warnings were given - canada headed a step closer to a police state

Forum Sponsor
mlc said:
Remember when I posted this...?

"Here is my question to those of you that feel the G20 was a great travesty of justice. What are you going to do about it? Arguing with me is useless, and will not do anything to help your cause . What will you do?

Imagine you have convinced me. That I were to agree with every point you make. So what? What are you doing about it?

All I see is 21 pages of arguments, spanning January back to the summer. Useless.

Don't worry about who agrees, or disagrees with you. Go do something about it.

I'll bet you won't."

January 18, 2011

Done anything yet? No?





Didn't think so.
Click to expand...

You know something, sharing the same opinion with a bunch of you folks simply makes me feel good. I think you are missing the point in regards to why these discussions actually exist. Words can reveal meaning and meaning can unite a group and bring forth action. One of the problems we have with our current structure is that alone, legally, it would be very difficult for any of us to act in an efficient and meaningful way.
 
I'll go one further and say that getting our citizens blown up every now and then when we fail to weed out every terrorist in our midst, are necessary deaths in defense of our freedoms. It's actually a cheaper and more effective sacrifice than all those wars we fought for the same freedoms in the first place. It's kind of like the maintenance costs for living in a free society. I'll pay up any day with my own life, and if that is my fate then the only thing worse would be if my death ended up used as an excuse to engage in a peemptive war, or as a justification to chip away at the freedoms that others have already paid with their lives for.
 
fastar1 said:
I'll go one further and say that getting our citizens blown up every now and then when we fail to weed out every terrorist in our midst, are necessary deaths in defense of our freedoms. It's actually a cheaper and more effective sacrifice than all those wars we fought for the same freedoms in the first place. It's kind of like the maintenance costs for living in a free society. I'll pay up any day with my own life, and if that is my fate then the only thing worse would be if my death ended up used as an excuse to engage in a peemptive war, or as a justification to chip away at the freedoms that others have already paid with their lives for.
Click to expand...

+1 We pay more "maintenance" in lives for car accidents. Some people estimate that the amount of car deaths due to increased traffic on the roads and reduced air travel is greater than the amount of terrorism casualties.
 
Last edited:
I can't say that I'm surprised... Unfortunately, it will pass because the hard-right has a majority. Even if the moderate-right wins a majority next time around, I don't see them repealing this crap. It would invite too many "bleeding heart fiberals soft on crime and terrorism" comments.
 
geoff-9 said:
your from trenton, so im guessing your in the air force.. and your upset that police have more power to combat terrorism!!

strange but okay.
Click to expand...

Probably works on base as a civi......that or a supply tech...... ummmm corporal? Can I have a new mosquito net?



mlc said:
Remember when I posted this...?

"Here is my question to those of you that feel the G20 was a great travesty of justice. What are you going to do about it? Arguing with me is useless, and will not do anything to help your cause . What will you do?

Imagine you have convinced me. That I were to agree with every point you make. So what? What are you doing about it?

All I see is 21 pages of arguments, spanning January back to the summer. Useless.

Don't worry about who agrees, or disagrees with you. Go do something about it.

I'll bet you won't."

January 18, 2011

Done anything yet? No?





Didn't think so.
Click to expand...


So very, very well said. Don't interrupt the whiners, I think they're on there way to a possible chant...
 
Graves said:
Probably works on base as a civi......that or a supply tech...... ummmm corporal? Can I have a new mosquito net?

So very, very well said. Don't interrupt the whiners, I think they're on there way to a possible chant...
Click to expand...

you can find them at canadian tire. as for interrupting whiners, it's the squeaky wheel that gets oiled. either you enjoy your rights being taken away because you can't think for your self or you are the sort of person who has a postion that will benefit from other's rights being taken away because you're bully. judging from the way you talk about supply techs i suspect it's the latter, as all the people i know in the forces say "be nice to the logis, they bring you your cheques, make your food and give you your gear that you depend on.

lets godwin this thread

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
 
Graves said:
So very, very well said. Don't interrupt the whiners, I think they're on there way to a possible chant...
Click to expand...

So what do you suggest? People getting up in arms? Rioting? Burning stuff down?
 
FiReSTaRT said:
So what do you suggest? People getting up in arms? Rioting? Burning stuff down?
Click to expand...

The G20 and London riots prove that doesn't work. ;) All it does is justify the miscreancy the "right wing boogeyman" is trying to pin on you.

Face it kids. We're protesting to the generation that invented protesting. Those baby-boomers, who oh...by the way are running the country now...are becoming more and more conservative as they age.(we all do) They want to sit down in a nice safe place with their retirement packages and dictate the way the country is run until they fade into oblivion.

And as most of them view the internet as something you send e-mails on...sitting here whining on an internet forum ain't doing anything for your "cause".
 
A couple of points:

- Most Canadians don't even know that we had our own version of a "Patriot Act", when it was in force. No investigations benefited from these extraordinary powers.

- The law was originally brought into force by a Liberal government, so the slant of that article is more than a little annoying.

I say those things as someone who thinks that Harper should have been run out of Parliament on a rail, rather than given a majority in the last election. I just prefer truth, to spin.
 
Propaganda was believed - but Canada is not headed a step closer to a police state

CruisnGrrl said:
Because the libs did it the cons have to go further?

neither is acceptable.
Click to expand...

The entire front page on yesterday's Metro was extolling the virtues of our current Premier.

They haven't gone any further and things will settle down again.

I'm just saying that the big propaganda machine is running.

If you haven't noticed an election is imminent, fear and disinformation can greatly skew the results.

Don't believe everything you read. Some people are know to lie.
 
Last edited:
Re: Propaganda was believed - but Canada is not headed a step closer to a police stat

/sigh

I hate these debates, the law is totally useless and really hasn't done anything for anyone. Its just political posturing for the tough on crime image.

If this was important for law enforcement we should have seen the RCMP complaining about letting the law lapse ages ago.
 
Re: Propaganda was believed - but Canada is not headed a step closer to a police stat

OpenGambit said:
/sigh

I hate these debates, the law is totally useless and really hasn't done anything for anyone. Its just political posturing for the tough on crime image.

If this was important for law enforcement we should have seen the RCMP complaining about letting the law lapse ages ago.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and I'm tired of this faux 'tough on crime' crap. Certain political buzz-words need to be banned, from campaign use. It got us the debacle, that is HTA 172. It got us a useless ban on young, legal age drivers having any alcohol in their systems. It got us a virtually unenforced, unenforceable ban on the use of electronic devices, while driving. It almost got us a ban on young children, of appropriate size and wearing appropriate gear, from being passengers on street bikes (despite there being absolutely no supporting statistical data for it).

And that's just this Province. At the Federal level, it'll soon be creating massive increases in the cost of our correctional system.
 
Re: Propaganda was believed - but Canada is not headed a step closer to a police stat

Rob MacLennan said:
Exactly, and I'm tired of this faux 'tough on crime' crap. Certain political buzz-words need to be banned, from campaign use. It got us the debacle, that is HTA 172. It got us a useless ban on young, legal age drivers having any alcohol in their systems. It got us a virtually unenforced, unenforceable ban on the use of electronic devices, while driving. It almost got us a ban on young children, of appropriate size and wearing appropriate gear, from being passengers on street bikes (despite there being absolutely no supporting statistical data for it).

And that's just this Province. At the Federal level, it'll soon be creating massive increases in the cost of our correctional system.
Click to expand...

/Lock thread

Best post I have read...well ever.
 
Re: Propaganda was believed - but Canada is not headed a step closer to a police stat

Rob MacLennan said:
Exactly, and I'm tired of this faux 'tough on crime' crap. Certain political buzz-words need to be banned, from campaign use. It got us the debacle, that is HTA 172. It got us a useless ban on young, legal age drivers having any alcohol in their systems. It got us a virtually unenforced, unenforceable ban on the use of electronic devices, while driving. It almost got us a ban on young children, of appropriate size and wearing appropriate gear, from being passengers on street bikes (despite there being absolutely no supporting statistical data for it).

And that's just this Province. At the Federal level, it'll soon be creating massive increases in the cost of our correctional system.
Click to expand...
]

Are you in favour of cell phones and texting while driving or just complaining about the enforcement bit?

As far as the terrorist arrest part, who authorizes the arrest? Will it be like the G20 where cops are told by their confused superiors that they can legally snare anyone they want as long as they have a vague impression of some vague threat.

Not unlike HTA 172 where virtually any movement of a vehicle can be used to justify a roadside ripoff.

Cop "You're under arrest for trying to buy poisons and spreading anthrax. I heard it."

Guy " NO! I was trying to buy insecticide because I have ant tracks in my kitchen."
 
Re: Propaganda was believed - but Canada is not headed a step closer to a police stat

nobbie48 said:
Are you in favour of cell phones and texting while driving or just complaining about the enforcement bit?

As far as the terrorist arrest part, who authorizes the arrest? Will it be like the G20 where cops are told by their confused superiors that they can legally snare anyone they want as long as they have a vague impression of some vague threat.

Not unlike HTA 172 where virtually any movement of a vehicle can be used to justify a roadside ripoff.

Cop "You're under arrest for trying to buy poisons and spreading anthrax. I heard it."

Guy " NO! I was trying to buy insecticide because I have ant tracks in my kitchen."
Click to expand...

I'm sure that you've already seen what I'm 'in favour of', in the Law & HTA section, but I'll state it again here. Distracted driving, whether it's due to cell phone, iPod, cigarette, or coffee cup, is "driving without due care and attention" by definition. From where I sit it was a valid charge, before the electronic devices ban went into effect, so no additional law was required. What was required, then and now, is enforcement. If you have a law, but don't enforce it, then there is no need for that law.

The terrorist thing? Same issue. The law was created, but wasn't used, so why have the law at all? It wasn't used when it was created, shortly after the WTC attacks (in December of 2001). It isn't likely to be used now, if brought back into force. It's a simple smokescreen PR exercise, to show how the "law and order Harris Government®" is "working hard to protect Canadian citizens."

I'm bloody tired of it.
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom