Interference with hunting, trapping fishing or sport shooting - proposed amendment to Criminal Code

[welsh]

As for the kids not being charged. I am pretty sure that 12 to 15 year old kids CAN be charged with trespass.
How old do I have to be to be charged with a crime?

It seems you're missing my point, because we're not being clear what a "crime" is. Breaking the law is only a crime if the law you break is in the Criminal Code. Anything else is just an offence. Trespassing is an offence, but it's not a crime.

The reason I say these kids could probably not be charged has nothing to do with their age. The same would hold true if they were 27 years old. All crimes have an element of intent, which is usually spelled out in the law.

In the case of this bill, Breitkreuz seems to have done a pretty good job of spelling that out:
Everyone commits an offence who intentionally interferes with lawful hunting, trapping, fishing or sport shooting....

"Intentionally interferes" has a clear meaning. It would not be enough simply to do something that you knew could cause interference; you would have to intend the interference. This is aimed at people who set out to sabotage hunts, interfere with traps, and so on. So these kids could not be charged with the criminal offence, because they lack criminal intent.

[Snowwalker]

[/B]It seems you're missing my point, because we're not being clear what a "crime" is. Breaking the law is only a crime if the law you break is in the Criminal Code. Anything else is just an offence. Trespassing is an offence, but it's not a crime.

The reason I say these kids could probably not be charged has nothing to do with their age. The same would hold true if they were 27 years old. All crimes have an element of intent, which is usually spelled out in the law.

In the case of this bill, Breitkreuz seems to have done a pretty good job of spelling that out:
Everyone commits an offence who intentionally interferes with lawful hunting, trapping, fishing or sport shooting....

"Intentionally interferes" has a clear meaning. It would not be enough simply to do something that you knew could cause interference; you would have to intend the interference. This is aimed at people who set out to sabotage hunts, interfere with traps, and so on. So these kids could not be charged with the criminal offence, because they lack criminal intent.

Since you say that one has to have intent. I will put it this way.

If you wander down on to the back side of my place, and get told it is private property the first time is fine.
After you have been caught there for the third and fourth time, there is INTENT.

[welsh]

That's intent, but it's intent to trespass -- which doesn't matter because trespassing doesn't require intent -- i.e., the first time actually isn't fine if you don't want it to be. But the criminal charge would require the specific intent to interfere, which is not proven by the fact they know they're trespassing. You have to establish the specific elements of the charge.

If they were told that trespassing had the effect of interfering, then you'd have intent.

The point is that this bill, if it passes, won't allow you to slam criminal charges on anyone who happens to disrupt your activities. It will only apply to people who mean to cause trouble.

[Snowwalker]

That's intent, but it's intent to trespass -- which doesn't matter because trespassing doesn't require intent -- i.e., the first time actually isn't fine if you don't want it to be. But the criminal charge would require the specific intent to interfere, which is not proven by the fact they know they're trespassing. You have to establish the specific elements of the charge.

If they were told that trespassing had the effect of interfering, then you'd have intent.

The point is that this bill, if it passes, won't allow you to slam criminal charges on anyone who happens to disrupt your activities. It will only apply to people who mean to cause trouble.

Welsh you just made me point. The kids trespass the first time and get taken home in a cruser. Mom gets told whats wheres and why. So next time they trespass charges would be layed for trespass at least, if they are repeat offenders the interference charge could be added. If there was one that is.

[welsh]

Only if the kids had specifically been told the first time that their trespassing was interfering with shooting, and only if case law had established that disregarding the consequences of the act establishes intent for this offence. That's not what the letter of the bill actually says, and "intentionally interferes" implies a wilful act rather than recklessness. You're looking hard for something that isn't really there.

If someone continually disrupts something you're doing and interferes with your enjoyment of your property, that's a civil matter. You could deal with the kids in a heartbeat with the threat of civil action. It tends to have a powerful effect on people.

[Snowwalker]

Only if the kids had specifically been told the first time that their trespassing was interfering with shooting, and only if case law had established that disregarding the consequences of the act establishes intent for this offence. That's not what the letter of the bill actually says, and "intentionally interferes" implies a wilful act rather than recklessness. You're looking hard for something that isn't really there.

If someone continually disrupts something you're doing and interferes with your enjoyment of your property, that's a civil matter. You could deal with the kids in a heartbeat with the threat of civil action. It tends to have a powerful effect on people.

It takes money to file and sue or file a restraining order, but yes civil action is possible. If the interference law comes in to effect, the teens could be one of many trial cases.

[welsh]

You don't have to sue anyone. You just have to get a lawyer to send a letter pointing out that interfering with the club's enjoyment of its property could lead to civil action. And I'm well aware that this costs money, but I take the view that if you're not willing to pay a couple hundred bucks for it, then this issue isn't really worth very much to you, is it?

You need to think this through. If you set the bar for intent where you want it, I get priority access to any water I want to fish, regardless of who is boating, swimming, skipping rocks or whatever on it. I just motor up to your dock, zing my line into the water and say, "I'm fishing here and swimming scares the fish. Get yer kids the $%^& out of my water or I'll have them charged."

Oh, yes, that's exactly the bar you just set. By continuing to swim after I start to fish, your kids would be knowingly interfering with my fishing.

Civil problems belong in the civil realm. We don't criminalize irritants for the sake of people who want the state to step in and take care of their problems for free.

[Snowwalker]

You need to think this through. If you set the bar for intent where you want it, I get priority access to any water I want to fish, regardless of who is boating, swimming, skipping rocks or whatever on it. I just motor up to your dock, zing my line into the water and say, "I'm fishing here and swimming scares the fish. Get yer kids the $%^& out of my water or I'll have them charged."

Oh, yes, that's exactly the bar you just set. By continuing to swim after I start to fish, your kids would be knowingly interfering with my fishing.

Well you just operated a vessel in a careless manner by motoring into an area with swimmers in the water...
The regulations prohibit careless operation of a vessel.

This means no one is allowed to operate a small vessel without due care and attention or reasonable consideration for other people

[welsh]

LOL. Let's say I paddle up in a canoe.

What I'm doing makes no difference here.

[Snowwalker]

LOL. Let's say I paddle up in a canoe.

What I'm doing makes no difference here.

Ok so now who's doing the straw grab....

By the way a bump on the head from a Canoe can disable a swimmer and cause them to drown, as surely as a prop could cleave flesh and injure or kill.

It has been fun, but I believe we need to find another topic to joust over. Unless you enjoy charging Windmills.
I DO NO fancy looking like
Don Quixote..