Ignorant People Busted Leaving Closed Park

[youjustcomplain]

talk about over reaction

I don't carry anything flammable or anything that makes a spark. i'll go wherever the hell I want. I haven 't started fire yet

I don't think anyone is suggesting you have started any fires. But would you know if you did? Take smokers, for example. Smoker goes for a hike. On his hike, he lights up, does his thing, tosses the butt and steps on it. In his mind, the cigarette is not on fire anymore. So he keeps walking. 20 minutes later he heads home and after dinner that night, he checks his favorite news source to see that the park had a grass fire that afternoon.
Does he tell himself he started it? Of course not. In his mind, he knew he put out the cigarette by stepping on it for a half second. So he'd feel just as confident that he didn't start any fires as you do gman313. And in my little example/story, I don't know that he started the grass fire either.

[gman313]

I don't think anyone is suggesting you have started any fires. But would you know if you did? Take smokers, for example. Smoker goes for a hike. On his hike, he lights up, does his thing, tosses the butt and steps on it. In his mind, the cigarette is not on fire anymore. So he keeps walking. 20 minutes later he heads home and after dinner that night, he checks his favorite news source to see that the park had a grass fire that afternoon.
Does he tell himself he started it? Of course not. In his mind, he knew he put out the cigarette by stepping on it for a half second. So he'd feel just as confident that he didn't start any fires as you do gman313. And in my little example/story, I don't know that he started the grass fire either.

your argument is valid. However, I don't bring cigarettes into the park. I don't smoke, I don't have a lighter. The only way I could possibly start a fire is to use my glasses like a kid burning an ant. But then I would lose my glasses and burn in the fire I started.

People out for hikes are not starting fires. No way. Now I can appreciate the logic of a ban if it is to prevent people from being trapped. But I would also consider that like an evacuation order, not mandatory but you're on your own if you chose to enter.

that being said I have fully respected the closures and don't enter. I just don't agree with them

[Opeeved]

Overreaction fire (lol typo but stands) sure.

This reminds of lisa Simpson stroking the rope obediently at the museum after they just broke in after hours, "oh no dad, you can't cross the velvet rope, the velvet rope".

If there's one thing life has taught me, we generally don't get ahead by being the nice guy and following all the rules.

The only ignorance I see is the poster.

[Fancy]

What's ignorant is people ignoring people breaking the laws/rules. Good on the poster for speaking up.

[gman313]

What's ignorant is people ignoring people breaking the laws/rules. Good on the poster for speaking up.

laws that don't make sense are broken on a regular basis to get them changed. people need to keep the government accountable

[Fancy]

laws that don't make sense are broken on a regular basis to get them changed. people need to keep the government accountable

A temporary measure that isn't going to affect anyone's lives that abide by the rule but could possibly help for reasons given is hardly the type of law government needs to be held accountable for.

[youjustcomplain]

What's ignorant is people ignoring people breaking the laws/rules. Good on the poster for speaking up.

Good on the poster for contacting the RCMP. Bad on him/her for bringing it here.

[youjustcomplain]

that being said I have fully respected the closures and don't enter. I just don't agree with them

I completely agree with you ! I'd love to take my kids hiking into some of these parks. However, I'm a rule follower. I obey and teach them to do the same.

Some rules are stupid. I don't break them because I don't agree with them. I just realize they're stupid and move on. :)

[Opeeved]

That's your opinion fancy and you're welcome to it. I completely disagree. The cop commending agrees with me. Which btw I'm quite sure that officer was rolling his or her eyes at being taken away from real police work, you know the stuff everyon legitimately complains about? Traffic enforcement, drug dealing, violent crime?

Walking their dog in a public park. Good grief. Now this also reminds of peanuts and Charlie going to kick the football.

[Fancy]

If there's one thing life has taught me, we generally don't get ahead by being the nice guy and following all the rules.

Of course I'm welcome to my opinion - that's a given. Instead of slamming the poster, might think about the actual reason parks and backcountry areas are closed for any particular reason. Go after what's important and get the laws that are in place enforced to ensure people are held accountable for their actions to the maximum - like those starting fires. As far as contacting the RCMP, when laws or rules are put into place, there should be an expectation of complaints and I would expect the call to be referred appropriately.

I guess no one actually read who should be contacted? If after hours, who's next?

If you observe people accessing these closed parks, call West Kelowna Bylaw Enforcement at 778-797-8810. People observed disobeying these regulations will be fined; fines can be as much as $500.

[Opeeved]

I'm cordial about opinions.
I'm quite well aware of why these bans are in place. I also agree that the more attention given to this circumstance is warranted and valued. I draw the line at goody two shoes (that the right phrase?) Freaking out at responsible people for walking their dog, which Is the responsible dog owner when pavement is too hot for their paws...another thread could be made about that, responsibility to animals and walking dogs..
But seriously, busy bodies can urinate off. Beatniks, teens, up to no good? Sure, I wouldn't be here posting in this thread. Couple people walking a dog? Stupid.

Laws aren't meant for reasonable people, they are a bench mark to differentiate between reasonable or not.

[dodgerdodge]

I'm cordial about opinions.
I'm quite well aware of why these bans are in place. I also agree that the more attention given to this circumstance is warranted and valued. I draw the line at goody two shoes (that the right phrase?) Freaking out at responsible people for walking their dog, which Is the responsible dog owner when pavement is too hot for their paws...another thread could be made about that, responsibility to animals and walking dogs..
But seriously, busy bodies can urinate off. Beatniks, teens, up to no good? Sure, I wouldn't be here posting in this thread. Couple people walking a dog? Stupid.

Laws aren't meant for reasonable people, they are a bench mark to differentiate between reasonable or not.

But the law or bylaw is in force and should be respected regardless whether you are a "nice dog walker" or a pyromaniac. You see when they make a law it cannot be made to distinguish between good people and bad or black people and white it has to be a blanket law that covers the whole community or subdivision or whatever. Sure it may not make complete sense to all those that take great care of our surroundings but we cannot start adjusting it to suit different types of people, after all that's discrimination. The problem with not enforcing it very well and police or bylaw turning a blind eye just makes it worse as more people will assume they also have the right to enter as they are "doing nothing wrong"

[Treblehook]

This notion that some people should be able to enter closed parks is pure nonsense. Saying such a thing indicates the person feels they are "special" and the law prohibiting entry doesn't apply to them... That is not the way it works, and the police officers who seemed to condone the violation were absolutely wrong. They might think they were exercising discretion in not ticketing these violators or at the very least issuing a stern warning. I would disagree ... discretion in the context of law enforcement demands that the officer would do the same thing in respect to anyone else under similar circumstances... and I doubt that is the case.

[GordonH]

holes have always been just that, they don't care if park gate is locked & a sign says Park is Closed. holes will ignore that.
If caught slap there dumb es with couple thousand dollar fine for pure stupidity.

[Opeeved]

This notion that some people should be able to enter closed parks is pure nonsense. Saying such a thing indicates the person feels they are "special" and the law prohibiting entry doesn't apply to them... That is not the way it works, and the police officers who seemed to condone the violation were absolutely wrong. They might think they were exercising discretion in not ticketing these violators or at the very least issuing a stern warning. I would disagree ... discretion in the context of law enforcement demands that the officer would do the same thing in respect to anyone else under similar circumstances... and I doubt that is the case.

The notion that lemmings (not Norwegian lemmings, they have balls. Google it) should be able to dictate what one can't or can't do for what one has paid for (look at the nonsense posted; jail, bankrupting fines) they seriously can jump off the proverbial lemming cliff. That is nonsense. For citizens that are neighbours walking their dog.

So ooo freaking lame I have no words.

When your need by laws or a cop when you actually need one, don't even bother complaining here because you know the panty waists have high jacked their time pandering to bull####.

What's a non self absorbed person want?