Criminal Code changes would allow fingerprinting before charges

The Liberals will let it pass.

Quote:

Day said it would speed up the charge and trial process and make sure no one got out on bail after they were suspected of committing an indictable offence without being fingerprinted and photographed.

I had been of the understanding that the police decide when someone is free to go. They couldn't just make sure that someone is fingerprinted before telling them they can leave??

On the other hand, getting rid of a ridiculous interprovincial jurisdictional issues makes sense. I can't see why avoiding arrest should be as simple as making your way to the next nearest province. We can extradite people from Europe or Asia or Australia, but not from another province in Canada??

They sit around in your file for years because they just "don't have the staff" to clear out all the junk.

G. Pie wrote:

Cueball wrote:

They sit around in your file for years because they just "don't have the staff" to clear out all the junk.

And then if you later get fingerprinted and charged with a different crime, the first set is irrelevant, right?  Right???

exactly lol it aint n even with a charge they should only fingerprint u with a conviction a charge is an accusation really ur being fingerprinted if charged for bein part of a non mainstream group. If this passes then ur gonna see cops rollin around the hood wit ink pads, papers n pens more then now tryna get every1z fingerprint n they'll justifiy it n yall already know how son

Does anyone seriously think this would stand up to a court challenge?

It doesn't require one. The issue is one of self-incrimination. ie. providing material that can be used in evidence prior to charges being laid to assist in charges being laid.

We don't have a 5th, here.

Cueball wrote:

We don't have a 5th, here.

we actually do it just aint called that it part of british common law. Guns are also tecnically allowed because the magna carta is part of our law and that allows self-defense 

this part of a comment I seen on a article one time I posted it in something here u go cuz 

In the USA , 48 US states allow their citizens to aquire a concealed carry permit to carry a handgun 24/7 on their person. (of course now that anti-gun Obama has been elected-you can expect that to change very soon)
Are U.S. citizens more trustworthy than Canadains ? ..some may argue that they have a second amendment and we dont. Well technically we do too- except very little people know about it.

The "Magna Carta" derived from old english/british law that was also adopted into Canadian law when this country was founded is essentially the english version of the U.S. 2nd amendment. I have yet to hear of a case where this defence was used in court though- but the law still exists. We have since adopted a charter of rights and freedoms which under sec.7 states we have a right to life,liberty and "Security of the person"
again reinforcing in undefined terms essentially what the original Magna Carta stated. I believe there is still a court case before the supreme court regarding an Edmonton store owner who gunned down an armed man whio broke into his home/store (the dwelling was adjacent/part of the store)

Anyways, this case will be a test of the section 7 clause of the charter as well as self-defence clauses under the criminal code."

Nevermind the fact that your Insurance company already does collect your DNA. When I bought my life insurance some 14 years ago they took a swab to make sure I wasn't a smoker. So they already have my data on file. I don't think it would be too hard for the cops to force access to insurance companies files.

[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/activism/pro-bono-proposed-laws-have-activis... thread[/url]