CBSA (Canadian border services agency) cracking down on folders entering Canada

[shane45-1911]

You cannot carry a weapon, of any kind. But what define a weapon is the intended use. In the case on knives, police have been known to try and trick you into admitting that something you are carrying could be used defensively; if you fall into that trap, you just admitted to the possession of a weapon, so you basically signed your arrest warrant yourself. Same goes for walking stick and bear spray.

I don't try to "trick" anyone into saying anything.

Don't give me (or any LEO) a reason to give you a second look, and you can generally carry whatever you want (within reason) and go home at the end of the day.

 

[Sharp & Fiery]

CBSA doesn't make the rules. They just interpret them and enforce them, rightly or wrongly.

This is not true. The CBSA rewrote the rules on “gravity knives” after the Skyline debacle.

 

[shane45-1911]

This is not true. The CBSA rewrote the rules on “gravity knives” after the Skyline debacle.

No, CBSA is not a law-making entity. They can submit requests for clarification, revision, etc. but they do not have any authority to create or alter existing laws.

 

[Sharp & Fiery]

No, CBSA is not a law-making entity. They can submit requests for clarification, revision, etc. but they do not have any authority to create or alter existing laws.

I concur. So what I am hearing you say is basically that the CBSA revised the law as to not be wrong?

 

[shane45-1911]

I concur. So what I am hearing you say is basically that the CBSA revised the law as to not be wrong?

LOL, well they submitted their interpretation of the law and the law was passed/revised by parliament.

 

[Sharp & Fiery]

LOL, well they submitted their interpretation of the law and the law was passed/revised by parliament.

There has to be proof of this somewhere…any idea where I can find it?
As far as I know, the Tribunal changed it.
I’m interested to know.

 

[Gideons]

I concur. So what I am hearing you say is basically that the CBSA revised the law as to not be wrong?

LOL, well they submitted their interpretation of the law and the law was passed/revised by parliament.

There has to be proof of this somewhere…any idea where I can find it?
As far as I know, the Tribunal changed it.
I’m interested to know.

The criminal code (Law) hasn't been updated. It was just the CBSA interpretation based off of a CITT ruling - which is a quasi-judicial (not legal) body. https://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/publications/cn-ad/cn18-01-eng.html

 

[Sharp & Fiery]

The criminal code (Law) hasn't been updated. It was just the CBSA interpretation based off of a CITT ruling - which is a quasi-judicial (not legal) body. https://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/publications/cn-ad/cn18-01-eng.html

This was also my impression.

And, correct me if I’m wrong, this is why it is “illegal” to cross the border, but not illegal to posses in Canada.

Like I said, the first people to stand against this interpretation should be the CBSA agents.

 

[shane45-1911]

As far as I know, the Tribunal changed it.

The tribunal is just that. It is a group created to discuss and change and revise if necessary. The final passing of any law (or change to it) is still solely owned by parliament (House of Commons and Senate) and the Governor General.

 

[Sharp & Fiery]

The tribunal is just that. It is a group created to discuss and change and revise if necessary. The final passing of any law (or change to it) is still solely owned by parliament (House of Commons and Senate) and the Governor General.

The Tribunal is not Parliament.

 

[shane45-1911]

The Tribunal is not Parliament.

I never said it was?

I will re-state what I just said in my post above...."The final passing of any law (or change to it) is still solely owned by parliament (House of Commons and Senate) and the Governor General.

 

[Sharp & Fiery]

LOL, well they submitted their interpretation of the law and the law was passed/revised by parliament.

I never said it was?

You did right here in the post above.

 

[shane45-1911]

You did right here in the post above.

Read it again please. Yes, they had CBSA representatives in the hearing tribunal to discuss the law. But all that tribunal did was make recommendations. They cannot change or create any laws.

 

[Sharp & Fiery]

No, CBSA is not a law-making entity. They can submit requests for clarification, revision, etc. but they do not have any authority to create or alter existing laws.

The tribunal is just that. It is a group created to discuss and change and revise if necessary. The final passing of any law (or change to it) is still solely owned by parliament (House of Commons and Senate) and the Governor General.

Hmmmm….that’s not what you are implying here.

They cannot change the criminal code. But they can revise current Canadian Border laws through the tribunal.

 

[shane45-1911]

Hmmmm….that’s not what you are implying here.

They cannot change the criminal code. But they can revise current Canadian Border laws through the tribunal.

I am truly failing to see where I implied this.

For the sake of clarity, and I cannot be any clearer:
CBSA has no authority to create or change any legislature. They CANNOT CREATE OR REVISE ANYTHING. They can recommend or request changes, but that change can ONLY be granted by parliament.

 

[Sharp & Fiery]

I’m just trying to get things straight here.

So the Tribunal cannot make or revise laws. So since this “law interpretation” that they are currently using is NOT Canadian Criminal Code law…how are they allowed to examine and make judgements in this current way?

Did the Tribunal just tell them to start doing it this way? Is this lawful?

 

[Sharp & Fiery]

I am truly failing to see where I implied this.

For the sake of clarity, and I cannot be any clearer:
CBSA has no authority to create or change any legislature. They CANNOT CREATE OR REVISE ANYTHING. They can recommend or request changes, but that change can ONLY be granted by parliament.

Ummm…they can change the Customs Act.

 

[Sharp & Fiery]

They can change it because they have been pre-authorized to.

 

[Sharp & Fiery]

Anywho, my friend, in reality, we all need to come together with solid arguments and rebuttals if we want to change what is currently happening here at our borders.

I fear you are correct in saying that we most likely cannot, and that we should try our hardest to not let it get any worse.

 

[shane45-1911]

View attachment 2231211

They can change it because they have been pre-authorized to.

You are looking at a very specific section, and putting far more weight to it than warranted.

"Subordinate legislation" is a broad term used to interpret the "spirit" or intent of any given law and granted to the agency that typically enforces it - the CBSA, in this case.

It is NOT creating a law, as THAT CAN ONLY BE DONE THROUGH PARLIAMENT. It is simply the functional interpretation of any existing laws that the enforcing agency deals with. That interpreation is still subject to legal and parliamentary approval if challenged, and does not grant any power to create new legislatation.