Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I understand the spirit of what's attempted; however, this puts another constraint on what is an attempt to expand the power of arrest.
What's important to remember is that the power of arrest is in relation to the property. Maybe if there's a shoplifting theft in a convenience store like Mr. Chen's, that might work, but what do you do when there's a break-in in a parking lot? Somebody smashes the window and grabs objects from your car. You don't own the parking lot, obviously. Maybe you do, but it would be certainly an unusual circumstance. What do you do if this person flees with the stuff or if you find the person perhaps a day later because you've somehow stumbled across them? Better yet, the vehicle is stolen, and they take off. If they cross town or cross the county line as they would do to avoid the revenuers in the rum-running days....
It just constrains the power of arrest and I think it could add some confusion to interpretation before the courts. For that reason, we're not favourable to this amendment.