GostHacked Posted June 2, 2011 Author Report Posted June 2, 2011 Ooooh scary.... Where can I order my tin foil hat? I'm pretty sure I took part in democracy when I was one of the 40% of Canadians who voted for another term for this police state. If you are not scared or at least concerned. Then you simply have not been paying attention. Many of us have been paying attention, and see the trends. Most of us can put 2+2 and it does equal 4, regardless of them trying to lie to us and tell us that it is actually 5. But using the tin-foil hat bit is another 'last resort' when someone is obviously defeated. Just like the way you pointed out that the name calling was a last resort. It's also a defense mechanism for those who can't deal or don't want to deal with reality. Quote
GostHacked Posted June 2, 2011 Author Report Posted June 2, 2011 Shooting them on sight would be way too harsh, and calling them freedom fighters is equally absurd, I think a reasonable compromise to keep the peace would have been to physically detain some of the protesters for a day or two, and then release them if no charges could be laid. That is what happened. And many detained illegally, because of the special powers the police were said to have been granted, but only after the summit was over, we find out the powers were never granted. We have been lied to on purpose. And you still don't have a problem with that? And I do like the idea of carrying a camera. But even now in parts of the US, and I am suspecting parts of Canada where the cops try to discourage you from filimg them. And in some areas making it illegal to video a public officer. They can train as many cameras on you as they want, but as soon as you start making them accountable for their actions, they get quite nasty. Lost of evidence on youtube and liveleak. Quote
CPCFTW Posted June 2, 2011 Report Posted June 2, 2011 If you are not scared or at least concerned. Then you simply have not been paying attention. Many of us have been paying attention, and see the trends. Most of us can put 2+2 and it does equal 4, regardless of them trying to lie to us and tell us that it is actually 5. But using the tin-foil hat bit is another 'last resort' when someone is obviously defeated. Just like the way you pointed out that the name calling was a last resort. It's also a defense mechanism for those who can't deal or don't want to deal with reality. I'm sorry what reality is that? The thing about democracy is that if the "trends" towards a police state become too obvious or pronounced, then we can just elect happy jack to trend us towards an economic collapse! The problem with your theory is that most Canadians don't have anything to hide from the "police state" so your cries fall on deaf ears. Most Canadians are more concerned about catching criminals, not hiding their own criminal activity. Quote
GostHacked Posted June 2, 2011 Author Report Posted June 2, 2011 I'm sorry what reality is that? The thing about democracy is that if the "trends" towards a police state become too obvious or pronounced, then we can just elect happy jack to trend us towards an economic collapse! Democracy does not trend to a police state. Tyranny trends to a police state. Also economic collapse has in the past given way to police like states. Nazi Germany is one example. The problem with your theory is that most Canadians don't have anything to hide from the "police state" so your cries fall on deaf ears. Most Canadians are more concerned about catching criminals, not hiding their own criminal activity. Gone a little off topic, but not so far as this stuff is not irrelevant to the thread's topic. We've been through this already as well. If you are not suspected of being a criminal or doing criminal activity, then there is no reason for the police to be detaining you or illegaly wiretapping your phones, or the need for constant surveillance on you. Would you mind if I followed you around all day, every day? If you are not doing anything wrong, then what is the deal? Right? Do you value your privacy at all? Quote
CPCFTW Posted June 2, 2011 Report Posted June 2, 2011 (edited) Democracy does not trend to a police state. Tyranny trends to a police state. Also economic collapse has in the past given way to police like states. Nazi Germany is one example. So then what is your point about you being able to "see the trends"? Gone a little off topic, but not so far as this stuff is not irrelevant to the thread's topic. We've been through this already as well. If you are not suspected of being a criminal or doing criminal activity, then there is no reason for the police to be detaining you or illegaly wiretapping your phones, or the need for constant surveillance on you. And I doubt that they will be doing either of those things to me unless they have reason to suspect I am involved in illegal activity or I am associating myself with people who are. Edited June 2, 2011 by CPCFTW Quote
guyser Posted June 2, 2011 Report Posted June 2, 2011 The problem with your theory is that most Canadians don't have anything to hide from the "police state" so your cries fall on deaf ears. Some, not most. And they , like you, fail to see that refusing to show police anything in ones house or car for instance is not on par with hiding something. Police have powers that you and I do not have, yet you are comfortable in the police overstepping them, violating them, abusing them. Thankfully the Charter upholds our rights Quote
Scotty Posted June 2, 2011 Report Posted June 2, 2011 The proper analogy you're looking for is "If I dared to walk down a street the day after someone had torched a police car, then I'd deserve to be beaten and arrested too!" Which is about as brainless an opinion as I've seen here in some time. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted June 2, 2011 Report Posted June 2, 2011 Yes, the police should have been much more selective. Anyone seen tossing a rock through a shop window or setting a police car on fire should have been shot on the spot. With cameras on their weapons, the cops would have had all the proof they'd require before firing. Even if you believed in that sort of extremist bullshit, you still would have to be an imbecile to justify the police arresting people who had absolutely nothing to do with torching cars or breaking windows, weren't even in the neighborhood, and who didn't know the first thing about the people who did. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
guyser Posted June 2, 2011 Report Posted June 2, 2011 "If I dared to walk down a street the day after someone had torched a police car, then I'd deserve to be beaten and arrested too!" Now that is good! Thanks for the chuckle.(So apt too) Quote
Scotty Posted June 2, 2011 Report Posted June 2, 2011 Hey, I'm not religious. But, I do believe those seen breaking windows, looting, setting fire to police cars - y'know, scum of the earth and that sort - should have been shot on sight. So you think the appropriate punishment for breaking a window is death? Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
CPCFTW Posted June 3, 2011 Report Posted June 3, 2011 Now that is good! Thanks for the chuckle.(So apt too) It's cute that you guys believe that's what happened. Quote
RNG Posted June 3, 2011 Report Posted June 3, 2011 I'm very right wing. But I had the great misfortune of working in both Mexico and Venezuela, both bastions of civil liberties. (Total joke, BTW). That, and some experiences from my youth where friends suffered terribly from corrupt and assholey cops has made me a strong civil liberties defender. Mock all you want but it is a danger. The whole "Patriot Act" shit in the US and other things happening in Canada, supposedly to help the war on terror just make me cringe. Quote The government can't give anything to anyone without having first taken it from someone else.
GostHacked Posted June 3, 2011 Author Report Posted June 3, 2011 I'm very right wing. But I had the great misfortune of working in both Mexico and Venezuela, both bastions of civil liberties. (Total joke, BTW). That, and some experiences from my youth where friends suffered terribly from corrupt and assholey cops has made me a strong civil liberties defender. Mock all you want but it is a danger. The whole "Patriot Act" shit in the US and other things happening in Canada, supposedly to help the war on terror just make me cringe. You are not the only one cringing. Glad to see others are paying attention. I have not had my rights violated yet, and I'd like to prevent that from happening. So I talk about it a lot. I was reading one of those small rags today (Metro for the Ottawa area) and it had a peice on the G20 today (trying to locate it on their website) that said McGuinty won't apologize for the granting of the special powers to the police. Peice is total bullshit, because the special powers were never given. I should just grap a copy and scan it. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 3, 2011 Report Posted June 3, 2011 ... The whole "Patriot Act" shit in the US and other things happening in Canada, supposedly to help the war on terror just make me cringe. Oh...you mean like hate speech laws and no right to firearms? Yea....makes me "cringe" too. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
RNG Posted June 3, 2011 Report Posted June 3, 2011 Oh...you mean like hate speech laws and no right to firearms? Yea....makes me "cringe" too. Your second amendment is a travesty, IMHO. And yes, our human rights kangaroo courts are a joke. I agree. We all try to make life better for our children. I would love to get rid of guns and get rid of our human rights joke boxes. Quote The government can't give anything to anyone without having first taken it from someone else.
Sandy MacNab Posted June 3, 2011 Report Posted June 3, 2011 So you think the appropriate punishment for breaking a window is death? No, more like an arse full of rock-salt via a good old 410 shot-gun. BTW, I know you'd give those naughty folks a stern scolding. Then you'd pat them on the head and send them home with an ice-cream cone ---- and their loot. Quote
Sandy MacNab Posted June 3, 2011 Report Posted June 3, 2011 Shooting them on sight would be way too harsh, and calling them freedom fighters is equally absurd, I think a reasonable compromise to keep the peace would have been to physically detain some of the protesters for a day or two, and then release them if no charges could be laid. Golly, why didn't the cops think of that? Quote
Battletoads Posted June 3, 2011 Report Posted June 3, 2011 Some, not most. And they , like you, fail to see that refusing to show police anything in ones house or car for instance is not on par with hiding something. Police have powers that you and I do not have, yet you are comfortable in the police overstepping them, violating them, abusing them. Thankfully the Charter upholds our rights Yep. I'm grateful that the constitution is so hard to change, it's pretty much the only thing protecting us from the radical government that Canadians just elected. Quote "You can lead a Conservative to knowledge, but you can't make him think."
Saipan Posted June 3, 2011 Report Posted June 3, 2011 (edited) So you think the appropriate punishment for breaking a window is death? Well, not exactly. But during LA riots only the armed store owners were not looted and their stores torched. If some vandal got shot, while he was trying to break in, who really gives rat's ass. Many of those didn't hesitate to kill people at random with bricks, no reason whatsoever. I. e. they should be considered just dangerous vermin. Edited June 3, 2011 by Saipan Quote
Saipan Posted June 3, 2011 Report Posted June 3, 2011 I'm grateful that the constitution is so hard to change, it's pretty much the only thing protecting us from the radical government that Canadians just elected. What constitution? We don't even have right to our property. Quote
Scotty Posted June 3, 2011 Report Posted June 3, 2011 It's cute that you guys believe that's what happened. The sad thing is that is EXACTLY what happened. God knows there are enough videos on the internet if you cared to stir yourself enough to look. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted June 3, 2011 Report Posted June 3, 2011 No, more like an arse full of rock-salt via a good old 410 shot-gun. BTW, I know you'd give those naughty folks a stern scolding. Then you'd pat them on the head and send them home with an ice-cream cone ---- and their loot. You obviously don't know me, nor have read much of what I've posted. For the record, I've written before about bringing Singapore's answer to street vermin to Canada. I don't have a big problem with corporal punishment suiting the crime. It'd be a lot cheaper and more efficient than a few months in prison in many instances. I like the idea of prison 'at hard labour' too. I am, in short, no bleeding heart liberal. But here's the thing. I think punks who attack people on the street should be severely dealt with EVEN if those punks are wearing uniforms. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted June 3, 2011 Report Posted June 3, 2011 Well, not exactly. But during LA riots only the armed store owners were not looted and their stores torched. If some vandal got shot, while he was trying to break in, who really gives rat's ass. Many of those didn't hesitate to kill people at random with bricks, no reason whatsoever. I. e. they should be considered just dangerous vermin. I don't have a major problem with people protecting their property - within reason. But my issue with the G20 riots was police running amok assaulting people who had NOT broken any windows or committed any crimes. I also don't like the idea of citizens being kidnapped off the street and thrown into cages when they've done nothing wrong and there's no evidence they intend to do anything wrong. Call me funny that way. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
guyser Posted June 3, 2011 Report Posted June 3, 2011 It's cute that you guys believe that's what happened. I dont know but something tells me the Courts saw it the same way. But of course you can keep on sticking your head in the sand. You'll be the little whining bitch when it happens to you. Quote
Remiel Posted June 3, 2011 Report Posted June 3, 2011 There is no justfication for killing looters of shops or homes that does not also properly entail the killing of looters of economies and nations, and yet strangely the first is reflexive while the second is alien. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.