Stockwell Day Wants U.S.-Style Armed Border Patrol

Posted on Saturday, February 18 at 10:39 by BC Mary
Last month, about 20 unarmed border officers fled from their posts at the Peace Arch border crossing after they learned that two U.S. murder suspects were headed their way. The union representing Canada Border Services Agency staff has asked that its members be provided with sidearms. Day, who spent Wednesday evening meeting with guards, said: "We want no access to the bad guys."


Contributed By

Article Rating

 (0 votes) 



  1. Sat Feb 18, 2006 9:18 pm
    Well if you want to get into the stock market and making a killing, buy into bullets, bombs and war toys. It would appear that this ConServative Party have their head stuck right up GW 's ass.
    Be prepared to give up your children, your grand children , because, you see this party is into pushing the hot button and kiss America's ass. You voted for them and "you" support the party system , so live with it. The voice of the party rules over the people, we do not own "government" the ConServative Party do.

    Good government is not a party government

  2. Sat Feb 18, 2006 10:59 pm
    We may not own government, but as a people we collectively own the ability to smash the government up-side the head if we so choose.

    "The more you read and learn, the less your adversary will know." --Sun Tzu

  3. Sun Feb 19, 2006 7:54 am
    Our Minister of Public Security is our first foremost security threat. Orwell: where are you when we need you?

    "We are all in this together somehow, some more than others somehow"

  4. Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:12 pm
    Gaulois: very interesting thought. I'd say George Orwell lives on,
    and has never seemed so alive, as he is now. His prophetic novels
    of political warning are repeating themselves in our daily news.

    Stockwell Day could have stumbled straight out of the pages of
    Animal Farm. How can ValOrie stand him?

    Come to think of it, has anyone seen ValOrie lately?

  5. Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:41 pm
    Well BC Mary they could have stumbled straight out of the pages of Animal Farm.

    Here some of you are worried about poor old Stockwell Day when in fact he is the smallest of problems..we have much more to worrie about. As far as having the ability to smash the government up-side the head if we so choose. "Government my friend Jay Yates is not my fear either, my fear sits within the political parties... the snakes that only crawl at night.

    Jay if we keep electing just political parties to "govern" , then you can count on it as a tax payer, being screwed every minute of in a day, out of taxes and public infrastructure.

    Political parties have proven to be nothing more than private clubs, which lawyers, and a few other professional use to gain control of power, and power in their eyes is the ultimate control. Harpers Cabinet is well represented by the Canadian Bar Association, and good old Tory lawyer Mike Wilson is now out Canadian representative to America.. look out hang onto your wallet.

    The legal community have positioned themselves in government and know more about every Canadian citizen than any other profession on the face of this slimmy earth. Yet they want to know more so they are pushing for tigher security laws.. most likely they are or hold major shares in the very companies wo will be handeling Canada's Security.

    No, if you want to hold these pigs back, do not support or help finance any of the main political parties, but I would sooner see all of these political parties take a bath, clean most if not all of the scum off of them.

    Start thinking outside the party box and when you do , this country and government might be returned to all the people.

    Good government is not a party government

  6. Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:43 pm
    Some cute comments and dire predictions here, but I thought the topic was an armed border services?
    My first thought is - Christ! Why do we have to continually compare ourselves to America? Anyway...
    There are two questions here. First is "do we as tax payers want and expect our communities and our country to take controll over who and what enters through our borders"?
    Second is "how do we expect to achieve this"?
    As to the first question I personally think it is absolutely ridiculous that our government asks our border gaurds to keep bad guys out but then under their breath they whisper, by the way, if someone's armed and dangerous let him proceed and we'll see if we can catch him later. I mean come on!!
    As to the second question there are many issues. Firstly, customs officers are peace officers and are so defined by the criminal code of Canada. They are the only unarmed peace officers in Canada. We think it makes sense to arm Fisheries officers, BC transit police, and - perhaps most telling - private armed couriers who pick up money from bank machines, but not Customs officers? So we'd rather have shoot outs in malls and on street corners with armed and dangerous felons and private security gaurds than we would make every effort to stop them at the border in the first place? My 5 year old could devise a better stategy.
    And if there is to be an armed presence at the borders, are we really considering an additional agency or some contracting arrangement to achieve this? So the border gaurd can then say to the bad guy - oh wait a second - you have to report to the armed guy over there, I can't deal with you because you're armed and dangerous. There's a good idea. Or in the case where the officers left their work posts due to an armed and dangerous person being en-route, they can now just step aside and let the armed contracted person take over?
    I say let's save the 2 or 3 million we're about to spend studying the shit out of it and impliment a phasing in system that sees all peace officers working at the borders given the training and equipment they need to do the job they're being asked to do. Simple.

  7. Sun Feb 19, 2006 5:16 pm
    Well sailor2 suffer you as “we have to continually compare ourselves to America? Anyway…” . This is not about comparing ourselves with American’s, it about integration and nothing more and headed up by mainly the legal community.

    It all about doing business or setting up business that feed off the tax system and right now, the new thing is security and the best way to achieve this is through fear , scaring the hell out of the people. I am not buying into this crap and like I said the best way to be heard is do not support political parties, here in Canada it been well documented that both the Liberal and Conservative Parties do as they feel, they have mismanaged our tax infrastructure dollars and the maintains of the public infrastructure , while at the same time deplete the public infrastructure capital by turning those public taxes over to fund private business.

    As I have asked many time before, what is the purpose of a political party, what is the purpose of taxation, what is public infrastructure and what is private business. I want to know why I am being forced through Revenue Canada to pay taxes that are used as an investment fund for “private business” ? Why? Do we have the right to refuse and if not why?

    Canada has big problems with the security within our bureaucracy, remember the DND employee that took off with $165 million of our tax dollars, remember the millions it cost to run the ad scam , these were all dollars stolen away from our "public infrastructure" . Maybe it is time we ran a security check on every bureaucrat and politician in Canada, maybe it time we implanted a tracker chip on these people, after all they do belong to us.
    One might say they are our cattle.

    Good government is not a party government

  8. Sun Feb 19, 2006 8:54 pm
    Why would we want to smash the goverment upside the head for trying to protect us? Isn't that their job?

    "I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden

  9. Sun Feb 19, 2006 11:22 pm
    I don't think it's unreasonable that border guards have weapons. If police officers and security guards can have weapons, surely they can too.
    As for party government, we get screwed over as much in municipal government - where there ARE no parties!

  10. Mon Feb 20, 2006 12:17 am
    Well, I guess that really depends on defining what government protection is. I'm not talking about striking the government right now for no reason. I'm merely saying that as free people on a free planet we control the option should the need arise. Everyone has the right to revolt against a corrupt or oppressive regime. Whether the corruption and oppression are sustained by the gun or by coercion doesn't matter.

    "The more you read and learn, the less your adversary will know." --Sun Tzu

  11. Mon Feb 20, 2006 12:25 am
    Agreed. But while I prefer to work outside the system through direct action, I don't shy away from placing the vote the Constitution guarantees me where I believe it can do the least damage. "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal." --Emma Goldman

    "The more you read and learn, the less your adversary will know." --Sun Tzu

  12. Mon Feb 20, 2006 4:06 pm
    I won't dissagree with much of what you have said here but it seems like a tremendous leap of logic to be talking about the mismanagment of public funds by governments and political parties when the issue being raised is simply why do we not provide our customs officers with proper tools and training to do the job they're being asked to do?
    I see a great deal of anti - Day sentiment in Vive and a lot of complaints and criticisms about government and politics and so on - and some of it is very true and very good. But sometimes it is beneficial to deal more specifically with the issue at hand and leave all the rhetoric for a more related topic.
    Having said that, I don't believe this issue of arming our customs is tantamount to deeper integration with the US. In fact it may be a good step in the other direction. I undersatnd that in some places Canadian border officers have their US counterparts listed as #1 or #2 on their emergency contact list of numbers because in a critical incident the local police are too far away and our officers are unarmed. So how do you feel about armed US customs officers rushing into Canadian border sites to provide the armed presence if it's needed? The Canada/US border belongs to both Canada and the US so why don't we take resposibility for ourselves and thereby reduce our reliance on US policies to dictate how we run our borders? Furthermore, arming our customs officers is about being able to better protect ourselves from those elements of US society that we find undesireable rather than just standing around collecting money from Canadians coming home from vacation who spent a few bucks too many while drug and gun runners are chuckling about how easy it is to sneak across Canada's soft borders.
    What I meant when I said "why do we constantly compare ourselves to America?" was that we are a sovereign nation with the ability and the right to controll our own actions and dictate our own policies. Choosing to impliment a border partoll and arming our officers should be about our own choices but because it is a shared border and this proposal resembles what the US is already doing it gets called a "US - style armed border patroll". First of all this clearly expresses a bias on the part of the author who chose a title bound to influence how readers will interpret the article, but more importantly why can't we be happy and indeed proud to call it an "armed border services - Canadian style"?

  13. Mon Feb 20, 2006 6:21 pm
    A "great deal of anti-Day sentiments" surfer?? That's a bit of an
    exaggeration, isn't it?

    Stephen Harper has given the sea-do-riding M.P. from Coquihala
    a pair of extremely touchy Ministries. It would take a genius to
    manage them well. Realistically, we can assume that the guy who
    walks with dinosaurs is not the genius we need.

    What would you have us do?

    P.S. So nobody has seen ValOrie lately?

  14. Mon Feb 20, 2006 7:17 pm
    No not really, our councillor are a little closer to the people, much easier to communicate with, where as if your not a member of the "governing party" , they have no need to communicate with you, because "you" in their eyes are not a constituent.

    It time we revisited this stoneage system and brough it into a new era.

    Party politics are like I said nothing more than gangs, along the same line as the Hells Angles, except political parties are provided with legislation that make their crimes legal.

    Maybe the Hells Angles should fill up the ranks of their gang with lawyers , like political parties have.

    Good government is not a party government

view comments in forum

You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.

Latest Editorials

more articles »

Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news