Originally Posted by SPOC

--SIGH-- As some once said on this forum "Why do I bother".... I am going to trying to refrain from intentially attacking your inability to grasp simple concepts such as 'examples'. However I can not promise that some offside comments wont slip out...
First of all the careless driving was an EXAMPLE. I am not going to debate or describe in painfully detail every point of legislation. So again careless driving was an example of existing powers not being abused. You completely missed the point by making that rant about charging street racers with careless driving versus street racing.

Moving onto your second well thought out statement about SUSPECTED vs PROVE. Did I miss something? Did this bill reform or entire legal system and court process in Canada? Did this bill just do away with PROVING an offence occurred in court by presenting EVIDENCE? I dont think so. As was stated before the person still has to actually commite the offence and evidence still has to exist. The word SUSPECTED was in the he news article posted at the begining of this thread. That news article is not the actual bill nor is it legislation or the actual amendment to statue law. A journalist wrote that article as a summarized, dumb-down version of the actual bill. As far as I can tell the actual statute law does not exist yet, or atleast has not been published yet as the regualtions have to completed (also previously stated).
In addition, the accussed person in every offence or charge laid by police is always refered to as having been "SUSPECTED" of committing the offence until CONVICTED by the courts. Its just the terminology used. It stems from that age old premise "Innocent until proven guilty"... OH theres that word again, PROVE.

All I have been trying to say through out the many people who believe themselves to be these great street-lawyers, is the law has not even been put into black and white text yet. Until the actual wording in the HTA comes out there is no point even passing judgement on some chopped up version of the billl written in a news article.

Furthermore there is not one offence in law that I am aware of where a police officer can lay a charge based solely on SUSPICION alone. There ALWAYS must exist a set of facts and circumstances.
So keep your pantyhose on and relax about this whole suspicion thing.