Sovereignty? What sovereignty?

[NewCasa]

http://www.sootoday.com/content/news...ls.asp?c=43170

Give me a break Harper. How could you even consider this?

[Roll The Bones]

they will protect us from... umm... well... perhaps from terrorists who are fleeing canada into the US...

anyone got anything else more plausible???

[Anapeg]

I was acrimonious upon reading this a bit back and thought it useless to post or say not about it as RW would have some infuriating smart ass comment. I would look upon this as a personal political suicide, it would do untold damage to Harper and will have lasting effect on his party. The day I need bow to another countries policing entities is the day I join one of those American para military groups.

[1337]

Ever consider this could be as little as having FBI having an HQ here (Canada)?

The way you guys are talking is that the US tanks are going to be rolling down our streets.

[NewCasa]

Ever consider this could be as little as having FBI having an HQ here (Canada)?

The way you guys are talking is that the US tanks are going to be rolling down our streets.

Nope, not exactly. The way we're taking it is that the US believes it's their right to interfere in our country.

[bilbo79]

Nope, not exactly. The way we're taking it is that the US believes it's their right to interfere in our country.

At least they're not trying to bring us democracy

[NewCasa]

At least they're not trying to bring us democracy

True. There's always that to be thankful for.

[stupefied]

The way we're taking it is that the US believes it's their right to interfere in our country.

I think it's more along the lines of both US and Canadian officers not having to let the bad guys get away just because they managed to get across the border. Still a bad idea at first glance.

The RCMP is planning to ease Canadians into the idea of United States law enforcement agents pursuing suspects across the land border and onto Canadian soil through “baby steps,” say two top Mounties...

... Criminals, said Mr. Oliver, are “exploiting the fact that we have to respect our boundaries and we have to stop at the border.”

“We’ve had instances where we’ve engaged in the attempts to interdict vessels in our shared waterways, and the vessel has fled into the other territory and has escaped apprehension,” he said.

Mr. Oliver also revealed that while it is often seen in the context of national security, cross-border policing is typically used to pursue organized crime.
more

[NewCasa]

This is so incredibly wrong. And Mr. Harper even has us taxpayers paying for it the training:

"Each of the training courses cost the RCMP around $75,000. The Mounties pay for the accommodation and travel of officers, but the US pays for the courses."

[Anapeg]

Ever consider this could be as little as having FBI having an HQ here (Canada)?

The way you guys are talking is that the US tanks are going to be rolling down our streets.

We are a sovereign country with our own law enforcement agency's in place and have no need for Big Brother and all their hang ups holding reign over us. Regardless of the depth of your naivete you have to realize it will NOT stop there. They have no right to enforce us with their muscle. We as a people need to pull our collective heads out of our collective arse's and defend our sovereignty. Anyone who reads on this BBS knows myself and New Casa poo poo any of the conspiracy mongers but this time we believe the governments of the two country's are not pulling the wool over our eye's but rather pulling the whole bloody sheep over our faces.

[Roll The Bones]

if i'm not mistaken, canadian law enforcement currently has agreements in place with the Americans to conduct investigations in the US... perhaps Harper is aiming to reciprocate/cooperate etc... ie the Halam investigation took SSMPS and OPP into Michigan...

I personally don't think the FBI will be kicking in doors north of the border any time soon... unless of course those persons on the other side of the doors are, as one article mentioned, organized crime...

[KDawg]

if i'm not mistaken, canadian law enforcement currently has agreements in place with the Americans to conduct investigations in the US... perhaps Harper is aiming to reciprocate/cooperate etc... ie the Halam investigation took SSMPS and OPP into Michigan...

I personally don't think the FBI will be kicking in doors north of the border any time soon... unless of course those persons on the other side of the doors are, as one article mentioned, organized crime...

Agreements that different police agencies have to cooperate with each other is one thing.

As long as Canada is a sovereign nation, there is NEVER a reason good enough to have the police/troops of another nation operating on our soil. PERIOD.

I am simply amazed that some posters here might not think it's a bad idea, or at least are trying to half-way justify this.

[Roll The Bones]

that's what makes this a great country kdawg... we can have our own independent opinions... as for my own opinion, i don't believe i need to justify it at all...

but let's look at one of the statements posted, this allegedly from RCMP personnel: “We’ve had instances where we’ve engaged in the attempts to interdict vessels in our shared waterways, and the vessel has fled into the other territory and has escaped apprehension”. In this circumstance, who would you rather have landing on our shores? Only the criminal who is fleeing US law enforcement and knows they can't touch him on Canadian soil? Or US law enforcement who can apprehend the criminal by continuing the pursuit and preventing said criminal from landing here and hiding amongst us within our communities?

again, only my personal opinion, but i would chose the latter, hands down, any day of the week...

[Anapeg]

that's what makes this a great country kdawg... we can have our own independent opinions... as for my own opinion, i don't believe i need to justify it at all...

but let's look at one of the statements posted, this allegedly from RCMP personnel: “We’ve had instances where we’ve engaged in the attempts to interdict vessels in our shared waterways, and the vessel has fled into the other territory and has escaped apprehension”. In this circumstance, who would you rather have landing on our shores? Only the criminal who is fleeing US law enforcement and knows they can't touch him on Canadian soil? Or US law enforcement who can apprehend the criminal by continuing the pursuit and preventing said criminal from landing here and hiding amongst us within our communities?

again, only my personal opinion, but i would chose the latter, hands down, any day of the week...

You give up other Canadians freedoms with such a flair. Your other post saying you did not think they would be kicking down doors anytime soon, unless it was organized crime. Have you any experience with the term "thin edge of the wedge"? Do our laws hold sway or do they use American law on OUR soil?

[Roll The Bones]

You give up other Canadians freedoms with such a flair.

And you give me too much credit, as I've given up nothing of the sort. Point that is being made is - criminals do not respect boundaries, including international borders. Neither the US or Canadian forces are claiming to relinquish sovereign control of borders but rather to conduct the pursuit to completion. It's difficult to believe that, if US forces were pursuing a fugitive, Canadian forces wouldn't be either notified or engaged in the pursuit, or both.

Do our laws hold sway or do they use American law on OUR soil?

You said yourself that we are a sovereign nation, and I support that position wholeheartedly. I think the answer to your above question is obvious.

[Anapeg]

American authorities on Canadian soil after, lets say a murderer form , oh I don't know lets say Texas. We abolished the death penalty years ago and have in history refused to send the back to the Americans due to his likelihood of being put to death. Look it up, it is true. Now, whose law holds sway. You have allowed the to track their man across our back woods and they are at the border taking him back to sit in Ol' Sparky. Do they go because you said they have the RIGHT to hunt their lawless cohorts or do they go back empty handed having wasted copious amounts of time due to us not honouring the death penalty?

Recall when the president came to Canada and they demanded they use their own secret service and the RCMP said sure, BUT, no guns. They had to listen as we where a Sovereign Nation.

[Roll The Bones]

American authorities on Canadian soil after, lets say a murderer form , oh I don't know lets say Texas. We abolished the death penalty years ago and have in history refused to send the back to the Americans due to his likelihood of being put to death. Look it up, it is true. Now, whose law holds sway. You have allowed the to track their man across our back woods and they are at the border taking him back to sit in Ol' Sparky. Do they go because you said they have the RIGHT to hunt their lawless cohorts or do they go back empty handed having wasted copious amounts of time due to us not honouring the death penalty?

I understand where you're going, but keep in mind that, from what I've read above, no one from the US or Canada has spoken about allowing American law enforcers to hunt through our "back woods". There are several references to continuing a pursuit across open waters that border both jurisdictions. I'm positive that protocols would be negotiated first before any US agency would be permitted to openly pursue an American fugitive.

And as for the death penalty - the US justice system follows due process, much like ours does. Sure there may be a possibility that, in your scenario, a prosecutor would seek the death penalty if the suspect was found guilty. But since the crime was committed in a US jurisdiction, it is right to return that suspect to the States to face prosecution. Otherwise said suspect sits comfortably in a Canadian jail, eating three squares a day, all on our dime. That, or is permitted to run free within our communities, never being convicted of crimes allegedly committed in the US.

[Anapeg]

I always worry sleeping with the elephant, should she decide to roll we have no chance whatsoever.
Who is going to be responsible if they are engaged in a high speed chase that crosses our border and someone is either hurt or worse? There are just too many political, legal and moral consequences and ramifications to leave it to the two governments to work out. Between them they can't raise a group to operate a clothesline without a friggin' consultant.

[hobo]

Shiprider agreement as it is referred to has existed since 2009.

http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/prg/le...artime-eng.pdf

[Roll The Bones]

I always worry sleeping with the elephant, should she decide to roll we have no chance whatsoever.
Who is going to be responsible if they are engaged in a high speed chase that crosses our border and someone is either hurt or worse? There are just too many political, legal and moral consequences and ramifications to leave it to the two governments to work out. Between them they can't raise a group to operate a clothesline without a friggin' consultant.

and the consultant is getting paid $500/hr... i know how you feel... and your patriotism is compelling... as for the elephant reference, i don't see canada as the "mouse" it once was... maybe i'm wrong...