Montreal police ticket veteran bagpiper for carrying traditional knife

[Retired AF Guy]

It is a but different in that the knife is tucked into the sock and not in view and the sword is in plain view and that riffles generally do not have bolts in them.  Having said that, I would not mind fake swords/riffles for people on parade.  I do not see what having a real knife/sword/riffle brings that the real thing doesn't.

I know pilots don't get to handle them very often, but riffles??

 

[SupersonicMax]

I know pilots don't get to handle them very often, but riffles??

Sorry, my native French coming out...  Rifles

During parades that didn't involve shooting blanks, I don't remember having bolts in my rifles but I may be wrong, it's been a long while. I will defer to those who actually do this more often.

The knife is in view as the handle protrudes above sock; there is no mention of the police officer having x-ray vision.

No need to special x-ray vision.  When confronted by a police officer, proving that the knife isn't real should be sufficient.

I too am perfectly OK with pilots being restricted to carrying fake swords on parade.

In my time after RMC, I have been involved in exactly 1 parade and it didn't involve any weapon...  You can restrict me all you want, it won't hurt my feelings .

An argument in favour actual weapons on a parade has yet to be presented here and I frankly do not see a requirement for it.  I say if it upsets people in the community and contravenes local bylaws then perhaps we should reconsider how we conduct parades out in towns and cities (or at least get proper authorization to do so)

 

[Haggis]

There are some who would say that the bagpipes were the offensive weapon in this case...

I'm surprised that it took 16 posts before someone trotted out this theory.

 

[brihard]

I'm surprised that it took 16 posts before someone trotted out this theory.

It was inevitable, but no less funny for that.

 

[Kat Stevens]

An argument in favour actual weapons on a parade has yet to be presented here and I frankly do not see a requirement for it.  I say if it upsets people in the community and contravenes local bylaws then perhaps we should reconsider how we conduct parades out in towns and cities (or at least get proper authorization to do so)

Read a freedom of the city proclamation, it covers this nicely.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Sorry, my native French coming out...  Rifles

No problem.

 

[SupersonicMax]

Read a freedom of the city proclamation, it covers this nicely.

These proclamations are unit specifics.  Units sometimes parade in cities in which they do not have such proclamations, therefore cannot march with "Flying Colors, Bayonettes Fixed and Drums Beating" at will.

I also seem to recall that a unit that desire using that freedom still needs to request it.

 

[Jed]

C'mon Super_Max, grow a pair and graduate to handling big boy toys.  [

 

[mariomike]

In case anyone is interested,

List of Freedom of the City recipients (military)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Freedom_of_the_City_recipients_(military)#Canada

 

[Pusser]

In case anyone is interested,

List of Freedom of the City recipients (military)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Freedom_of_the_City_recipients_(military)#Canada

That list is not up to date.  HMCS YORK has had the freedom of the city of Toronto since at least 1983.  I know because I was there.

 

[hugh19]

I agree. i did HMCS Discovery's second freedom of the city march when I was a brand new OD in 1990. Much before 2010 if my math is correct.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

It is a but different in that the knife is tucked into the sock and not in view and the sword is in plain view and that riffles generally do not have bolts in them.  Having said that, I would not mind fake swords/riffles for people on parade.  I do not see what having a real knife/sword/riffle brings that the real thing doesn't.

I'm sorry that someone who drops bombs on people, on behalf of the Canadian government, seems to have trouble with military accoutrements that remind civilians what we do.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

It is a but different in that the knife is tucked into the sock and not in view and the sword is in plain view and that riffles generally do not have bolts in them.  Having said that, I would not mind fake swords/riffles for people on parade.  I do not see what having a real knife/sword/riffle brings that the real thing doesn't.

I can see why the Air Force wouldn't issue bolts to their pers. It would take a Combat Arms NCO remuster to teach everyone how to put the bolt in their weapon.

In the real world, weapons don't get issued from stores without their bolts.

If your unit doesn't issue bolts with their rifles, for parade, it's likely because you can't be trusted with a live weapon.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

An argument in favour actual weapons on a parade has yet to be presented here and I frankly do not see a requirement for it.  I say if it upsets people in the community and contravenes local bylaws then perhaps we should reconsider how we conduct parades out in towns and cities (or at least get proper authorization to do so)

We are a martial organisation. Our job is to protect our Sovereign, our country, citizens and our comrades. That transcends any municipal or provincial authority. Rifles, artillery pieces, vehicles, whatever. These are the tools that our citizens have given us to protect them. They deserve to see us, fully kitted out, as their defenders.

If you, for even an iota of a second, don't feel we should be showing the Canadian people what they have paid for, what they can expect, or how we are going to protect them, then you are an idiot of the highest magnitude.

Have you ever done a fly past at a sports event? Or the opening of something important?

Most of us on Remembrance Day don't have fighter jets to roar past a cenotaph.

The weapon we carry is the one our bosses said we are the most effective with. IT IS the tool of our trade, like your plane.

Go back to your pilot lounge and spend time with your buds talking about how rough you have it compared to the guys living in holes in the ground. You can discuss how using the equipment that your country has given demeans you and how the government are such assholes for having you present yourself to the taxpayers in such a 'violent' arm of said government.

I think Air Canada might be hiring. It's OK though, I refuse to use them, like so many other Canadians, for obvious reasons. I'm sure you'll fit right in.

 

[rnkelly]

Recceguy- I agree with your points on why we should be displaying our tools of the trade but don't think the personal attacks or general vitriol towards airforce contributes anything.  As a TacHel guy I have more in common with the army combat arms types then Air Force but in the end we're all on the same team. 

Let's not lose sight of the real problem here; a couple of power tripping loser Montreal Cops.

 

[BurmaShave]

2.  No person carrying or having in his possession a knife, sword, machete or other similar weapon, without a reasonable excuse, may be in a public place, street, park, public square, on foot or in a transit vehicle.
        For the purposes of this article, self-defence does not constitute a reasonable excuse.

The way I (and, I'd wager, the law) see it, being in Scottish traditional dress is a reasonable excuse. This is just an overreach by police. They happen. Incidents like these are what enshrine legal definitions of what is a reasonable excuse. It's how the legal system works, awkward as it might look at times.

I'm not sure I agree with the duplicates thing. I think, by virtue of being in the armed forces, we ought to be trusted with weapons. Also, maintaining duplicates specifically for parade seems an unneeded hassle. That being said, to my knowledge, we don't issue ammo on parade. There's no reason to. We don't fly bombed up jets over football games. There is no way to take the ammo out of a sword or knife; it's always a weapon. If a city were to take issue with swords/knives, being diplomatic about it would set us in better stead.

Furthermore, flypasts, freedom of the city, what have you: it's not a goddamn right, it's a privilege. Cities make their own rules (bylaws). You can challenge them, if you feel your federally-provided rights are being infringed. I don't have a federally provided right to buzz football games. It's a bloody privilege, afforded to me by cities. They can, and do (Ottawa, last year) prohibit flypasts. I'm not sure if a ban on weapons while marching could be upheld (though I wager a ban on ammo would be), but a city could do that. They make the rules, the courts interpret the rules. Military servicemen are not simply exempt from rules by default.

And Recce? I don't wanna get in DS trouble on my 12th post, but I don't think there's cause to blow up at Max like that.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I know you think your RCAF, but TacHel, properly, should be Army ;D

Yes, I get your point, but read carefully. The RCAF is not the object of my scorn.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

The point that has to be made, is simply, does a municipal authority have jurisdiction to tell the Federal Government what a soldier is allowed to wear or not.

If the 'offender' was a member of the Black Watch, on an authorised duty, following the dress regulations promulgated by the CAF, Federal Government and the NDA is set upon by the MPD for violation of municipal laws, then Montreal (Quebec) better start remembering they are still part of Canada and not their own fucking country.

"Freedom of the City was an honour granted only to troops which had earned the trust of the local populace, either through some valiant action or simply by being a familiar presence.

Today, martial freedom of the city is an entirely ceremonial honour, usually bestowed upon a unit with historic ties to the area, as a token of appreciation for their long and dedicated service. The awarding of the Freedom is often accompanied by a celebratory parade through the city."

 

[BurmaShave]

The point that has to be made, is simply, does a municipal authority have jurisdiction to tell the Federal Government what a soldier is allowed to wear or not.

If the 'offender' was a member of the Black Watch, on an authorised duty, following the dress regulations promulgated by the CAF, Federal Government and the NDA is set upon by the MPD for violation of municipal laws, then Montreal (Quebec) better start remembering they are still part of Canada and not their own ******* country.

"Freedom of the City was an honour granted only to troops which had earned the trust of the local populace, either through some valiant action or simply by being a familiar presence.

Today, martial freedom of the city is an entirely ceremonial honour, usually bestowed upon a unit with historic ties to the area, as a token of appreciation for their long and dedicated service. The awarding of the Freedom is often accompanied by a celebratory parade through the city."

Ah, I was referring Freedom of the City in the sense of the parade, not the ceremonial honour of carrying weapons. Permission to parade through their streets is granted by the municipal government. It's a privilege.

That's a bit unrelated, though. At issue, is, as rnkelly put it, a couple of power tripping loser Montreal Cops. It's not a military thing, it's just an over-zealous application of the law (which, I might remind you, we're still bound by, even municipal laws (though I'm not sure anyone would have the guts to ticket an illegally parked LAV ;D)). They can go back and review what constitutes a reasonable excuse, at which point they'll conclude that traditional Scottish dress is a reasonable excuse, as they have for Sikhs.

 

[SupersonicMax]

I'm sorry that someone who drops bombs on people, on behalf of the Canadian government, seems to have trouble with military accoutrements that remind civilians what we do.

I haven't said I had issues with weapons. But the news story certainly suggests people outside our organization do.  All I said is I don't care either way if we are allowed to carry actual or fake weapons on a parade.  And it is worth questionning our ways and looking into the potential problem.  Is it an overzealous cop?  Maybe.  But judging by the comments when fly-bys and even airshows are conducted there is a fair amount of people upset in Canada by the display of military might.

So, we can tell people they can shut up and tell them they need to see their military with weapons on a parade so they can trust us with weapons or we can look objectively at our organization and see how we fit in the society we protect.

Questionning the established ways is not a bad thing and this forum, being unofficial, open to everyone and not costing the Government a single dime, is a good way to stir ideas for small perceived problems like this. 

If you, as a moderator of all people, can't understand that and feel the need to resort to unwarranted personnal attacks, then I feel sorry for you.

To come back to the subject, the questions that would need answering are:

1- Does the population actually have issues with using weapons on parade?
2- If yes, is there an actual need to carry weapons on a parade?
3- Can we achieve the same "effect" with "fake" weapons?

As far as fly-bys go, never with live weapons on the aircraft and generally at the request from the population.  The only military-driven fly-bys happen on base or during Rememberance Day parade.  The other ones are requested by civilian agencies through 1 CAD.