That's correct. I think the practical point is that when you have the geographical exception where two kilometres, for example, might be overly broad because of those services that we've talked about, the problem arises when multiple exceptions are needed to make that geographical condition reasonable and appropriate. When you have those multiple exceptions, it adds a lot of uncertainty to the sentencing process.
I'm sure from a victim's standpoint, it adds a lot of uncertainty as well. I'm seeing the person asking, “Is it falling under an exception?” And this is to provide certainty. From a police officer's perspective, it provides a lot of uncertainty about enforcement.
From an accused's perspective, it also opens them to a deprivation of liberty and an arrest for something that they're doing lawfully. They're within their boundary, there's an exception; usually they're arrested first, brought to court, and then prosecuted. If they can show that they have fallen into the exception, then there will be an acquittal and there will be a recognition that this wasn't appropriate action.
It's all that comes before it that is undesirable.