Does RCMP run daily/weekly criminal background checks????

C

Challenger2010

Regular
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Location
Ontario
I was checking out some youtube videos posted by Canadians with regards to possessing a PAL/RPAL.

One video poster specifically made mention that once you are issued a PAL, your name goes into a special database that runs off a macro that is run by the RCMP, could be daily, weekly, monthly, etc etc, that checks to see if you may have recently been charged by the police regarding some criminal activity. If your name comes up, the RCMP have the right to immediately suspend or revoke your PAL.

Any truth to this??????
 
There is a "continuous eligibility" process that is evidently run, so yes - if you find your way into the CPIC database for a potential offence involving violence or firearms, my understanding is that it is likely to be flagged up.
 
You don't have to be charged, just an interaction according the explanation of the continuous eligibility program.
My understanding, a domestic dispute for instance where police attended but nothing came of it as far as arrests etc. would generate a flag which would cause someone to look into the contact and decide whether to send it to the provincial cfo for further review.

Sounds like a slow process but still more scrutiny than most parolees
 
Challenger2010 said:
I was checking out some youtube videos posted by Canadians with regards to possessing a PAL/RPAL.

One video poster specifically made mention that once you are issued a PAL, your name goes into a special database that runs off a macro that is run by the RCMP, could be daily, weekly, monthly, etc etc, that checks to see if you may have recently been charged by the police regarding some criminal activity. If your name comes up, the RCMP have the right to immediately suspend or revoke your PAL.

Any truth to this??????
Click to expand...

Of course this is true.
You watched it on via the internet on a you tube channel.
Did you see the clip about House Hippos???
Tight Groups and Keep your Powder Dry too,
Rob
 
I believe its actually the other way around.
if you are charged with certain criminal offences ( mostly the violent ones) then your name is put on CPIC as Charged.
it is then run in CFRO to see if you have a licence and it (Licence) is then suspended.
It actually is a good thing and its only for certain offences .(Violence, domestic violence,Criminal harassment, drug dealing, terrorism etc)
the same offences as in section 5 of the firearms act, which anyone can look up as its a public law.
Other police reports Mental health ,addiction, domestic disputes, suicidal behaviour are sent to the CFO at the discretion of the police.

I do not believe we (licence holders ) are run threw a big mega computer every day. it would jam up the system with almost 2 million licence holders.
 
I wouldn't worry about them coming after your PAL.

If you end up in front of a Judge who prohibits you from owning a firearm, they are also going to suspend your PAL.
But given you are in front of a Judge, you are likely a law breaker anyway and wont care that you don't have a PAL.
 
Challenger2010 said:
I was checking out some youtube videos posted by Canadians with regards to possessing a PAL/RPAL.

One video poster specifically made mention that once you are issued a PAL, your name goes into a special database that runs off a macro that is run by the RCMP, could be daily, weekly, monthly, etc etc, that checks to see if you may have recently been charged by the police regarding some criminal activity. If your name comes up, the RCMP have the right to immediately suspend or revoke your PAL.

Any truth to this??????
Click to expand...

Why? Did you get into trouble?
 
bacardi said:
Why? Did you get into trouble?
Click to expand...

No, just asking. Like I said, I was reviewing a bunch of videos on youtube. One of them looked like it was made by a firearms school and this was mentioned in the video.

The instructor in the video said that "Basically, once you have a PAL, your rights to privacy are now limited seeing as the RCMP and other law enforcement are allowed to run background checks whenever they want".

The reason I found this interesting is because I'm a pretty private person. I do not, nor have I ever, owned a cellphone. I always found these to be too intrusive, simply by viewing how friends behave with their own cellphones. They're always on them, their wives have to know where they are every second so they're always calling them, texting them. Stuff like that.

I've never been in any trouble with the police, so for me, it's a moot point. Just an observation.
 
Challenger2010 said:
No, just asking. Like I said, I was reviewing a bunch of videos on youtube. One of them looked like it was made by a firearms school and this was mentioned in the video.

The instructor in the video said that "Basically, once you have a PAL, your rights to privacy are now limited seeing as the RCMP and other law enforcement are allowed to run background checks whenever they want".

The reason I found this interesting is because I'm a pretty private person. I do not, nor have I ever, owned a cellphone. I always found these to be too intrusive, simply by viewing how friends behave with their own cellphones. They're always on them, their wives have to know where they are every second so they're always calling them, texting them. Stuff like that.

I've never been in any trouble with the police, so for me, it's a moot point. Just an observation.
Click to expand...

The police can do a background check on you regardless if you have a PAL.
 
bryan35 said:
The police can do a background check on you regardless if you have a PAL.
Click to expand...

Let me clarify what I mean by privacy. I have attached the below from the Regulations Amending the Firearms Licenses Regulation. What I was getting at with regards to background checks and stuff is in the latter part of the paragraph regarding the Privacy Act;

Continuous Eligibility Screening recognizes that an individual’s circumstances, including the appropriateness of ongoing firearms possession, change over time. Such screening ensures that certain interactions with law enforcement on the part of firearms owners who are complying with the legal requirements for licensing or registration are brought to the attention of chief firearms officers, if they are recorded in the Canadian Police Information Centre. This allows the authorities to take appropriate action, as required, including revoking a licence and seizing a firearm. When firearms owners become non-compliant (i.e. do not renew a licence), they are no longer within the ambit of the CFP’s jurisdiction. As a result, the Privacy Act, among other legislation, prevents the RCMP from conducting further Continuous Eligibility Screening, thereby withdrawing a meaningful tool that enables the CFP to take pre-emptive measures in dealing with higher-risk firearms owners.
 
bryan35 said:
The police can do a background check on you regardless if you have a PAL.
Click to expand...

Every Canadian that has an RPAL/PAL is in the federal database as a firearms licensee which CPIC cross-references every time a name is entered into it for any reason,be it a simple interactive conversation with a Constable,a traffic incident,whatever. The Police know,instantly,that an individual is either in the "licensed" or "prohibited/denied" category. It makes no distinction with respect to people who are not licensed. That gives a very good indication to the Officer what type of individual he/she may be dealing with and causes them to govern their approach to the individual accordingly.
 
Is there any difference as far as the databases go between firearms licensees and the general public?

John Q Public and John Q Public with an RPAL. When a cop pulls you over is there any difference?
 
Trimmer 905 said:
Every Canadian that has an RPAL/PAL is in the federal database as a firearms licensee which CPIC cross-references every time a name is entered into it for any reason,be it a simple interactive conversation with a Constable,a traffic incident,whatever. The Police know,instantly,that an individual is either in the "licensed" or "prohibited/denied" category. It makes no distinction with respect to people who are not licensed. That gives a very good indication to the Officer what type of individual he/she may be dealing with and causes them to govern their approach to the individual accordingly.
Click to expand...

It's well known CPIC is horribly out of date. The auditor generals report on that database basically said it was useless. There have been judges stating they can't do there job imposing sentences because CPIC doesn't show any up to date information. There was a man a few years back that showed no convictions in CPIC but court records in that court house showed 11 at that time. So pretty much if you commit a crime don't commit another crime in the same courts area and you are good to go. Some times the conviction records are never even sent in to the national database.


http://www.sterlingbackcheck.ca/Resources/OurBlog/2015/March/Is-CPIC-Up-To-Date.aspx

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rcm...-of-date-police-and-prosecutors-say-1.2989397
 
Last edited:
Bigbubba said:
I wouldn't worry about them coming after your PAL.

If you end up in front of a Judge who prohibits you from owning a firearm, they are also going to suspend your PAL.
But given you are in front of a Judge, you are likely a law breaker anyway and wont care that you don't have a PAL.
Click to expand...

Ya man a judge can revoke your pal.....but what's all this trash i hear about a cops seizing firearms after a domestic disturbance ? They got too much power....the judge has to revoke it before the cops can touch any firearms should be the rule.....but that never happens...we are law abiding criminals
 
icelink said:
Ya man a judge can revoke your pal.....but what's all this trash i hear about a cops seizing firearms after a domestic disturbance ? They got too much power....the judge has to revoke it before the cops can touch any firearms should be the rule.....but that never happens...we are law abiding criminals
Click to expand...


Apparently you need to read section 117.04(2) of the criminal code of Canada.
 
KRJ said:
It's well known CPIC is horribly out of date. The auditor generals report on that database basically said it was useless. There have been judges stating they can't do there job imposing sentences because CPIC doesn't show any up to date information. There was a man a few years back that showed no convictions in CPIC but court records in that court house showed 11 at that time. So pretty much if you commit a crime don't commit another crime in the same courts area and you are good to go. Some times the conviction records are never even sent in to the national database.


http://www.sterlingbackcheck.ca/Resources/OurBlog/2015/March/Is-CPIC-Up-To-Date.aspx

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rcm...-of-date-police-and-prosecutors-say-1.2989397
Click to expand...

That is an absolute fact. Poiice personnel are very good at opening CPIC files when there's an interaction,but,are notoriously lax with follow-ups or deletions after matters are concluded,either by no further action or Crown Attorneys dropping or declining to lay charges. I have friends that were caught skinny-dipping at 2AM at a secluded beach in 1966 that were subsequently dropped and never thought about again. Fast forward to 2008 and they get stopped by the US Border Patrol for a routine inspection while crossing at Lewiston,ON. CPIC says they're charged with "public nudity" and the Border Patrol sends them back. They've been married for decades and across the US border dozens of times,but, this time,they got checked. The BS they had to go through to have that record erased was ridiculous. It took their lawyer six months and cost a bundle.
 
Trimmer 905 said:
I have friends that were caught skinny-dipping at 2AM at a secluded beach in 1966 that were subsequently dropped and never thought about again. Fast forward to 2008 and they get stopped by the US Border Patrol for a routine inspection while crossing at Lewiston,ON. CPIC says they're charged with "public nudity" and the Border Patrol sends them back. They've been married for decades and across the US border dozens of times,but, this time,they got checked. The BS they had to go through to have that record erased was ridiculous. It took their lawyer six months and cost a bundle.
Click to expand...

Either you have a criminal record or not. If they're 'dropped' why would they need to get the record erased. I think your friends may have left something out of their story to you. A paper file from 1966 with "dropped" charges would never have made it onto CPIC unless there was a criminal conviction, and even then I'd have to get a 1966 criminal code, but for example it's currently a straight summary offence, which means no fingerprints, which means no "criminal record" because if we don't send prints in it never happened.

CPIC isn't the individual forces' database. "Charges" or their status in an investigation doesn't get updated on CPIC, and the closest information you'd get connecting the two would be release conditions. And those don't generally say what the release conditions are for. (Usually you can guess based on experience, but that's all)

I think there is a rather massive understanding how CPIC works and what impact the day to day work of police actually have on it. For example the only people in our detachment that can update anything on CPIC is our secretaries. My access for lack of a better term is "read-only", and same goes from nearly every officer in my outfit. Some places an NCO has to use CPIC simply because there is no secretary available or trustworthy enough to have access.

City forces use CPIC a lot more than we do, but they use it as a communication method, that's about the only difference that I know of. Someone in a muni force can chime in on that one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom