Drivers charged $20 'toll' after deadly crash forces detour through First Nation

[polak]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Source? Or is it anecdote time?

I'm leaving work so I'm not going to look into it now but I'm going off my sociology of health class.

I'll look into it.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by polak

I'm leaving work so I'm not going to look into it now but I'm going off my sociology of health class.

I'll look into it.

I believe. I'm just curious as to what the numbers are and what measurables they use.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by peter12

The reserves aren't private property either.

Never said they were. They are not public property which means you would be trespassing if you used their land without permission.

[polak]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I believe. I'm just curious as to what the numbers are and what measurables they use.

It was health and financial.

Financially is an obvious since there's no wealth sharing and a lot more job stability.

Health, I'll have to see what I can dig up but simple access to healthcare is far greater off-reserve than on.

[Clarkey]

This happened to me once at the same place, I slowed down a bit, saw they were angry and then bombed right passed them, they were pissed!!!

[Drummer]

Imagine if they decided to blockade HWY 1 and 1A. It would cut off Banff and Canmore.

[PsYcNeT]

This honestly seems like an old people tax, because really, who the hell carries $20?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by polak

Yes forcing them to live in terrible poverty without water or proper healthcare in order to preserve the idea of their "culture" makes total sense.

I'm sure that the people living in the 3rd world conditions on the reserves find solace in their "culture" being protected over their health and well being.

That makes more sense then fixing their quality of life and worrying about how to preserve their culture as a secondary concern.



Yes they do. Like, substantially. Especially economically speaking.

Firstly, no one forces anyone to live on a reserve. It's not a prison. They are free to leave any time.

They are choosing their culture over being assimilated into our culture and material gains. And yes they should have that choice. Considering that we just ended the residential school system in Canada in the mid-90s, it's a little too early to judge whether a reserve perpetuates "3rd world" conditions as you claim.

[#-3]

If there was not a pre-existing gate and toll I suspect this was not legal. To actually get something out of a trespassing lawsuit you need to have taken reasonable steps to keep the people off the land (A fence and a gate), the best they should hope for without this is removal upon the RCMP receiving a complaint. And profiteering certainly is not legal.

I Also tend to be far less sensitive to aboriginal issues than most, so maybe I'm wrong.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

This honestly seems like an old people tax, because really, who the hell carries $20?

Are you saying you carry bigger bills? Or carry nothing?

What a weird comment

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by Daradon

What a weird comment

Not really. A lot of people no longer carry cash.

[vanisleflamesfan]

Originally Posted by peter12

Well, as the reserve is on Crown land, it isn't private.

peter12: puttin' the 'D#U#H# in 'feduciary'

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by kunkstyle

Not really. A lot of people no longer carry cash.

I think we found what the actual problem here is. People who were very confidant in saying that "there is no need to carry cash" find themselves in a situation where it would have been very handy to have been carrying cash.

Especially when travelling on the highway; I have run into many situations where having cash would be handy. Sure- 99% of the time you may not; but when that 1% hits.....

[EldrickOnIce]

People who say they have no need to carry cash have never really been anywhere

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by vanisleflamesfan

peter12: puttin' the 'D#U#H# in 'feduciary'

vanisleflamesfan: puttin' the 'e' in 'fiduciary'

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I think we found what the actual problem here is. People who were very confidant in saying that "there is no need to carry cash" find themselves in a situation where it would have been very handy to have been carrying cash.

Ha, could be it. Personally I started carrying cash again a number of years back.

All I meant was that Psycnet's comment wasn't all that odd, as carrying cash seems to be a bit of a generational thing, anecdotally speaking.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by peter12

Well, as the reserve is on Crown land, it isn't private.

In Canada - with some rare exceptions, such as railway land - the vast majority of land is technically owned by the crown and the "owner" just has a fee simple, which gives them exclusive rights to its use and occupation (within limits).

Reserve land would be owned by the specific band and can't be, by definition, owned by any specific individual. The band would "own" it but under much stricter limits than the fee simple of private individuals. For example, they can't do anything to it that would change its nature from generation to generation without permission. Their level of ownership is seen as holding it in trust for future generations.

The term "private" ownership is complicated in Canada, but I was using it in the sense that it's not open to the public as a whole.

A property lawyer can correct me...

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by ken0042

You also have to remember a bit of the history; and dare I say phycology. As a group of people, there is still a lot of resentment over what us white people have taken from them. Not just hundreds of years ago, but even as recently as a generation ago with the schools. They take a certain amount of satisfaction in being able to charge us back. And I take this info from friends who live on another reserve, who make sure I know exactly what to say to anybody who stops me. I have to be able to say who I am visiting and exactly where I am going, and that they are expecting me.

I agree Ken, but if the push is towards reconciliation then these types of actions don't help, IMO.

I have said before the native population of Canada has had a raw deal, but I have also said that if the truly wish to move forward they need to do just that move forward.

While they may be within their legal rights, there is also the optics of this action.

On Saturday we were coming back from Banff and got caught in a horrible traffic jam on the Morley Flats due to construction. We turned off and I was going to shoot through the reserve to 1A, there was a fella parked across the road turning vehicles around. I don't know if he was looking for money or not. I u-turned and went back 1 km to 1X then to 1A.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I agree Ken, but if the push is towards reconciliation then these types of actions don't help, IMO.

I have said before the native population of Canada has had a raw deal, but I have also said that if the truly wish to move forward they need to do just that move forward.

This type of sentiment demonstrates a desire for capitulation, not reconciliation.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by rubecube

This type of sentiment demonstrates a desire for capitulation, not reconciliation.

Rubecube you and I have gone back and forth before on this.


I would have thought that previously my thoughts/posts would have shown that I do not have a desire for capitulation, but perhaps not.

IMO, opinion it furthers the perception of us vs them, which only re-enforces the opinion of the general populace towards natives.

Are they within their rights to restrict access, yep, I reckon they are.

If the end goal of reconciliation is equality of treatment and a colourless approach to Canadian society, I am not of the belief this supports that end goal.