Posted by Phil on January 26, 19100 at 22:00:56:
In Reply to: Re: RICO action, now (Bill-13) ATTENTION-ALL-DIVERS-7 posted by Ted, post-7 on January 25, 19100 at 11:48:29:
: message was posted on 12:50:29, - - 1/23/000
: Answer to Phil:
: The diver who wears a Dog on his head, since it is not illegal to date, and acknowledges that diving, with his Dog, as is the choice of his diving "Buddie".
: In our choice of freedoms, Phil, we have no objection (Not even by the NAUI diving standards) to your way of diving, go for it.
: But, Phil, if your dog bites you in the ass, don't come back to me for buddy breading, I only got one regulator. You are on your own.
Ted,
You missed my point completely. Let me spell it out simply. Canadian Law is Canadian Law, US Law is US Law. The two have nothing to do with the other. I can not quote from a case that was derived in the US Court system for use in a Canadian legal case. All the bantering about State US constitutional law and US case law has zero bearing to this problem. Now I'm not saying that there are not similar laws or case law up here in Canada, but what we need is reference to that information.
Secondly, I have never suggested that we stop fighting the passage of the bill. I was simply stating the likelihood of the bill passing. Given its current priority, the remaining amount of time that the bill does have to get through committee and back to the house to be passed. Since the bill has been pulled into Committee it can be stalled to death (a very large likelihood, given the number of people who will wish to speak about it). Also, since the bill is a private members bill, it maybe simply pushed aside for more important government business (another strong likelihood). With all this stacked against the bill it has a low priority of being passed. Does that mean that we stop fighting it? No, but we need to use the tools that are available to us to be used
Let me clear up a few other points that people seem to be having trouble with. Land ownership up here in Canada is not the same as it is down in there in the US. Now, I'm not a Lawyer (let alone a Constitution Specialist), but up here in Canada we have the Right of ENJOYMENT, not ownership. What does this mean? Well if I have a deed to a parcel of land, it means that I have exclusive use and enjoyment of said property, but I do not own it. The Government can expropriate the land for other uses, providing due compensation is made, in effect the Government owns the land, not the people. As for the lake bottom, it is Canadian Government property, which is governed and regulated by the Ontario Government, and all abandoned wrecks/structures are property of the Ontario Government.
There are a few Laws up here that are already on the books that most of you may not know.
1) If you discover a wreck/object on the lake bottom (lakes or waterays controlled by the OG) you are required to inform the CCG of it's location and all data/information that you know about the object. The CCG will then attempt to find the previous owner and notify them of the exact location and allow them the option of recovering the object. If no owner can be located, I'm not sure what happens. I have not seen the entire law/program specs., and only brushed into this briefly in the last week or so.
2) It is already against the law to remove any artifact from any wreck in Ontario waters, unless you have clear title to do so.
3) As for the Scourge and the Hamilton wrecks, they were just recently given to the OG by the US Government (the US Government never released it claim on them, and as such they were US property even though they were on Canadian soil). There were two provisions to this release:
1) Any remains of US service personal found on the wrecks must be return to the US Government for proper military burial.
2) The OG must do something with the wrecks to preserve them and to allow access or some sort of exhibit dealing with the wrecks.
Due to concerns about the remains of the service personnel being illegal removed, as well as the artifacts contained on the wrecks the OG as seen fit to declare the site off limits
Now, I'm not lawyer, and as such I sure that my understanding is limited in comparison to a Canadian Constitutional Specialist. So what does have the most bearing on this matter?
1) The Canadian Constitution
2) The Canadian Charter of Rights
3) The Canadian Shipping Act
4) The Ontario Heritage Act
5) The Canadian Salvage Law
If we could just a grasp on these few simple facts then it would be possible to start working together to fight this bill. At the moment this is not happening, and I believe that we are all on the same side of this issue, but we have to work with the tools that are available to be used.
We have been attacking each other over stupid things, like spelling and grammar. Lord knows my spelling sucks as well as my grammar, but does that really have any importance to the issue at hand? I don't think so. We have also been wording our responses in sharp and sometimes insulting ways. Again this does not help resolve the issue at hand. Now, if I have given offence, insulted or in anyway demeaned an individual on this board with my responses and posts, then you have my unconditional apology for those posts.
Can we all start to pull on the rope in the same direction again? Please.
Respectfully
Phil