TC and the Cat

The Old Fogducker · Post by **The Old Fogducker** » Thu Oct 27, 2005 11:13 pm

Cat:

I know I said I was going to hit the rack, but my sleep cycle is all screwed up by hanging around doing not much and staying up late for the last few days ... so it'll likely be a long time before I'm able to get the brain to settle down enough to log some horizontal time in the fart sack. Unfortunately I don't have a gorgeous blonde to excersize me like a gelding in the paddock before being put into the box stall for the night.

Sorry, but they only need a search warrant to enter a private residence....a "dwelling house" as the term goes. Any airplane, building, Hangar, etc is fair game for not needing a search warrant.

You can indeed refuse them entry when they ask to enter your airplane that they've just watched land and taxi up to the tiedowns on the ramp, but you are then treading on possible obstruction charges....especially if there is some "probable cause" like looking in the windows and the load is stacked up on the seats without tiedowns, or see 15 female pax get off with a baby in each of ther arms in a Cessna 402 (for a total pax count of 45 sob) for example. ... yes, I'm being silly with the example. In that case one of them would stay with the airplane and other would contact the RCMP and a Justice to get a warrant.

Take a look at the links CD provided earlier and the Enforcement manual explains that part .. I just read it this afternoon while I was looking for the info Elbarto alluded to. In a way, its actually interesting stuff.

I might read it again .. along with a few of the CARs ... that will cure the insomnia for sure!

Fog

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Fri Oct 28, 2005 8:42 am

Fog :

This is a slippery slope we can find ourselves on when discussing exactly what TC can and can't do on a ramp check.

All your suppositions so far have been directed at the pilot being in a position where there is sufficient evidence that the pilot is in contrevention of the regulations.

However if you are not in contrevention of any regulations that are dangerous to the public and TC demands access to your airplane I would do the following.

They must ask for documents, I would produce them.

If they demanded access to my airplane I would ask them on what grounds are you asking access, do you have reason to believe that I am in contrevention of any regulation and if so what regulation?

Unless they could tell me what regulation they think I am in contrevention of I would refuse access and be on my way.

But before leaving I would advise them that any further demands on their part would result in my immediately contacting Ottawa anfd filing an harrassment charge.

And that action Fog is filed outside TCCA and gets results....I've used it and believe me it shakes up their day.

So in closing your posts are directed at the guilty, mine are directed at the innocent.

That gives the troops a balanced discussion on this subject.

Have a good sleep and lets chat again.

Your old colleauge....Cat

trey kule · Post by **trey kule** » Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:01 am

I just got back today and will provide the information here in an hour or so. I also will not take offense fogducker to the nastiness you sent my way. And I am not a young pup who has smoked to much dope tonight.

trey kule · Post by **trey kule** » Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:30 am

Well here it is. Read carefully.

First, the law as it applies.

1. CARS are just regulations. Period. They are not law. They are based on the Aeronautics Act, so when looking at this type of situation we have to go to the Aeronautics Act. Section 8.7 of the Aeronautics Act deals with search and seizure. I am not going to go verbatim into, the essential points are as follows. Secion. 487 and 492 of the CCC apply with regard to search warrents (ie. cause must be shown), and section 8.7 also indicates casue.
2. The important point here is that there must be cause. They can not be random. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which takes prec edence over the Aeronautics Act (Section 8 and 9) provides Canadains with protection against search and seizure without cause.
It may take a court case to the supreme court to estabblish this, more of which I will discuss later.

So the law does not , or should not allow it. How are they doing it then.
Well, first of all, that nice person who approaches you on the ramp is not well versed in the legal nicities of the situation. They have CARS on their side, and many of the honestly think that regulations are law. However, if they ask you nicely..."may I have a look at your documents?", and you say "yes", you have waived your rights. So what to do.
a. Ask the inspector if they have any reason to believe you are in violation or have violated the Aeronautics Act?" If they say yes, get specfics. If they say no, walk away. Dont argue. Dont argue....did I mention dont argue. Walk away. And take notes. Get the inspectors name. Confirm that they are who they say they are. Get the time. Dont...and I mean dont write stuff like...and I told him...stick to the facts as to what was actually said

What will the inspector do. They will occassionally threaten (and you may deem it a threat) to call in the police. Walk away. If they do call the police and you nicely explain to the officer that you were being detained without cause, show the officer your notes (keep touching them), 90% of the time that will end it. Occassionally you will find some gung ho officer who will use the line "if your not doing anything wrong why not let them look" My advice is to reply as follows: "I am not doing anything wrong but the TC inspector is trying to deny me my rights s a Canadain. Are you aiding and abbetting him in this endeavor?
.Provinical ombudsman will look at a complaint after the fact, and unfortunatel, to date, no one has tried to ramp me.

I worry because there are so many pilots out there who are so scared of TC that they will let their rights be trampled, and remember, if they do have proper cause, they have rights...this only applies to random ramp checks.

LH · Post by LH » Fri Oct 28, 2005 1:07 pm

Interesting subject here. I also see two ways of dealing with the problem that have been suggested or stated. May I suggest another?

If you are stopped and ASKED to sit in a police cruiser car, then that is allowable under law. If you are ORDERED to sit in that cruiser car, then it must be for an "Arrestable Offense". If the reason that you were stopped is not an "Arrestable Offense", then you have had a "False Arrest" committed against your person and if a search of your person was conducted also, then you have had "Assault and Battery" committed against your person. If ORDERED or ASKED to sit in that cruiser, then do so and start taking notes for your memories sake as evidence later on IF you were ORDERED to sit in the cruiser car. You now wait approximately 24 hrs afterwards and until his "system" has had time to digest his logs of the days activities and radio call-ins. At that point you contact a lawyer and have him charged under the Criminal Code of Canada.

For any ramp-check run on me, that is the method that I have used and it would be "Yes Sir", "No Sir" and allow him/her to break as many rules as possible and/or commit as many offfenses against me as they could build-up. Be sure of your Air Law and know exactly when an offense against those Laws is being committed in front of you. Get witnesses to hear/listen to the goings-on, if possible. Engineers, ramp crews, a fellow pilot. etc will suffice nicely. Let them "dig their own grave" as much as they wish and allow the evidence to mount as you watch. It's one thing to get someone by the gonads and squeeze, but it's another thing when you know that you now are getting the power minute by minute to rip those gonads off also in the following hours.......if you so choose.

Point being, SOMETIMES it is best to appear intimidated and/or stupid and allow someone to "dig their own very deep grave" in front of you while keeping your yap shut. That person will not "screw-with-you" again unless THEY are the stupid ones.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Fri Oct 28, 2005 2:33 pm

elbarto and LH :

Thank you both for expressing the same thing that I have been trying to point out for a couple of years.

Anyone who thinks that there are not TC inspectors out there who will not bully you and violate your rights under law deserves to get raped by them.

P.S.

I offer an open invitation to the same TC inspectors who tried to screw me over a couple of years ago on that little AOR that the Nanaimo FSS passed on to TC....here is my invitation, try ramp checking me sometime.

Cat

centerstored · Post by **centerstored** » Sat Oct 29, 2005 6:23 pm

This must be CAT's dream...a whole thread devoted to bitching about TC. And can you believe it...CAT didn't even have to hijack it! Maybe it was a raping you deserved?

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sat Oct 29, 2005 6:48 pm

Maybe you should know what you are talking about centerstored, before you make ignorant comments.

What exactly is your problem centerstored, or are you just ignorant period?

Cat

hazatude · Post by **hazatude** » Sat Oct 29, 2005 7:02 pm

@#$! you right in the face, Centerstored!

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sat Oct 29, 2005 7:14 pm

Thanks Haz, I just can not imagine why someone who professes to be a pilot would make such a low down remark as " maybe it was a raping you desedved " when the facts are so clear that all I did was ask for another PMI for my company.

I have no idea who centerstored is but he would not last very long working with the people who I work with. Someone would punch his f.ckin lights out with that attitude.

Cat

hazatude · Post by **hazatude** » Sat Oct 29, 2005 7:18 pm

Twats abound here. We need to fumagate for them.

LH · Post by LH » Sat Oct 29, 2005 11:55 pm

Cat ----- one can stand-up for their Rights BEFORE or AFTER the offense is committed against them......both are effective. There are SOME occasions when keeping one's yap shut and standing up for those Rights afterwards is the most effective way to go. I call it "The Spider Effect". Let the fly do as he pleases and appear not to be as "fast" as him, but just a tad on the "slow" side mentally. Knowing the difference is the secret.

With MoT, as with a whole host of other professions and trades, a select FEW, give the majority of their peers a bad reputation. I know many from the MoT who I have dealt with over the years, who are a true credit to their agency and don't deserve the rep that SOME of their peers generate for them.

Centerstored -----in your statement, you used the word "Maybe". That indicates in any court of law or in my house that one is NOT SURE, doesn't have proof of and/or doesn't know all the details about what they are speaking about........and they are admitting same by using that word....."Maybe". I don't know ALL of Cat's dealings with MoT, but I KNOW enough to advise you that you are WRONG. I therefore trust that you will take this correction in the right sense because you've "fired from the hip" on this one.

centerstored · Post by **centerstored** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 12:17 pm

Tit for Tat CAT, you wanna dish it, you're gonna take it. As I've said before, I don't know your story nor do I give a $hit. As for all you CAT lovers, careful you don't knock CAT of his pedastal while your kissing his ARSE!

Sasquash · Post by **Sasquash** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 12:38 pm

Elbarto;

I see you read your Aeronautics Act rather nicely, however, just for the record; the Cars are in fact an enforceable regulation, or an enabling legislation just as valid as the Act itself.

If you look at the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada, you will note most violations cited are in fact under the Cars. It seems the most serious offences, such as illegal commercial air services and the likes are addressed under section 7.3(1) of the Act. Most of the 7.3 violations are addressed judicially, that is by way of the Department of Justice and the Provincial courts. The Cars violations are dealts with the aviation tribunal itself.

As for ramp check they fall under the power of inspection as outlined in Cars 103.02 of the Regulations. If you refer to the TC website at

http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/RegSe ... r2.htm#2.1

You will find the following under the enforcement policy manual:

2.2.2 Inspection
Inspection powers are derived from paragraph 8.7(1)(a) of the Aeronautics Act. Examples of other delegated authorities from the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs) that facilitate inspection are listed below:
a. Section 103.02(1): The owner or operator of an aircraft shall, on reasonable notice given by the Minister, make the aircraft available for inspection in accordance with the notice.

INVESTIGATION

6.1 Introduction
An investigation is a systematic search for documentation of the facts relevant to an event

6.11 Search Warrants - Investigations
During the course of an investigation, the powers of entry and seizure available to an inspector conducting an inspection are no longer applicable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So basically any peace officer and/or TC inspector can request production under 103.02 under the inspection power. They can also seize evidence without a warrant.

However, if and when a peace officer and /or TC have prior knowledge of an incident, then it’s an investigation and the power conferred by 8.7 of the Act would apply, unless the alleged offender provides a voluntary surrender of the documentary evidence.

I find that a lot a folks are something confusing the inspection and investigation powers under the Act. Hope this help..

S

Springbok · Post by **Springbok** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 12:56 pm

centerstored wrote:Tit for Tat CAT, you wanna dish it, you're gonna take it. As I've said before, I don't know your story nor do I give a $hit. As for all you CAT lovers, careful you don't knock CAT of his pedastal while your kissing his ARSE!

Haza used the word Twat to describe you and I think it was very mildly put...almost a compliment and not an insult. Let me tell you why.

A "twat" is a a derogatory term for a part of the female anatomy so do use your imagination here. Now,by calling you a twat, we are insulting the fairer sex which we love so much and to make matters worse, are calling you a part of their anatomy which has a very useful function and that is not fair either. I think Haza should have called you "half a twat", because that is a really useless piece of equipment and fits a decription of how I and many others think of you.

So, centerstored, you deem it fit to insult (without provocation) a well respected, senior member of the aviation community. You Sir, have no respect for your elders and it shows in your comments. You did not have a good upbringing or you ignored your good folks when they tried to do their best. You are classless. You are a f-cking waste of space and a waste of skin. You Sir are a f-cking oxygen thief. I wish I could have the pleasure of your aquaintence so that I could rip off your starboard ear, piss on your f-cking brain and get some sense into you that way.

And before you respond and hide behind your annonymous keyboard, remember that sometime, somewhere, you will lose that identity and then we will see how wise ass you really are.

Now me thinks I will return to my customary position of leisure befitting of a Sunday afternoon in the Caribbean....hammock and a cold Rum and Coke with lots of ice. For on the morrow, it is back to the grindstone and packing another damn container, #2. Aircraft are en-route already.

. ._ · Post by **. ._** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 2:18 pm

I hope centerstored tries to get an OC in the Pacific Region one day, then gets ramp-checked out of business.

-istp

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:06 pm

S&J...allow me to correct part of your last offering to this sacred site.

" they use him like a fuking muppet at a circle jerk.... "

This is what really happened...

" they TRIED to use him like a fuking muppet at a circle jerk...."

But the old Cat got them by the balls and squeezed, that made them rethink what they were trying to do...

Now S&J may I suggest you get your own thread and leave me to mine...this one is mine....

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:07 pm

S&J, did you know that fierce contender is a guy that comes first and third in a circle jerk?

SplitS · Post by **SplitS** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:16 pm

Thats some funny shit you two - im laughing so hard Im crying here

1st and 3rd - Cat youre killing me!!! Cat, you deserve your own Catagory on Avcanada, nevermind thread...

centerstored STFU already!!

Oh cpt sweet'njuicy where you been???? Long time it seems....

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:25 pm

He has been practicing to be a contender.