussion seems to be over

[JAG]

Well it is a good day to be a Canadian I guess, but I do not have the same great feeling that everyone else seemingly does, about airport searches. Airport searches - well at least the more 'detailed' ones - are normally aimed at 'certain' people and are done for no other reason than preconceived prejudices and sterotypes. If we were searching everyone the same, fine - if it was a condition of going onto a plane and you knew that before you travelled, I would have less of a problem with it - though still a significant problem, what next everytime you enter a train station? - but it isn't. Searches of people who have done no wrong and there is no evidence of them doing wrong, should NEVER be searched. For those who think it is fine, how many people have actually been stopped blowing up planes, or whatever, because of a search at an airport? .. None. They are stopped through intelligence and good policing, not by illegal searches at airports which make people feel great in their insecure heads, but really do nothing but alienate and discriminate.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Well it is a good day to be a Canadian I guess, but I do not have the same great feeling that everyone else seemingly does, about airport searches. Airport searches - well at least the more 'detailed' ones - are normally aimed at 'certain' people and are done for no other reason than preconceived prejudices and sterotypes. If we were searching everyone the same, fine - if it was a condition of going onto a plane and you knew that before you travelled, I would have less of a problem with it - though still a significant problem, what next everytime you enter a train station? - but it isn't. Searches of people who have done no wrong and there is no evidence of them doing wrong, should NEVER be searched. For those who think it is fine, how many people have actually been stopped blowing up planes, or whatever, because of a search at an airport? .. None. They are stopped through intelligence and good policing, not by illegal searches at airports which make people feel great in their insecure heads, but really do nothing but alienate and discriminate.

The Black after the White and Grey finally rears it's ugly head.

[UglyandHasty]

The Canadian Supreme Court has ruled that random school and public place inspections with drug sniffing dogs are unconstitutional.

Amen to that !

[Geoffrey S]

Seems like Rabbit's point, that random searches at schools and random searches at airports/anywhere else are all equally pointless, is being missed completely. And intentionally?