Does this look like Canada to you?

[cybercoma]

Blah, blah blah said the man who knows nothing whatsoever about what happened, is too lazy to investigate, and is reflexively defending the police no matter what they do and no matter who they do it to.

Thanks for adding so much insight to the discussion.

What!? You mean you don't agree with the notion that you should do whatever the hell the cops tell you, even if you're not doing anything illegal? Pfft. You're a domestic terrorist!

[cybercoma]

Rightly or wrongly, a law we have is that an order of a police officer is to be obeyed. We have ample opportunity to challenge that order in a peacefull way through the courts. The "protesters" are just there to make trouble.

The biggest question I have always had is what the G-8/G-20 protesters are against, and what do they think they can accomplish? Losers.

You do know that there are many people that lived in that neighbourhood, who were not protestors and were beaten and arrested by police, right? Moreover, it's not against the law to protest and, frankly, I find it offensive that you're publicly declaring that any political dissent should be crushed by the police.

I'm guessing, however, that if we had an extremely left-wing socialist government, you would love the opportunity to voice your displeasure with them publicly, rather than supporting them using the cops to beat and arrest people.

[RNG]

You do know that there are many people that lived in that neighbourhood, who were not protestors and were beaten and arrested by police, right?

No, I don't know that. And I would appreciate links to verify your statements. I believe you are exercising hyperbole.

[Evening Star]

No, I don't know that. And I would appreciate links to verify your statements. I believe you are exercising hyperbole.

You could start here (full episode): http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2010-2011/youshouldhavestayedathome/

But, really, just compare the sheer number of arrests with the number of convictions.

Edited June 28, 2011 by Evening Star

[dre]

This seems pretty simple to me.

Throw the people who were violating the law in jail, along with the police that knowingly arrested people that were NOT breaking the law.

Edited June 28, 2011 by dre

[Evening Star]

If you go near an idiot burning a police car, then I think the police are fully justified in arresting you.

Link.

That link is about the Vancouver Stanley Cup riots. I was talking about the G20 in Toronto. Most of the arrests happened on the day after police cars were vandalized. The police were ineffective at doing much when the vandalism and burning took place and then overreacted towards peaceful people the next day.

[RNG]

But, really, just compare the sheer number of arrests with the number of convictions.

But that happens every time there are riots. The arrests are more a way of getting troublemakers off the street for a while. And it isn't worth the cost to prosecute them. That proves nothing.

[Evening Star]

But that happens every time there are riots. The arrests are more a way of getting troublemakers off the street for a while. And it isn't worth the cost to prosecute them. That proves nothing.

Perhaps you're right about that part of it. That video does go into much more depth though about the specific abuses.

[Evening Star]

How about this one from the Star in June 2010?

Dalton McGuinty, Bill Blair defend quiet boost in arrest powers

Boosting the arrest powers by using the Public Works Protection Act and making perfectly legal specifics using ONTARIO REGULATION 233/10 which was revoked as a standing regulation on June 28th, 2010.

So now read the story from the Star, above, and then the Globe story you linked. Once you have finished reading the stories answer me this: what "secret" law??

So they didn't technically pass a new bill in secret but they passed a regulation that extended the Public Works Protection Act or at least made it applicable to big chunks of downtown Toronto as an order-in-council without publishing it?

At least Andre Marin seemed to think so: http://www.globaltoronto.com/Ontario+must+show+more+transparency+after+secret+Ombudsman/4981065/story.html

[Battletoads]

Just wait till your wires are being warrantlessly tapped, courtesy of the Harper Regime's new crime bill.

Edited June 28, 2011 by Battletoads

[dre]

Perhaps you're right about that part of it. That video does go into much more depth though about the specific abuses.

Absolutely. Mass arrests of innocent people can be a usefull tool for government. Its a slippery slope though.

Liberty is expensive and when you let people move around freely and associate with whom they please you run into these kind of problems. They freak out sometimes... protest your involvement in global instituations, set stuff on fire over your decision to invade such in such a countries, or maybe even dump you tea into a harbor somewhere.

The question is should the governments convenience be paramount, or your rights?. Does their right to "remove troublemakers from the street" supercede our right to move about freely. And do you trust government in general to decide who they should "round up" to "avoid trouble"?

[Shakeyhands]

But that happens every time there are riots. The arrests are more a way of getting troublemakers off the street for a while. And it isn't worth the cost to prosecute them. That proves nothing.

Pesky Charter Rights eh... How anyone can look at what actually happened and be ok with it is beyond me.

[Shwa]

I don't get this ... sarcasm ?

You maintain that there is a 'secret law.' You go as far to point out a story in the Globe and Mail. So I supplied you links, including a story from the Star last year. So now, after reviewing the information contained in those links, what "secret law" are you referring to?

No sarcasm intended. But the question remains: do you still think there was some "secret law" or can you see the phrase being used as a media construct?

[jacee]

It didn't look like Canada to me, but it was Harper's warning of what is to come for any citizens who dare to oppose his control. Of course he will be the first PM in history to have to pay the price of lawsuits for violation of Charter rights, since the Supreme Court recently deemed that possible. That means that we the taxpayers will pay for such police violations, which may give some people (voters) pause for thought.

Black Bloc tactics are intended to provoke violent reactions from police to expose the ugly underbelly of state repression against citizens. The G20 police were particularly compliant with the Anarchists' wishes, avoiding the BB themselves and attacking peaceful protesters instead. Clearly the Anarchists won.

[bloodyminded]

Rightly or wrongly, a law we have is that an order of a police officer is to be obeyed. We have ample opportunity to challenge that order in a peacefull way through the courts. The "protesters" are just there to make trouble.

No. As Scotty and numerous others have pointed out, the vast majority of protesters (including the majority who were arrested) were not there to make trouble, were there for peaceful purposes, and some of them were even pleading with the violent little minority that was there to cause trouble.

The biggest question I have always had is what the G-8/G-20 protesters are against, and what do they think they can accomplish? Losers.

This is an entirely different matter, and a completely different debate. It's not relevant to this one.

Edited June 28, 2011 by bloodyminded

[Keepitsimple]

It didn't look like Canada to me, but it was Harper's warning of what is to come for any citizens who dare to oppose his control. Of course he will be the first PM in history to have to pay the price of lawsuits for violation of Charter rights, since the Supreme Court recently deemed that possible. That means that we the taxpayers will pay for such police violations, which may give some people (voters) pause for thought.

Black Bloc tactics are intended to provoke violent reactions from police to expose the ugly underbelly of state repression against citizens. The G20 police were particularly compliant with the Anarchists' wishes, avoiding the BB themselves and attacking peaceful protesters instead. Clearly the Anarchists won.

Blah, blah, blah........

[Tilter]

I kinda liked the opinion page headline by Scott Thompson in today's Hamilton Spec---- We don't see Figure Skating riots do we? :lol:

[GostHacked]

The real problem I have is that the police cannot be held accountable for their actions. The main reason being is that they wear no identification other than that of being a police officer. You have every right to ask for their badge number and name when they are on duty. Good luck getting that information. This creates a situation where a charge could be brought against a cop, but since there is no way to identify the person (and other cops won't say shit to protect their 'boys'.

Police brutality is on the rise, just take a look through what is posted on Youtube. Some of that should make you very upset and very angry at the system. If it does not make you angry, then you might not understand fully as to what is going on.

Let me add, I will assume many cops do wear identification, but the riot cops ... don't.

Edited June 28, 2011 by GostHacked

[cybercoma]

But that happens every time there are riots. The arrests are more a way of getting troublemakers off the street for a while. And it isn't worth the cost to prosecute them. That proves nothing.

I find it hard to believe that there were literally HUNDREDS of trouble-makers, when only a handful of cars were burned and a few windows smashed the day before arrests happened at the G20. You seem to think that everyone arrested was a "troublemaker". They weren't.

[cybercoma]

Black Bloc tactics are intended to provoke violent reactions from police to expose the ugly underbelly of state repression against citizens. The G20 police were particularly compliant with the Anarchists' wishes, avoiding the BB themselves and attacking peaceful protesters instead. Clearly the Anarchists won.

This.

[fellowtraveller]

Police brutality is on the rise,

I don't think so. Police have always had incidents of brutality, but today it is so much easier for them to be caught doing both the act and getting caught in denying the act. l

[cybercoma]

The real problem I have is that the police cannot be held accountable for their actions. The main reason being is that they wear no identification other than that of being a police officer. You have every right to ask for their badge number and name when they are on duty. Good luck getting that information. This creates a situation where a charge could be brought against a cop, but since there is no way to identify the person (and other cops won't say shit to protect their 'boys'.

Police brutality is on the rise, just take a look through what is posted on Youtube. Some of that should make you very upset and very angry at the system. If it does not make you angry, then you might not understand fully as to what is going on.

Let me add, I will assume many cops do wear identification, but the riot cops ... don't.

Cops, if they don't have their last name on the front of their shirt, will have their badge number on their shoulders. The problem is that when you're being beaten and tasered, you're not exactly in any shape to be memorizing a 6-8 digit number that might be on top of the cop's shoulder that's standing on your head.

[g_bambino]

This could be it - from the Globe and Mail.

Premier Dalton McGuinty says public hearings into police actions during the G20 in Toronto will help government understand what to do going forward. But Mr. McGuinty won't apologize for the secret law the Liberal government passed governing police powers to detain and arrest people during the international summit.

I don't think an error filled article does much to support your claim.

[g_bambino]

So they didn't technically pass a new bill in secret but they passed a regulation that extended the Public Works Protection Act or at least made it applicable to big chunks of downtown Toronto as an order-in-council without publishing it?

Do you have any evidence that the Order-in-Council extended the Public Works Protection Act to "big chunks of downtown Toronto"? The only, oft repeated statement made by the Cabinet about that order is that it applied solely to a five metre area just inside the fence surrounding the secure area in the CBD.

[guyser]

The real problem I have is that the police cannot be held accountable for their actions. The main reason being is that they wear no identification other than that of being a police officer. You have every right to ask for their badge number and name when they are on duty. Good luck getting that information. This creates a situation where a charge could be brought against a cop, but since there is no way to identify the person (and other cops won't say shit to protect their 'boys'.

You have touched on part of the issue that to me is reprehensible.

According to media reports (and photos) 90 Officers removed their name tags and Badge numbers before atteding ot the G20.

This after Chief Blair memo'd all officers working to make sure they had them on at all times. Cheif Blair could have made some inroads to solving some of this issue if he had the balls to charge those officers under the Police Act.

They should by all accounts have been arrested themselves.

The gap between police and public is widening daily, and all of it brought on by police actions and indifference.

The amount of ignorance and dishonesty in this thread is alarming. Posting that the people arrested were deserving of it due to violence (violence they had no hand in), posting that one should move from a dedicated protest zone because some cop told you to just confirms there are people who have no idea of their rights.

But of course they will whine like little bitches when it is they who have their rights violated.