Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[zivan56]

Originally Posted by EastVanMark

Not a gray area at all. If a peace officer stops you, you have to obey him/her. The moment they ask you to stop they have initiated an investigation, and rightly or wrongly the law gives them broad power to stop you. If you don't believe it, the next time a cop stops you just keep on walking and see how long till you're kissing pavement. Also, Although you are not required to carry ID on your person, an officer has the power to keep you there until they can verify your identity. (thats a common myth where people say you don't have to give a cop your name, and if anyone has attended law school you know thats one of the first things that is covered).

...and what gives them the right to check tickets for a private company and apply police authority there?
Does the police come to your house and taser you if you didn't pay your phone bill? I am quite sure they can't do anything about your dealings with a private company...yet here they think they can. Again, their job is not to check tickets.

[zivan56]

Clearly I am not the only one very angry about this. On CTV National News, this was the 2nd story on the news (Skytrain tasering). We are very close to a moratorium on tasers, which will be a great day for humanity!

Btw, the pigs didn't even apologize to Robert Dziekanskis mother! What PIGS (They don't deserve to be called officers anymore). I can't believe what humanity has been lowered to
Not even a stinking apology.
Not to mention they couldn't even find that guy that allegedly killed his 3 kids...when he was 2KM from his home just sitting there!
I say bring in the military, they will probably do a better job...or build the RCMP again from scratch.
EDIT: On the local CTV news, all the people they interviewed were outraged at police action as well. So people arguing for it using it against fare evaders are definitely "special" in terms of the general population.

[EastVanMark]

Originally Posted by zivan56

...and what gives them the right to check tickets for a private company and apply police authority there?
Does the police come to your house and taser you if you didn't pay your phone bill? I am quite sure they can't do anything about your dealings with a private company...yet here they think they can. Again, their job is not to check tickets.

The law gives them the right to both check tickets and apply any police force necessary. Whether a private company or not, if a law (any law no matter how small) has been broken, the police have full authority. Not producing a valid ticket is a criminal offense. Thus, under the authority granted to them under the law, the transit police have the right to detain you if you broke that law.

Nobody is questioning whether or not they have jurisdiction in these matters but rather the excessive amount of force that was used.

[worldwide]

Originally Posted by eduardo88

How is that complete 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵? Marijuana is a controlled substance and there was reasonable cause to search him....

uh oh i think we have an american in here

but seriously, i usually stank like buds just a little bit and i would be pissed if this happened to me

[vanlaw]

Originally Posted by worldwide

uh oh i think we have an american in here

but seriously, i usually stank like buds just a little bit and i would be pissed if this happened to me

Exactly - smelling like pot does not constitute reasonable grounds for a search. - and by "reasonable", I dont mean in the sense of what people's views may be on this issue, I mean in the sense of s.8 Of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

[vanlaw]

http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=28a1b282-b05a-4e2e-9acf-83dd1abce072&k=76385

Tasered fare-evaders asked to testify

Next month's inquiry needs to hear from zapped SkyTrain riders, official says
David Carrigg and Frank Luba, The Province
Published: Thursday, April 17, 2008

Two fare-evaders who were Tasered by SkyTrain cops are being asked to come forward and testify at a public inquiry into Taser use.

Murray Mollard, executive director of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, said victims of Taser-use need a voice at next month's Braidwood Inquiry in Vancouver.

"I have seen nothing on the psychological impact on being Tasered," Mollard said yesterday. "The police make much of the fact they can turn it on and off and there's no subsidiary effects. Others say it's like an instrument of torture."

Mollard was reacting to a revelation that members of the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority Police Service have used their Tasers 10 times since January 2007, including twice against fare-evaders.

In one case the fare-evader was Tasered after running from transit police and in the other case the victim was Tasered as he grabbed onto a platform railing and wouldn't let go, according to the CBC.

"I don't think anybody, if they knew a Taser would come to be used on fare-evaders, would have said yes it's a good use. It's a shocking abuse," Mollard said.

Former B.C. Appeal Court judge Thomas Braidwood, who is conducting the Taser-use study as well as an examination into the Taser death of a man at Vancouver airport, told The Province that when he learned of the SkyTrain Taserings it raised a "red flag."

"It [Taser use] seems to put a red flag on it," Braidwood said.

"It appears that they didn't follow their own policy in the use of [Tasers]. I'm not involved in making any blame or anything but that would certainly red-flag it."

Braidwood said he was always going to include the TransLink police force in his inquiry.

"They [TransLink police] were always going to be a part of it," he said. "My mandate is to look into every police force that the province has jurisdiction over, to see exactly what is going on, report back and then make recommendations about the appropriate use of the Taser."

Braidwood said 27 presentations are scheduled for his inquiry but none are from Taser victims.

An inquiry spokesman said Braidwood will consider presentations from anyone with something to contribute.

TransLink police issued a news release yesterday in response to its Taser use.

"The GVTA Police Service is like any other police service, with its police officers trained in the various levels of use of force, meeting the National Use of Force Standards," read the statement. "The GVTA Police Service has been provided various tools to assist in the execution of their duties, with the Tasers being one. All tools are used with safety in mind, for the public and the police officers. The province is looking at the use of Tasers and the GVTA Police Service will be advised of the findings."

Jenny Kwan, NDP MLA for Vancouver-Mount Pleasant, has called for a moratorium on the use of Tasers on transit until Braidwood's inquiry is complete.

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by zivan56

and I have a feeling this guy is a right wing 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 Conservative.

Problems with the law?
I think not. In fact, I have only been approached by the police once...ages ago (when I was ~14). It was actually pretty funny, he accused me and a friend walking to another friends house of having fireworks and trying to "run away" from him. He then started acting like Mr 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵, and saying this and that. However, when I told him that he should bring up those issues with my father (who saw him talking to us and pulled over to see what was going on), the "officer" ran away with his tail between his legs. That's pretty much it. However, I see what they do in the media and real life, and it's pretty brutal IMO.
Otherwise, no problems...sweaky clean here and a pretty much model citizen. I work regularly and when I didn't have a job I never even went on welfare. So your assumption is wrong. In fact, I probably volunteer and help in the community way more than you (no offense, but you sound like a grumpy old man from your posts).

Or somebody who has been around long enough to realize the ineffectiveness of non-enforcement, without a bleeding heart to distort my judgement.

I just prefer to hold people to the highest standards of ethics and personal responsibility--both cops and civilians alike.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by zivan56

I know it's *legally* assult. However, the person who spat should not have their lives put in jepordy because of such a stupid incident. They could just tackle them or point a 🞵🞵🞵 at them, which will stop 99.9% of people.

I personally believe anything not putting the officers life in jeopardy should require use of nonlethal methods of restraint.
Plus all the studies on tasers have been done by people paid by Taser international. Vioxx anyone?

Ok, I get it. You do know that certain things are against the law, but you choose to only respect certain ones. Evading fares, spitting on police, refusing to show ID and becoming belligerent, using illegal "soft"-drugs, these are all "OK" by you.

And the police pulling a loaded 🞵🞵🞵 and aiming it at somebody running through a crowded public area (like a Skytrain station) is a good idea?

THINK ABOUT IT.

[vanman]

Originally Posted by worldwide

uh oh i think we have an american in here

but seriously, i usually stank like buds just a little bit and i would be pissed if this happened to me

I don't even smoke anymore and sometimes even I stank just cause almost everyone I know does. If I ever got harassed on skytrain I would definitely put up a fight.

[eduardo88]

Originally Posted by worldwide

uh oh i think we have an american in here

but seriously, i usually stank like buds just a little bit and i would be pissed if this happened to me

uh..no i'm not american, i was born in mexico but grew up in vancouver. i lived there until 3 years ago

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by zivan56

Aww, poor officer not wanting to do his job. Would he like a tackling assistant to do it for him?
I guess they are not so tough without their big fat union jobs which make them above the law.

Well I guess they don't care, as they are not human

Well, can't argue with that....

[zivan56]

Originally Posted by EastVanMark

The law gives them the right to both check tickets and apply any police force necessary. Whether a private company or not, if a law (any law no matter how small) has been broken, the police have full authority. Not producing a valid ticket is a criminal offense. Thus, under the authority granted to them under the law, the transit police have the right to detain you if you broke that law.

Nobody is questioning whether or not they have jurisdiction in these matters but rather the excessive amount of force that was used.

I think not:
http://www.gvtaps.bc.ca/common_qs/default.htm

What is the Transit Police Service's mandate?
A. To preserve and maintain the public peace, prevent crime and offences against the law, aid in the administration of justice and enforce the laws in force in British Columbia, primarily directed towards:

(i) Any criminal activity or breach of public peace that could affect the safety or security of transit passengers, employees or property; and
(ii) Conducting investigation and enforcement operations with respect to any unlawful activity on or around transit vehicles and other transit property.

...

Transit Police Officers will continue to issue violation tickets for fare evasion and other provincial infractions on SkyTrain, buses, SeaBus and West Coast Express.


SkyTrain Attendants (STAs) responsibilities include:

* Providing customer service;
* Providing first aid and emergency service;
* Trouble shooting train and station operations; and,
* Performing fare inspections.

So no, they are not authorized to check tickets! How many times have I said this before?
I don't see where it says it is a criminal offense, or where they have any right to anything except give you a ticket. It is a purely civilian matter, and will not show up on a criminal record. Is not paying your phone bill a criminal offense? Will they taser you if a Telus employee comes to collect money you haven't paid and you refuse? I think not...

[zivan56]

Originally Posted by Nutterbug

Or somebody who has been around long enough to realize the ineffectiveness of non-enforcement, without a bleeding heart to distort my judgement.

I just prefer to hold people to the highest standards of ethics and personal responsibility--both cops and civilians alike.

But you are arguing for cops to have more rights and people to have less...and for them to have unconditional obedience and trust. You sure you aren't bugsy on this forum as well?

[zivan56]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Ok, I get it. You do know that certain things are against the law, but you choose to only respect certain ones. Evading fares, spitting on police, refusing to show ID and becoming belligerent, using illegal "soft"-drugs, these are all "OK" by you.

And the police pulling a loaded 🞵🞵🞵 and aiming it at somebody running through a crowded public area (like a Skytrain station) is a good idea?

THINK ABOUT IT.

Nowhere did I say that, but whatever makes you happy. So you are saying they should shoot deadly taser darts at the person running through public instead and risk shocking random people?
Whatever, I agree 1+1 = 3 and up = down

[eduardo88]

Originally Posted by zivan56

Nowhere did I say that, but whatever makes you happy. So you are saying they should shoot deadly taser darts at the person running through public instead and risk shocking random people?
Whatever, I agree 1+1 = 3 and up = down

Are you sure you don't work for the ACLU or its canadian counterpart?]

Oh and transit cops do have the authority to check for tickets...

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by zivan56

But you are arguing for cops to have more rights and people to have less...and for them to have unconditional obedience and trust. You sure you aren't bugsy on this forum as well?

Cops should be held accountable and responsible for their actions, but at the same time, be given the authority and tools to be EFFECTIVE. The system should definitely be receptive to complaints about and open to investigations into their conduct.

I'm assuming most of the time, they won't give you trouble if you're perfectly civilized and law abiding and don't give them trouble.

Maybe they should put more cameras in more places in and around the stations and the trains to put both the cops and the public under greater scrutiny. Or will that be too much "Big Brother" and "invasion of privacy" for your liking?

[zivan56]

Originally Posted by eduardo88

Are you sure you don't work for the ACLU or its canadian counterpart?]

Oh and transit cops do have the authority to check for tickets...

Refer to my post and link provided. They *believe* they have the right to...and it's a very gray area. Do they have permission to check to see if you paid your phone bill?

[eduardo88]

Originally Posted by zivan56

Refer to my post and link provided. They *believe* they have the right to...and it's a very gray area. Do they have permission to check to see if you paid your phone bill?

thats completely different, thats a private debt, it goes to a debt collection agency. Riding on skytrain without a ticket is a public debt

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by zivan56

Refer to my post and link provided. They *believe* they have the right to...and it's a very gray area.

So who is in charge of enforcing fare payment?

[officedweller]

The offence provision is under the GREATER VANCOUVER TRANSIT CONDUCT AND SAFETY REGULATION:

http://www.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/reg/S/SouthCoastBCTrans/87_99.htm#section%209

Offence
9 (1) A person who contravenes section 3, 4 (1) or (2), 5 (2) or 7 (a), (b) or (c) or 8 (2) commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $150.

(2) If permission to enter a transit vehicle or other transit property is refused under section 6 (2) (a), a person who enters the transit vehicle or other property despite the refusal commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $150.

(3) A person who disobeys an order under section 6 (2) (b) to leave a transit vehicle or other transit property commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $150.

(3.1) If an order to not enter any transit property or to not enter specified transit properties for a period not exceeding 24 hours was made under section 6 (2) (c), a person who enters any transit property or specified transit properties despite the order commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $150.

(4) A person who contravenes section 5 (3), 7 (b) or 8 (1) or (3) (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g) or (h) commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $500.

The Violation Ticket Administration and Fines Regulation under the Offence Act would then grant authority to issue tickets in respect of offences rather than taking each offender to court.

See Schedule I - Police Officer entitled to enforce GVTA Transit Conduct and Safety Regulation
See Schedule II - offences and fines
Note: still listed under the GVTA Act in this on-line version:

http://www.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/reg/O/Offence/Offence89_97/89_97_00.htm