All the way to the Supreme Court again...


CDNBear
#1
To find out that no laws were broken...

Night deer hunting allowed for BC natives, says Supreme Court of Canada
December 21, 2006 - by Joseph Quesnel
The Supreme Court of Canada has determined that two Aboriginal men from British Columbia can hunt deer at night.
In many provinces, night hunting is illegal. In their dissenting opinions, some justices pointed out that this opens up hunting to unsafe practices.
In a 4-3 decision, the court overturned the convictions of Ivan Morris and Carl Olsen, members of the Tsartlip First Nation of Vancouver Island.
The two First Nation men were charged in 1996 after they fired at a decoy deer set up by conservation officers to catch people hunting illegally at night with flashlights.
Drawing upon historical information, the Supreme Court said a treaty signed in 1852 allows the Tsartlip to hunt using traditional methods and that included hunting at night with light and fire, the judges said.
A provincial court convicted Morris and Olsen of violating B.C.'s Wildlife Act, which does not allow hunting at night with lights. A court of appeal upheld the conviction.
 
tamarin
#2
That's a stupid decision. Something the Supreme Court seems remarkably adept at achieving. It's stupid on two counts: it upholds a hunting practice that has been properly condemned for the danger it poses to its practitioners, the message it sends to others who wish to flout hunting laws and the unfairness to the game; and, more importantly, it brings the aboriginal community into disrepute.
What's the average IQ of a Supreme Court Justice anyway? Can't be over 120.
 
CDNBear
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by tamarin View Post

That's a stupid decision. Something the Supreme Court seems remarkably adept at achieving. It's stupid on two counts: it upholds a hunting practice that has been properly condemned for the danger it poses to its practitioners, the message it sends to others who wish to flout hunting laws and the unfairness to the game; and, more importantly, it brings the aboriginal community into disrepute.
What's the average IQ of a Supreme Court Justice anyway? Can't be over 120.

Treaty rights, being upheld and nothing more. The common Non Native laws, do not apply.

The cost of the decision is more the point then the outcome.

Seeing as it is limited to the Native community, of which, is not an over whelming size, the risks are limited to Band memebers. Such being a communal type hunting group. Tactics are generaly well coordinated. I have been involved in large Native hunting parties. There are rules and procedures that are for the most part, strickly followed and ment to prevent loss of life and waste of resourses.

And before all the nay sayers jump up my ass, I do realize that there are those that breach the ethics of the Band, but they are the exception, not the norm.
 

Similar Threads

13
US Supreme Court moves even further right.
by Hard-Luck Henry | Jul 20th, 2019
103
Role of the Supreme Court of Canada
by FiveParadox | Apr 19th, 2018
5
7
U.S. Supreme Court depicts Muhammad
by I think not | Feb 8th, 2006