Owen831226

Post by jiayuan;3245894
西人一般都分不清亚洲人是华人，韩人还是日本人。
而亚洲人也一般都分不清西人样貌的人是魁瓜，罗马瓜还是意大利瓜。你怎么确定看到的是个魁瓜？
还把这个帖子扯到“歧视华人”上？

出门在外，还是个远门，中国人多多团结，并不是去抵制所谓“歧视”的，而是为了在这里过的更舒心，顺心。怎么偏偏有人喜欢上升到政治高度。

这里哪里说到种族歧视啦？我只是回复别人在Canadian Tire谁背包都可能被查。

我就单纯问了一个生活上的法律问题，你跑来谈什么中国人要团结，到底是谁敏感了:confused:。

riger2

网上查了一下，可以的。

对违法或者不当的搜索一个siezure的保护只有在国家代理人（即，警察和其他政府官员）进行这些行为在法律上保护你。在于，至少是它的方式是在加拿大。一所小学，因为他是不作为代理的字体（即当地警察没有问他这样做对他们的名义），可以搜索储物柜，健身袋，如长。 R.诉M.（M.R.）[1998]3 393指S.C.R.的

通过扩展，与在加拿大的商店也同样如此，他们COSTCO或任何其他商店。认为一家民营企业，由于管理层的商店不是国家官员，如果他们想进入商店（或潜在搜索）搜索作为一种强制性要求，他们当然可以这样做。它有没有做Costco的成员签署了一份合同。作为一个民营企业做，他们可以设定他们想要什么，他们的要求和进入其处所。

Protections against illegal or improper search a siezure are only in place in law to protect you from those acts conducted by agents of the State (ie, police and other government officials). At least that is the way it is in Canada. A school principal can search lockers, gym bags and such as long as he is not acting as an agent for the police (ie the local cops didn't ask him to do it on their behalf). R. v. M. (M.R.) [1998] 3 S.C.R. 393 refers

By extension, the same holds true with stores in Canada, be they COSTCO or any other store. Its considered a private enterprise and since the management of the store are not officials of the State if they want to make a search mandatory as a condition of entry into the store (or a potential search), they can certainly do so. It has nothing to do with having signed a contract for Costco membership. It has to do with their being a private business and they can set what ever conditions they want on entry and such into their premises.

Owen831226

Post by riger2;3250350
网上查了一下，可以的。

对违法或者不当的搜索一个siezure的保护只有在国家代理人（即，警察和其他政府官员）进行这些行为在法律上保护你。在于，至少是它的方式是在加拿大。一所小学，因为他是不作为代理的字体（即当地警察没有问他这样做对他们的名义），可以搜索储物柜，健身袋，如长。 R.诉M.（M.R.）[1998]3 393指S.C.R.的

通过扩展，与在加拿大的商店也同样如此，他们COSTCO或任何其他商店。认为一家民营企业，由于管理层的商店不是国家官员，如果他们想进入商店（或潜在搜索）搜索作为一种强制性要求，他们当然可以这样做。它有没有做Costco的成员签署了一份合同。作为一个民营企业做，他们可以设定他们想要什么，他们的要求和进入其处所。

Protections against illegal or improper search a siezure are only in place in law to protect you from those acts conducted by agents of the State (ie, police and other government officials). At least that is the way it is in Canada. A school principal can search lockers, gym bags and such as long as he is not acting as an agent for the police (ie the local cops didn't ask him to do it on their behalf). R. v. M. (M.R.) [1998] 3 S.C.R. 393 refers

By extension, the same holds true with stores in Canada, be they COSTCO or any other store. Its considered a private enterprise and since the management of the store are not officials of the State if they want to make a search mandatory as a condition of entry into the store (or a potential search), they can certainly do so. It has nothing to do with having signed a contract for Costco membership. It has to do with their being a private business and they can set what ever conditions they want on entry and such into their premises.

专业，谢谢了。就想要一个实在的答案。牛人的回答就是点到为止。

colo

That's on entry not on exit!

On entry, you can choose not going inside the store if they want to do a search on you.

Post by riger2;3250350
网上查了一下，可以的。

对违法或者不当的搜索一个siezure的保护只有在国家代理人（即，警察和其他政府官员）进行这些行为在法律上保护你。在于，至少是它的方式是在加拿大。一所小学，因为他是不作为代理的字体（即当地警察没有问他这样做对他们的名义），可以搜索储物柜，健身袋，如长。 R.诉M.（M.R.）[1998]3 393指S.C.R.的

通过扩展，与在加拿大的商店也同样如此，他们COSTCO或任何其他商店。认为一家民营企业，由于管理层的商店不是国家官员，如果他们想进入商店（或潜在搜索）搜索作为一种强制性要求，他们当然可以这样做。它有没有做Costco的成员签署了一份合同。作为一个民营企业做，他们可以设定他们想要什么，他们的要求和进入其处所。

Protections against illegal or improper search a siezure are only in place in law to protect you from those acts conducted by agents of the State (ie, police and other government officials). At least that is the way it is in Canada. A school principal can search lockers, gym bags and such as long as he is not acting as an agent for the police (ie the local cops didn't ask him to do it on their behalf). R. v. M. (M.R.) [1998] 3 S.C.R. 393 refers

By extension, the same holds true with stores in Canada, be they COSTCO or any other store. Its considered a private enterprise and since the management of the store are not officials of the State if they want to make a search mandatory as a condition of entry into the store (or a potential search), they can certainly do so. It has nothing to do with having signed a contract for Costco membership. It has to do with their being a private business and they can set what ever conditions they want on entry and such into their premises.

Post by Owen831226;3250758
专业，谢谢了。就想要一个实在的答案。牛人的回答就是点到为止。

[/QUOTE]
Are Door Bag Searches Legal?

Yes, as long as the inspection is voluntary. No, if the bag check is involuntary or coerced. This is a rather fine legal distinction that is subject to misunderstanding and abuse. Basically, nothing in the law gives the merchant the right to detain a customer for the purpose of searching a shopping bag unless there is a reasonable suspicion of retail theft. See my web page on Shoplifting: Detention & Arrest for more details

A customer can refuse to have their bag checked and simply walk out the door past the bag checker. Hopefully the bag checker has been trained to know that they cannot force anyone to submit to a bag search without cause. This is important because the expectation of the bag checker is that all bag contents have been purchased. The worst thing that could happen is that an aggressive bag checker would forcibly detain or threaten a customer who refused to comply with the voluntary search
[/QUOTE]

see more here: http://www.crimedoctor.com/loss_prevention_3.htm

there was once at bestbuy, i said 'no, thanks' and left without problem. If you don't feel comfortable with it, just say 'no' .