• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Freedom Convoy protests [Split from All things 2019-nCoV]

Remius said:
Civics should start before high school.
Click to expand...
No, I think age 13 or 14 is a suitable age to get started with the discussion. Before that I feel that it can take on the sense of indoctrination. Not a big fan of indoctrination.
 
Kirkhill said:
No, I think age 13 or 14 is a suitable age to get started with the discussion. Before that I feel that it can take on the sense of indoctrination. Not a big fan of indoctrination.
Click to expand...
I learned about civics in grade 5 onward. How parliament works, the BNA etc etc. Not sure how that is indoctrination. Indoctrination was the Lord’s Prayer in kindergarten. But that is another discussion.
 
Remius said:
We are misunderstanding each other. How about this: I AGREE. Clear enough? Maybe use my entire quite next time.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I incorrectly read your portion I quoted as qualifying the Senate’s place in the EA approval process.

Separately but related, perhaps if we had had some of that Sunny WaysTM promised electoral reform, there could also have been electorate accountability of the Upper House as well…
 
Kirkhill said:
Right up until there.

I find yahoos in both the extra-parliamentary government and opposition parties. They both deserve the same leeway and the same right to be not just wrong but silly. They also deserve to be treated equally under the law without fear or favour. IE, the government should not take council of its fears and choose to favour one approach over another simply because they fear the consequences.
Click to expand...

Oh believe me, I am of the belief that there are yahoos on both sides of the political spectrum. As much as the "Freedom Convoy" were out of line, I have seen the G20 and Pipeline protests devolve into madness as well. Stupid people gonna stupid regardless where they make camp politically.

The law should be applied uniformly, with due process and respect for rights to assembly, association, protest, thought, opinion, belief, et al respected. as soon as you're crossing out of that territory, you face the consequences of your actions. End of story.

Where I see the conflict arising is that a lot of these groups are both funded and led by outsiders. They have no concept, understanding, or respect for our laws and governance. They know what will get them responses, and thus, more funding to pursue their aims. Hard to get FOX News to follow your protest if you're talking about Section 7 of the Charter. Much like the Rockefeller Organization doesn't care about First Nations issues, they just don't want another competitor.

Hearing people spout off about "Miranda rights" or "First / Second Amendment rights" in a Canadian context are like people pronouncing the 2nd T in Toronto. "You're not from here, are ya buds?"
 
Remius said:
Ah so CSIS told you that eh?
Click to expand...
that's the part you took out of what I said. CSIS of course did not say that. The guy who did it said that. It's on the net I will let you google it. I can't watch that again. The guy is a semi famous hacker he claims to be the or one of the founder of Anonymous. Even if he was not paid by CSIS the Canadian government is using the data which is the part I was trying to say is the problem. No oversight, No court orders, No transparency.

Even as a type this the government is telling the Senate that a joint House/Senate committee for the EM act with have to been sworn to secrecy and even then will not be shown the data or the intelligence reports.
 
rmc_wannabe said:
Oh believe me, I am of the belief that there are yahoos on both sides of the political spectrum. As much as the "Freedom Convoy" were out of line, I have seen the G20 and Pipeline protests devolve into madness as well. Stupid people gonna stupid regardless where they make camp politically.

The law should be applied uniformly, with due process and respect for rights to assembly, association, protest, thought, opinion, belief, et al respected. as soon as you're crossing out of that territory, you face the consequences of your actions. End of story.

Where I see the conflict arising is that a lot of these groups are both funded and led by outsiders. They have no concept, understanding, or respect for our laws and governance. They know what will get them responses, and thus, more funding to pursue their aims. Hard to get FOX News to follow your protest if you're talking about Section 7 of the Charter. Much like the Rockefeller Organization doesn't care about First Nations issues, they just don't want another competitor.

Hearing people spout off about "Miranda rights" or "First / Second Amendment rights" in a Canadian context are like people pronouncing the 2nd T in Toronto. "You're not from here, are ya buds?"
Click to expand...

The outsider funding argument is also a historical argument. It predates the nation-state and the Reformation by centuries, if not millenia.
 
Spencer100 said:
that's the part you took out of what I said. CSIS of course did not say that. The guy who did it said that. It's on the net I will let you google it. I can't watch that again. The guy is a semi famous hacker he claims to be the or one of the founder of Anonymous. Even if he was not paid by CSIS the Canadian government is using the data which is the part I was trying to say is the problem. No oversight, No court orders, No transparency.

Even as a type this the government is telling the Senate that a joint House/Senate committee for the EM act with have to been sworn to secrecy and even then will not be shown the data or the intelligence reports.
Click to expand...
Well yes since it leads to the rest of your statement.

By all accounts this was not a sophisticated hack. And why would CSIS buy it? It was open source for a bit before it was taken down. And they gave it to the media.

“It’s on the net”. Lots of things, as we have seen are on the net.

CSIS buying this info seems odd at best given how this went down.
 
My point was the bigger hammer was sending troops on to the streets.
which would of made us look like 3rd world country in my opinion

Never liked the idea of putting troops on the street to do law enforcement work, made me uncomfortable as a soldier, taking up arms against fellow Canadians.
 
FormerHorseGuard said:
One of the biggest issues of this protest was the fact the protesters had and have no clue how Canadian Government works, how and what laws are applied in Canada.

Example, you cannot call the Governor General's office and ask her to change the ruling government because we do not like how they do things. We do not have a citizen recall system in place. We have to wait for an election or confidence vote to take place.

In Ontario if you are pulled over by Police for any reason while driving you must produce ID and a driver's license, proof of ownership and insurance. It is in the Ontario Highway Traffic Act. Passengers do not have to show ID, also in the Ontario Highway Traffic Act.

We do not have the 5th Amendment right, we do not have a Bill of Rights and Freedoms in Canada. We have the Constitution Of Canada, with the Charter of Rights. Right to bear Arms, is an American thing and those rights end at the border, we do not have Bail Enforcement Officers with more powers than Police in Canada.

Most Canadians do not know their rights.

American Rights after arrest
You have the right to remain silent and refuse to answer questions. Anything you say may be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to consult an attorney before speaking to the police and to have an attorney present during questioning now or in the future.

Canadian rights after arrest

The Canadian Charter warning reads (varies by police service): "You are under arrest for _________ (charge); do you understand? You have the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay. We will provide you with a toll-free telephone lawyer referral service, if you do not have your own lawyer.

Very different rights if you read them and understand them.

The mandates the Protesters wanted changed were a lot of Provincial Powers not Federal Powers

Health care and such falls under the mandate of the Provinces, so asking the Federal Government to toss the mask rules is not in their powers.

Border Crossing rules are a Federal jurisdiction, but Canada only controls the rules once you step across the border, Canada cannot change the rules in another Country.

The Ambassador Bridge, it is one of a few privately owned border crossings in North America. It is a Private business. Blocking it can be a trespassing issue.

In the States the Governor can call up the State National Guard to help with law enforcement. Mayors can request the National Guard.

In Canada the Provinces can request or requisition Canadian Armed Forces to assist in emergency situations, but they cannot be used in law enforcement roles unless the Federal Government enacts the Emergency Powers Act.

These sort of things need to be taught in school, and need to be explained in simple terms so the average person without a law degree can understand the basics.

I remember following a court case in the UK and the person was requesting their 5th Amendment rights and the UK judge had to explain that his courtroom was not in the USA and was not the TV show Law and Order. The person should speak with his lawyer before he says anything more on the stand.

Just because you see it on tv, does not make it right. Just because you heard an explanation of the law, does not mean that is the law of the land you are in. Just because you want something changed does not mean you waving a sign and honking a horn will make it happen.

Side note

The Government of Canada has 2 hammers in its tool box called the Emergency Power Act. This time the government picked the smaller hammer. The police once given proper marching orders, handled the situation very well. No one was shot, no one was killed, every one arrested was treated properly and given a hearing in a timely manner or released.

No one was frozen by the use of water canons like they use in Europe, no one was run over by tanks , no one strip searched on the side of the road. Everyone was treated fairly.
just my opinions
opie
Click to expand...
What is this Emergency Power Act you are talking about? I can find no record of any Federal act under that name?
 
FormerHorseGuard said:
One of the biggest issues of this protest was the fact the protesters had and have no clue how Canadian Government works, how and what laws are applied in Canada.

Example, you cannot call the Governor General's office and ask her to change the ruling government because we do not like how they do things. We do not have a citizen recall system in place. We have to wait for an election or confidence vote to take place.

In Ontario if you are pulled over by Police for any reason while driving you must produce ID and a driver's license, proof of ownership and insurance. It is in the Ontario Highway Traffic Act. Passengers do not have to show ID, also in the Ontario Highway Traffic Act.

We do not have the 5th Amendment right, we do not have a Bill of Rights and Freedoms in Canada. We have the Constitution Of Canada, with the Charter of Rights. Right to bear Arms, is an American thing and those rights end at the border, we do not have Bail Enforcement Officers with more powers than Police in Canada.

Most Canadians do not know their rights.

American Rights after arrest
You have the right to remain silent and refuse to answer questions. Anything you say may be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to consult an attorney before speaking to the police and to have an attorney present during questioning now or in the future.

Canadian rights after arrest

The Canadian Charter warning reads (varies by police service): "You are under arrest for _________ (charge); do you understand? You have the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay. We will provide you with a toll-free telephone lawyer referral service, if you do not have your own lawyer.

Very different rights if you read them and understand them.

The mandates the Protesters wanted changed were a lot of Provincial Powers not Federal Powers

Health care and such falls under the mandate of the Provinces, so asking the Federal Government to toss the mask rules is not in their powers.

Border Crossing rules are a Federal jurisdiction, but Canada only controls the rules once you step across the border, Canada cannot change the rules in another Country.

The Ambassador Bridge, it is one of a few privately owned border crossings in North America. It is a Private business. Blocking it can be a trespassing issue.

In the States the Governor can call up the State National Guard to help with law enforcement. Mayors can request the National Guard.

In Canada the Provinces can request or requisition Canadian Armed Forces to assist in emergency situations, but they cannot be used in law enforcement roles unless the Federal Government enacts the Emergency Powers Act.

These sort of things need to be taught in school, and need to be explained in simple terms so the average person without a law degree can understand the basics.

I remember following a court case in the UK and the person was requesting their 5th Amendment rights and the UK judge had to explain that his courtroom was not in the USA and was not the TV show Law and Order. The person should speak with his lawyer before he says anything more on the stand.

Just because you see it on tv, does not make it right. Just because you heard an explanation of the law, does not mean that is the law of the land you are in. Just because you want something changed does not mean you waving a sign and honking a horn will make it happen.

Side note

The Government of Canada has 2 hammers in its tool box called the Emergency Power Act. This time the government picked the smaller hammer. The police once given proper marching orders, handled the situation very well. No one was shot, no one was killed, every one arrested was treated properly and given a hearing in a timely manner or released.

No one was frozen by the use of water canons like they use in Europe, no one was run over by tanks , no one strip searched on the side of the road. Everyone was treated fairly.
just my opinions
opie
Click to expand...

A few points:

In Ontario you have to produce a d/l OR identification (no d/l will still get you a ticket) to avoid being arrested. There is nothing in the HTA about passengers one way or the other. Police cannot 'demand' passengers identify themselves under the HTA, but nothing prevents them from asking. In 30+ years (not all road time), I think I was told to pound sand twice, although I suspect it would be prevalent now.

In Canada, you do have the right to remain silent, under a couple of sections of the Charter, primarily Sec. 7, and supported by a number of SCC cases both pre and post Charter. While I no longer have a current version of the Standard Police Caution, most services use one that includes a statement that a person may remain silent but anything they say may be used in evidence (or words to that effect). The US version is not codified in their Bill of Rights either, it evolved from a court ruling interpreting the protection from self-incrimination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Oguz.06
Hi guys
Replies
11
Views
2K
Aper
Aper
Weinie
Mental Health Issues From Freedom Convoy? -split from Freedom Convoy protests
2
Replies
37
Views
25K
Navy_Pete
Navy_Pete
Bruce Monkhouse
    • Like
    • Insightful
    • Love it!
Premier Ford To Use "Notwithstanding" Against Education Staff- split fromFreedom Convoy Protests
12 13 14
Replies
266
Views
89K
Furniture
Furniture
C
Diminished Earning Capacity (DEC) and Education and Training Benefit
Replies
3
Views
1K
kratz
kratz
R
Past history of depression and anxiety - Potential disqualifiers?
Replies
5
Views
5K
canucksbc
C
Back
Top