"It has occurred to me that I'm far more afraid of my own government than of any 'terrorist organisation'. Our wonderful representatives in Ottawa spout off about human rights violations in Iraq, etc., but seem perfectly content to subject Canadian citizens to unwarranted search and seizure, take away the protection against self-incrimination, and break their own rules about equality under the law." -- email quote from RS, Justice Served Up Yukonslavia Style.

     WHITEHORSE, YUKONSLAVIA -- The two main federal documents supposedly assisting Kanuckistan in the maintenance of law, order and so-called justice are the Criminal Code and the Constitution of 1982.

     It's nice that Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada Beverly McLachlin believes Canadians are fortunate to have the "made-in-Canada" Charter of Rights and Freedoms for dealing with problems.

     It is in that important constitutional centrepiece where people should be able to find protection of their rights.

     But the myopic bozos who write and enforce laws don't recognize the Charter as anything other than a defense argument to be used in court.

     These strong laws were designed to take precedence over other laws and distinguish this nation as a civilized democracy set above dictatorship standards.

     Next in the pecking order of importance are the blizzard of federal laws--some good, some not so good and some just plain awful. They supersede the provincial and territorial laws, which, in turn, outweigh the low-ranking municipal laws that come at the bottom of the heap.

     The Criminal Code is the official Bible police officers use in carrying out enforcement duties of keeping law and order and protecting people and property.

     What people can and cannot do legally are clearly stated as are the punishments that befall those caught breaking the law.

     The thick tome provides for such age-old measures as defense of self, family and property and laying charges against dishonest government agents for fraud and breach of public trust.

     The Code offers checks and balances that should prevent command-and-control freaks from running roughshod over people's rights.

     Individual rights are reinforced in the Charter. Federal politicians and lawyers spent over 25 years making an industry out of unraveling 115 years of perfectly good British law and repatriating the constitution.

     Except for Marxists removing private property rights, the constitution is supposed to be replete with inalienable rights that protect everybody--not just a chosen few whenever it is political convenient to do so.

     Judicial activists, lawyers, badge-bearing bullies, government functionaries, law-and-policy makers, politicians, moral uplifters, do-gooders, busy-bodies, prohibitionists, green zealots seemingly believe these legal documents were written in disappearing ink and carry no value.

     While the laws are supposed to restrict the above-mentioned to a short leash, public policy is quietly oozing in. Rights are being replaced with "privileges". Privileges are much easier to strip from the masses than are inalienable, God-given rights.

     The government trusts the commoners won't find out what is being sprung on them until after the fact.

     The United Nations is weaning democratic countries away from criminal codes, constitutions and sovereignties, moving toward a corrupt one-world order that embraces a Communist Manifesto philosophy.

     That is how Yukonslavia and other jurisdictions have allowed piddly-assed municipal bylaws to take precedence over the constitution and federal acts. The Liberal government started down this destructive path by refusing to Charter-proof draconian legislation covering environment, elections, terrorism and firearms.

     Former federal justice minister Anne McLellan contended everything would come out in the wash, failing to comprehend this is ass-backwards.  By her logic it's okay that an individual is left with horrendous legal expenses and spends three or more years of their life fighting the state because the state infringed upon their rights in the first place.

     These acts declare the sinner guilty until he can prove his innocence, which contradicts Section 11 of the Charter. The firearms legislation violates the Charter no less than 28 times.

     Under the terrorist act a person can be arrested and held without being charged and brought before a judge. How third-world; how Stalinistic.

     The only power any level of government has is to declare War on Crime. When there aren't enough criminals, the government makes so many things illegal that it becomes impossible to breathe without breaking laws.

     People have been dictated to, lied to, brainwashed, indoctrinated, muzzled, hosed, ruled, regulated, restricted, licensed, registered, directed, checked, counted and discounted.

     They have been inspected, investigated, interrogated, measured, numbered, weighed, rated, berated, stamped, censured, refused, prevented, prohibited, admonished and monopolized.

     They have been extorted, robbed, hoaxed, fleeced, fined, harassed, disarmed, dishonoured, exploited, mauled, assessed, overtaxed, charged, sued, embarrassed and humiliated.

     Yet people keep accepting Marxists assurances: "It's all for your own good."

     Right, except unwarranted and unreasonable searches and seizures are not good for anybody, except the doorbusters who pocket the loot. That was one reason the Ontario Court of Appeal ordered Parliament to rewrite Criminal Code Section 117.04(1) in 2000.

     The "incurable overbreadth" violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It allowed for wholesale fishing expeditions in which police were permitted to invade an individual's privacy in circumstances where they may have had no reason to suspect, let alone believe, that a crime had been or was going to be committed, or that the person possessed--what? Guns, drugs, stolen candy bars, ashtrays?

     It also opened up the disgusting justification for the wrongly accused to be strip searched in their homes, on lawns, streets and beside highways. That is one step removed from legalized gang rape.

     Sometimes judges dismiss cases on the grounds that police carried out an improper warranted search on a person's house, office, vehicle or body.

     Or the police may have used the loophole of "exigent circumstances". A judge may decide a warrant could have been obtained without risk of losing important evidence.

     If a judge determines the accused did not consent for police to invade a dwelling without a warrant, the charges may be dismissed. Warrant or no warrant, door-crashers must have reasonable belief they will find the goods sought.

     A valid warrant has to be authorized and signed by a judge. On the document is the name and address of the unsuspecting schmuck whose premises is about to be rearranged; the location of the buildings targeted; and the items expected to be found at this specific place.

     The warrant stipulates the date(s) and daytime hours the raid can be legally conducted, that is dawn to dusk, or roughly 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.

     Some robber barons, who had to judge-shop to obtain a warrant, have been known to illegally tamper with the hours when they are in the midst of a particularly lucrative haul for personal gains and don't want to be interrupted by a curfew. These tyrants never get punished for acting above the law and defacing a legal document.

     If the alleged sinner is present when the police appear, he is presented with a copy of the warrant; if he isn't there, a warrant is supposed to be left on the kitchen table or tacked to the door.  In reality, standard procedure is for police to threaten said householder with "obstruction of justice" charges if they dare step foot inside their own home while it is being searched.

     In either case, the officer is supposed to leave a note describing the items taken. In the inconceivable event "nothing was taken", a terse note expresses that phenomenon.

     Regardless of how squeaky-clean a person thinks he is, nobody should ever underestimate the possibility of a surprise attack nor underestimate the trauma that goes with it.

     It's like coming home to find your private sanctum trashed and burglarized by thieves, which it has been.

     While the RCMP are supposedly trained in the delicate procedures of how to carry out a proper search to the letter of the Code, they are not always perfect. Sometimes hard-boiled outlaws are let off the hook because of a faulty search.

     If trained RCMP don't always get it right, how far can any untrained Tom, Dick and Harriat get by rummaging an individual's private sanctum with any degree of legality?

     Truthfully, they can't. They should stay out of people's bedrooms, washrooms and drawers. When any Tom, Dick and Harriat--who has no legal authority whatsoever, much less a judge-issued search warrant--can get by with conducting random searches on pedestrians, customers, students, tenants, private dwellings and offices, then Yukonslavia, formerly the Yukon, has disintegrated into an abhorrent, anarchical cesspool WORSE than Naziism.

     Even Adolf Hitler didn't break the law. The Nazi dictator had the decency to change and publicize a new set of laws and suspend sections of the constitution before he unleashed his butchers to commit legalized atrocities.

     The extermination program was done under the familiar guise of public health and public safety. Who could argue against such virtuous principles?

     The state categorized Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, labour leaders, clerics and the "mentally ill" as verminous enemies of the state guilty of spreading disease.

     Millions of people were gassed, tossed in hot furnaces, shot, buried alive, starved and carved up for gruesome medical experiments as the elitists re-engineered society.

     The experiment soured 60 years ago. But Marxism has regained momentum. New groups of sinners have been classified as threats to public health and safety: gun owners, land-users, smokers, entrepreneurs.

     Three levels of government bureaucrats are cheerfully running amok to stamp out state enemies. Their collective, command-and-obey Rambo mentality is focused on repeating history while disregarding privacy and constitutional rights.

     Section 8 of the Charter, "Everybody has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure", weighs in heavily with case law. The word "unreasonable" has been dissected and interpreted in countless courtroom debates.

     Police have been apprised in this matter but their contemptible mantra still is, "Tell it to the judge". It jams court dockets with innocent victims. But the court system has become an industry unto itself and needs to drum up business.

     As mentioned, federal or provincial police are supposed to obtain a judge-issued warrant or special warrant before door-crashing. When the secondary layer of green cops, water cops, fish cops, thought cops want to raid offices, mining camps, government chambers, they go to the RCMP who apply for a warrant and accompany the specialty cops on their missions.

     City bylaw officers aren't mentioned, supposedly because their duties are restricted to controlling four-legged critters and muzzling the mayor.

     Now, bylaw bloodhounds off their chains are running loose flushing out smokers.

     In some jurisdictions, off-duty RCMP officers, who possess a perverted delight in harassing people, accompany bylaw officers to offer credibility, especially when enforcing smoking bans.

     "Nicotine", "tobacco" and "smoke" are not listed in Schedules I to VIII of the Controlled Drugs and Substance Act regarding search warrants and special warrants of illegal products. Clue: tobacco isn't an illegal product and is controlled--not banned--under the federal Tobacco Act.

     "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed--and hence clamorous to be led to safety," proclaimed H.L. Mencken, a newspaper columnist of the 1930s. "Whenever 'A' attempts by law to impose his moral standards upon 'B', 'A' is most likely a scoundrel."

     The amateurish smoke sniffers are only supposed to attend so-called "public" places, many of which are privately-owned facilities. They aren't supposed to stray beyond areas designated for the general public. And they are not supposed to be pawing through people's purses, pockets and panties.

     Bylaw officers going into public washrooms is one-step removed from a strip search. Somebody in there has their pants down.

     Forcing their way into storage areas and private offices without a warrant, and where the general public is not allowed access, is one-step removed from these fascists conducting unwarranted raids on residential dwellings.

     Hands off! There is a long-standing right of any resident in this country to determine who shall and who shall not be permitted to enter his home, even if the home is nothing more than a shack, tent or spruce bough lean-to.

     In 1981, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld an age-old law: A person's home is his castle and fortress, a place for his defense against injury and violence, as well as for his repose.

     In other words, stay the hell out unless invited in. That also applies to overbearing, non-warranted Statistics Canada agents barging into homes on Sunday afternoons and threatening occupants with "compliance or prosecution".

     Anybody invading a private place for the purpose of conducting a "search and seizure" and is not properly papered ranks as a common thief who has committed what is described in the Criminal Code as Break and Enter, Trespassing and Burglary--even if he just "took" pictures.

     The city, which has done a superb job of making enemies out of Whitehorse taxpayers, better rein in the hounds and put them back in the kennels for re-training.
 
                                        - 30 -

Copyright 2005 diArmani.com