Stop Warrantless Searches

When did this idea of warrantless searches in Canada become okay?  When did they start?  How can we make them stop?  How can we make sure every Canadian know this is happening and that they can be the next victim of a warrantless search of some kind?  I have not personally been a victim of a warrantless search, nor do I wish to be.  What concerns me is, it seems only to be a matter of time.

It's been known for a long time that licensed law abiding gun owners were not subject to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We have very little recourse but have been fighting this all along. Finally, a step in the right direction has happened with the scrapping of the long gun registry, although laws regarding licensed gun owners still need to change.  The firearms act as a whole must be changed so that licensed gun owners once again fall within the Charter.  Below is a site I found that explains how the Firearms Act violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

http://www.brucemontague.ca/html/0080.html

At any given time, for almost any reason, a licensed gun owner must submit to a search of their home if an authority deems it necessary.  “Necessary” can be a neighbour saw the gun owner in their car with a black case, maybe even a gun case and makes a call to authorities.  During that call, the neighbour says they feel unsafe.  Authorities are allowed to enter the home according to the firearms act and there isn’t a thing that gun owners can do about it.  Odds are fairly high the case was empty anyway, but it doesn’t matter.  The best that’s happening is, parts of the act are being tested in court because of violation of gun owners rights.

Now, it appears it's not just licensed gun owners that fall outside the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Constitution.  The imagination of a small child is cause for a warrantless search of a home, presumption of guilt until proven innocent, a family separated, and children interviewed without parental supervision.  The picture the child drew is now gone so whether it ever existed is now based on the word and imagination of the teacher that saw it and listened to the child’s little story in the first place.  

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/03/01/government-has-no-place-at-family-table

Why is this okay?  Where was the danger, or perception of danger?  How is “my daddy shoots bad guys and monsters” a danger to any child and why were the parents not spoken to about it before it ever escalated to this level?  Occam’s Razor would indicate that TV or video games would be the answer.  How did this go from a white board drawing of a four year old to “the parents MUST be allowing the children to play with a real gun?”  Common sense would dictate that with so many levels of authority, the teacher, the principal, the police AND child services, SOMEONE would consider another explanation would be more feasible.  Instead they went straight to violating the parents rights, traumatizing the children, and overstepping their authority.  The best part is, they would do it again.  Maybe if they had to go to court and stand before a judge to secure a warrant for the search and separation of the children from the parents, this situation wouldn’t have been so blown out of proportion.

The SPCA can go onto private property under the auspice of investigating animal safety.  The problem here is, the people doing the investigation may not have experience with the animals they are investigating up close.  They then make a judgement and decide on fines based on visual assessments of the situation - as various Amish farms found out in Ontario.  Again, these are warrantless searches, no one went to court, due process not sought.  Those not directly affected by this allow it to happen.  Charges are then laid such as “Animal in Distress” when the animals are perfectly healthy.  I believe animals do need to be protected from cruelty but the people doing the investigations shouldn’t be permitted on private property without purpose.  Yes, stop puppy mills, no, don’t interfere with a farm with perfectly healthy animals because it doesn’t meet with your idealistic view of what a healthy animal looks like.  Again, if these people need to stand before a judge for a warrant and state that they believe there are animals in distress on a specific farm, actual proof may have to be provided for charges to be valid.  But pesky things like due process get in the way of moral self importance, I suppose.

http://www.torontosun.com/videos/featured/featured-tor/1213592864001/bureaucrats-bust-the-amish/1485861708001

In British Columbia, warrantless searches happen based on power consumption in the home. If personal power consumption is too high, police officers and BC Hydro employees show up and demand entrance to the residence within 48 hours of initial notice.  This happens because the home that uses “too much” energy is a possible marijuana grow operation, and for no other reason.  The fact that it could be an old drafty home, or it’s large, or it runs a legal business notwithstanding.  When I lived in BC, I had an outdoor hot tub, and let me tell you, that was not cheap to run.  That could account for high power usage in a lot of cases, one would think.  Again, if it were an actual grow op, go get a warrant.  But it must be more fun and interesting for authorities to embarrass people by arbitrarily accusing them of being drug dealers.

Now, there is this thing called the Lawful Access bill. I know it's gone to committee but it's scary.  When it was first presented to the public, it was presented as “you’re either for Bill C-30, or you’re with the child pornographers.”  It is quite the statement, very black and white.  It is really too bad the world doesn’t work like that. This bill, if brought into law is another one of those ways the government will be able to access our information and lives without a warrant. It is being put forth with the argument “well, other countries are doing it.” Why does that give my government the right to invade my privacy without due process?  I have NO problem protecting children, and want them protected.  Will this bill in fact protect children the same way the gun registry didn't prevent gun crimes though?  So far, there has been nothing said about why this bill is needed except that it’s needed.  It’s like saying I’m right because I’m right.

Like most, my family has been heavily affected by the past.  My dad escaped from East Germany as a young man and moved to Canada for it's freedoms; my mom was in a Residential School.  Yay me, I got it from both sides!  It seemed for a time Canada was getting better. Residential Schools have been eliminated and as an escape from a dictatorship, what better place was there to go?

Now however, Canada is seeming like a scary place to live.  The government is trying to raise our children, tell us what morals to live by, and convince us that contravening the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the right thing to do, it’s for the good of all Canadians you know.  I’ve seen people say “that law is fine, what do I have to hide.”  Privacy is not secrecy and the desire for due process is not wrong.  Why are the current government officials creating law and methods to circumvent due process, and why are so many Canadians okay with it?

To me, only those who do not wish to think for themselves would want the destruction of freedom.  I, on the other hand, wish to maintain my privacy, wish to maintain my rights and freedoms, and wish to live in a democracy.  I don’t like how Canada is changing.  I don’t like that I’m afraid to have a child because a mis-speak could land myself or my husband in jail.  I don’t like that warrantless searches have become okay among so many people.  Why do we have a Charter of Rights and Freedoms?  It certainly looks good on paper.

This all looks so familiar, I’m sure this has happened somewhere before.  If it has, if history has taught has anything, why are we letting it happen again?