Law Enforcement - The Good, The Bad, The Ugly..... | Page 340 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Law Enforcement - The Good, The Bad, The Ugly.....

Who was in the wrong?

  • Cop

    Votes: 23 20.7%

  • Dude who got shot

    Votes: 33 29.7%

  • I like turtles

    Votes: 55 49.5%
  • Total voters
    111
GreyGhost said:
It's a sad state of affairs when TPS has to issue a press release that they will bother to enforce a court order. In a well functioning system, that should be automatically assumed.

www.cp24.com

Toronto, Canada & Global Breaking News – CP24

Most recent News News business news stories and video from CP24
www.cp24.com www.cp24.com
Click to expand...
I think that's because they had previously stated that they wouldn't enforce trespass against the protesters, unless a court order was issued. Which is also ridiculous, because a land owner has the right to dictate who can and cannot have access to their property.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
I think that's because they had previously stated that they wouldn't enforce trespass against the protesters, unless a court order was issued. Which is also ridiculous, because a land owner has the right to dictate who can and cannot have access to their property.
Click to expand...
Meanwhile York asked them to do the same purge and it happened the same day. Not sure why U of T and York are being treated so differently.
 
My guess, saying they will enforce it is also posturing/telegraphing to get most of the less committed people out before they go in.

Not a legal reason under the law IMO but one difference between York and UofT is York said get rid of them near right away while UofT let them get more established trying to appease the situation.
 
backmarkerducati said:
My guess, saying they will enforce it is also posturing/telegraphing to get most of the less committed people out before they go in.

Not a legal reason under the law IMO but one difference between York and UofT is York said get rid of them near right away while UofT let them get more established trying to appease the situation.
Click to expand...
Maybe. York was pretty well established just not for long. A fleet of rental trucks arrived at midnight to unpack supplies and structures needed for the encampment. By the time anyone reacted in the morning it was a community.
 
backmarkerducati said:
My guess, saying they will enforce it is also posturing/telegraphing to get most of the less committed people out before they go in.

Not a legal reason under the law IMO but one difference between York and UofT is York said get rid of them near right away while UofT let them get more established trying to appease the situation.
Click to expand...
That certainly created a tougher situation at UofT. The protesters never really bothered with TMU. There were a couple of rallies and they were moved on.
 
GreyGhost said:
Maybe. York was pretty well established just not for long. A fleet of rental trucks arrived at midnight to unpack supplies and structures needed for the encampment. By the time anyone reacted in the morning it was a community.
Click to expand...
The location might also have something to do with it. UofT is a far bit more densely populated than York.
 
GreyGhost said:
But before that post a trigger warning so the protestors with PTSD from watching too many sad movies have a chance to put on their ear plugs and blindfolds so they don't get too upset by their persecution for trespassing.
Click to expand...

They get the rubber bullets.

Then tasered while they're flopping around on the ground.

uyfniEpByzSR9chkXt4uJ9GX0cWBsnap4dqiHUPXH0jtpGHxF_xop42iw3Qp2scbqQQpM-VlwbOAfWOBhApVZftLbZpZfPzqm6A-RWH8Q8S17VZtxD4B_sXPtULSmBKcrXB-_x_7G_XG9SHAHtQZ123_i5q0z1FaaED71VaX
 
GreyGhost said:
Meanwhile York asked them to do the same purge and it happened the same day. Not sure why U of T and York are being treated so differently.
Click to expand...
I believe the TPS were ready to go in on day one but were told by UofT that they were not needed and that the University could handle it on their own.
 
bigguy1 said:
I believe the TPS were ready to go in on day one but were told by UofT that they were not needed and that the University could handle it on their own.
Click to expand...
That's not what TPS said. I don't know where the truth lies.

www.thestar.com

Toronto police say they will not clear U of T encampment without court order

Police said they don't believe they have "sufficient legal authority" to remove protesters from campus without a court order.
www.thestar.com www.thestar.com

"Toronto police say they will not clear out the protest encampment at the University of Toronto unless there is an emergency or they are ordered to by a judge.

In an email to the Star, police said they don’t believe they have “sufficient legal authority” to remove protesters from campus.

“Absent a material change of circumstances, the Toronto Police Service will only act in situations involving an emergency to enforce the law and protect public safety, or to act in accordance with a court order,” said TPS director of corporate communications Natalie Clancy."
 
York issued the trespass notice immediately..
UofT waited close to 3 weeks.
UofT provided accommodations in that time.
etc..
 
Jampy00 said:
The level of leniency is just stupid in Canada...
Click to expand...
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Our system works far better than the more punitive one in the US.

But where we do fall down, is in the case of repeat offenders. Career criminals aren't dealt with severely enough. The "no fixed address" statement is a big red flag and if you have a clear indication that an accused is unlikely to appear, you shouldn't release them. Doubly so in the case of an obvious career criminal.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Our system works far better than the more punitive one in the US.

But where we do fall down, is in the case of repeat offenders. Career criminals aren't dealt with severely enough. The "no fixed address" statement is a big red flag and if you have a clear indication that an accused is unlikely to appear, you shouldn't release them. Doubly so in the case of an obvious career criminal.
Click to expand...
Afaik, other than "dangerous offender" which rarely gets invoked, the career criminal has little to lose. Their sentences won't be substantially different than a first time offender. They already had a criminal record so a longer one changes nothing regarding travel or employment. Zero meaningful consequences to continuing to hurt people. While three strikes has its issues, especially for violent offences, it's hard to argue that they should be given more chances. Offer MAID or a lifetime behind bars as the offender is not capable of being in society.
 
GreyGhost said:
Afaik, other than "dangerous offender" which rarely gets invoked, the career criminal has little to lose. Their sentences won't be substantially different than a first time offender. They already had a criminal record so a longer one changes nothing regarding travel or employment. Zero meaningful consequences to continuing to hurt people. While three strikes has its issues, especially for violent offences, it's hard to argue that they should be given more chances. Offer MAID or a lifetime behind bars as the offender is not capable of being in society.
Click to expand...
The problem that I'm talking about is the ability to commit more crimes while on pre-trial release. The idea that someone can be accused of a serious crime and obtain release doesn't bother me so much, as that's how the system works. That they can be on release and commit another serious crime, get released, commit another one... rinse and repeat, is what I find unconscionable. Breach of recognizance should result in a jail stay, until trial, not a finger-wag and, "Don't do it again."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom