Emerson, Manitoba border crossings

[rrskylar]

So it turns out that half of the illegals crossing into Manitoba from the US (many of who have lived in the US for years and in one case 17 years) have criminal records, only a idiot like Trudeau and a truly incompetent govt. like the liberals couldn't come with a solution to end this onslaught!

[jmt18325]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

So it turns out that half of the illegals crossing into Manitoba from the US (many of who have lived in the US for years and in one case 17 years) have criminal records, only a idiot like Trudeau and a truly incompetent govt. like the liberals couldn't come with a solution to end this onslaught!

Those people are arrested and not let go. They are then deported through the proper process if possible. What do you want them to do differently?

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

Those people are arrested and not let go. They are then deported through the proper process if possible. What do you want them to do differently?

As noted a couple of days ago, only those with "serious" criminal records are detained. It's called risk management.

As to what could be done differently, the only thing that I can think of would be to detain and hold all those found to have entered the country illegally until their refugee application had been dealt with. Whether this could be done consistent with Canadian law, I don't know. I suspect as well that taxpayers might have issues with the enormous costs of such an approach, since it would be a largely political measure without much practical necessity.

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

As noted a couple of days ago, only those with "serious" criminal records are detained. It's called risk management.

As to what could be done differently, the only thing that I can think of would be to detain and hold all those found to have entered the country illegally until their refugee application had been dealt with. Whether this could be done consistent with Canadian law, I don't know. I suspect as well that taxpayers might have issues with the enormous costs of such an approach, since it would be a largely political measure without much practical necessity.

Canada doesn't detain people just because they enter here illegally. If you enter illegally, you're documented, released into the public with welfare benefits and an apartment (usually empty rooms in an existing new construction condo) until your file is heard and goes through the tribunal and appeals process. This may take upto several years (not including appeals). During this time, all you have to do is find a desperate fat chick, convince her you love her and get married, your chances of staying suddenly become much greater.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

Canada doesn't detain people just because they enter here illegally. If you enter illegally, you're documented, released into the public with welfare benefits and an apartment (usually empty rooms in an existing new construction condo) until your file is heard and goes through the tribunal and appeals process. This may take upto several years (not including appeals). During this time, all you have to do is find a desperate fat chick, convince her you love her and get married, your chances of staying suddenly become much greater.

I know we don't - I was speculating on what we MIGHT do, if it were consistent with Canadian law.

By the way, marrying a Canadian is (in theory at least) irrelevant to the outcome of a refugee application.

[urbandreamer]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

Canada doesn't detain people just because they enter here illegally. If you enter illegally, you're documented, released into the public with welfare benefits and an apartment (usually empty rooms in an existing new construction condo) until your file is heard and goes through the tribunal and appeals process. This may take upto several years (not including appeals). During this time, all you have to do is find a desperate fat chick, convince her you love her and get married, your chances of staying suddenly become much greater.

Hilarious but sadly true. I've known 3 "refugees" from Africa & the Caribbean that did exactly that.

[jmt18325]

I realize they don't keep everyone with a record detained.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

I realize they don't keep everyone with a record detained.

Cost.

[1overcosc]

It should also be noted that many countries outside the developed world have corrupt/poorly run court systems and political dissents are often punished with false criminal convictions. A criminal record from a non-democratic country is something that should always be taken with a grain of salt. Hence why it's smart to evaluate people with records from countries like that instead of automatically assuming they're bad and deporting them, as some would want to do.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

It should also be noted that many countries outside the developed world have corrupt/poorly run court systems and political dissents are often punished with false criminal convictions. A criminal record from a non-democratic country is something that should always be taken with a grain of salt. Hence why it's smart to evaluate people with records from countries like that instead of automatically assuming they're bad and deporting them, as some would want to do.

I don't know, but I've been assuming that the criminal records being referred to in media reports relate only to convictions in the USA.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

I know we don't - I was speculating on what we MIGHT do, if it were consistent with Canadian law.

By the way, marrying a Canadian is (in theory at least) irrelevant to the outcome of a refugee application.

What about having a kid with a Canadian?

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

It should also be noted that many countries outside the developed world have corrupt/poorly run court systems and political dissents are often punished with false criminal convictions. A criminal record from a non-democratic country is something that should always be taken with a grain of salt. Hence why it's smart to evaluate people with records from countries like that instead of automatically assuming they're bad and deporting them, as some would want to do.

Yeah but that also goes the other way. In a lot of countries you can buy your way out of a legal jam no matter how serious.

I actually don't care if people deported or fearful of being deported are jumping the border to come to Canada. It would be stupid, however, to assume that they're all great people which is why we have to oppose illegal border crossings.

[Spocket]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

I don't know, but I've been assuming that the criminal records being referred to in media reports relate only to convictions in the USA.

Well, it's fair to say that being convicted of having weed doesn't mean as much in Canada as it does in the States, it does demonstrate that an individual is willing to flout laws he or she doesn't like.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

What about having a kid with a Canadian?

Same thing - in theory it shouldn't make any difference to the consideration of a refugee application. In practice, however, .....

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Spocket

Well, it's fair to say that being convicted of having weed doesn't mean as much in Canada as it does in the States, it does demonstrate that an individual is willing to flout laws he or she doesn't like.

The "flouting" is not the issue, however. It's whether such flouting justifies spending public money to detain said flouters, without regard to the nature of the "flout".

[rrskylar]

Originally Posted by jmt18325

Those people are arrested and not let go. They are then deported through the proper process if possible. What do you want them to do differently?

You don't grasp the simple solution to allowing people to enter the country illegally, arresting them, finding out they have a criminal past, letting them go, providing legal aid for them, having a hearing, allowing them to stay longer and then finally deporting them? Net benefit to Canada = 0

Only a fool or prince Justins liberal govt. would allow this stupidity! But then again laws of the land aren't for people like the Trudeau's (as prince Justin has already stated)

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by rrskylar

You don't grasp the simple solution to allowing people to enter the country illegally, arresting them, finding out they have a criminal past, letting them go, providing legal aid for them, having a hearing, allowing them to stay longer and then finally deporting them? Net benefit to Canada = 0

Only a fool or prince Justins liberal govt. would allow this stupidity! But then again laws of the land aren't for people like the Trudeau's (as prince Justin has already stated)

Actually, previous governments allowed exactly the same thing, at least since the STCA came into force in 2004. The difference in recent months is that the number crossing illegally has increased. To note as well that having a criminal record is not, by itself, enough to disqualify a person from being granted refugee status and that this is also not something new.

One understands the frustration that this situation gives rise to, but I think it's telling that nobody in Canada has suggested a solution that is both legally and financially viable.

[kwoldtimer]

Not exactly on point, but the Ontario Superior Court has ordered the release of a man held in detention in prison for seven years while officials tried to figure out a way to deport him (based on his criminal record). The court ruled that the length of detention violated the man's Charter rights (no indication, afaik, of how long a person illegally in Canada can be detained without it constituting a Charter violation, just the ruling that seven years is not reasonable).

The case is interesting, the man entered Canada from the USA on a fake passport in 1986. Based on his story, he would be Ghanaian and/or Nigerian, but neither of those countries accepts that he is their national as his birth was never registered. So in this case the man seems effectively stateless and in limbo in Canada with no legal status. He is living with his 26 year old daughter, who I presume is Canadian by birth.

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...alks-free.html

[JM5]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Not exactly on point, but the Ontario Superior Court has ordered the release of a man held in detention in prison for seven years while officials tried to figure out a way to deport him (based on his criminal record). The court ruled that the length of detention violated the man's Charter rights (no indication, afaik, of how long a person illegally in Canada can be detained without it constituting a Charter violation, just the ruling that seven years is not reasonable).

The case is interesting, the man entered Canada from the USA on a fake passport in 1986. Based on his story, he would be Ghanaian and/or Nigerian, but neither of those countries accepts that he is their national as his birth was never registered. So in this case the man seems effectively stateless and in limbo in Canada with no legal status. He is living with his 26 year old daughter, who I presume is Canadian by birth.

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...alks-free.html

I have to agree with the sentiment that a person who is not convicted of any crime in Canada should not be detained for a long time, and in the case of a person with no birth records, who is effectively stateless, this leaves us with few options but to let him stay.

None the less, this loophole could turn into a chasm if it becomes standard practice for source countries to deny responsibility for and knowledge of their "undesirable" citizens who have left. Managing this may be just another bridge we would need to cross if the trend in global mass migration grows going forward.

[le calmar]

Originally Posted by le calmar

Number of people intercepted by the RCMP at the border this year. The numbers for Ontario contradict the numbers I posted a while ago. I guess it makes sense that nobody crossed the Ontario border illegaly since it it 99.9% water. But 0 in Alberta and NB? Only 5 in Saskatchewan? I guess because Greyhound does not stop near the border in those places and no significant cities are close enough to the border. (not really true in New Brunswick, St.Stephen is right on the border.. but is there a bus service at all between the US and NB?)

•New Brunswick: 0 (January 2017) 0 (February 2017) 0 (total)
•Quebec: 245 (January 2017) 432 (February 2017) 677 (total)
•Ontario: 0 (January 2017) 0 (February 2017) 0 (total)
•Manitoba: 19 (January 2017) 142 (February 2017) 161 (total)
•Saskatchewan: 5 (January 2017) 0 (February 2017) 5 (total)
•Alberta: 0 (January 2017) 0 (February 2017) 0 (total)
•British Columbia: 207 (January2017) 84 (February 2017) 291 (total)
•Total: 476 (January 2017) 658 (February 2017) 1134 (total)

http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/na...ere-bondit.php

Update on the Quebec numbers:

July 2017: 2,500 (2,000 in 4 days)

http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/20...-au-quebec.php