Finally, a law none can possibly object to!

[fellowtraveller]

Don't worry, I'm sure Vic Toews and his SS have been monitoring this site for any signs of political dissidents and your loyalty and support of his fascist right wing state will be rewarded.

Joseph McCarthy would be pleased...

How long before his brownshirted lackeys kick down your door and take you to the camps? Did you get the notice that was bundled with local garbage pickup schedule?

[Rick]

How long before his brownshirted lackeys kick down your door and take you to the camps? Did you get the notice that was bundled with local garbage pickup schedule?

I'm like the underground...I keep moving and staying one step ahead of them.

[Guest Manny]

Part of the problem is, when we have the authorities themselves doing things that are illegal, knowingly, willingly, premeditated and by orders of the supervisors, it sends a signal to the people.

Without a meaningful mechanism of protest, one that is listened to and taken seriously, one that could eventually lead to reforms, then there is no other alternative. What have we provided as a mechanism for reforms? Nothing other than ignoring, jeering, and ridicule. And a crass and mean spirited authority that does whatever it wants, whenever it wants, breaking the very laws it expects the people themselves to uphold. Youth can only follow that example. Then there is no respect for the law.

[GostHacked]

Excellent point, gentlemen.

It seems to me that during the G20 fiasco, a number of police officers deliberately concealed their badge numbers to (presumably) avoid punishment for stepping over the line of appropriate police behavior.

If protesters are going to be punished for concealing their ID, the police better damned well be held to the same standard.

-k

Unfortunately that is not happening here. We can revisit the Montebello SPP summit where the 'black bloc' where cops, who concealed their identity. One set of rules to govern the masses, another set of rules for the enforcers of this other set of rules that we are to live under.

Even at the G20 where the black bloc were covered up, the police watching from a hundred feet away DID NOTHING to prevent the destruction from these individuals. So I feel this will fall on it's face and will be as others said here, ineffective.

[Guest Peeves]

Like I said.." Finally, a law none can possibly object to!"

Given the nonsensical flights of fancy I read, I should have added a qualifier ; No reasonable and sensible person using rational thought..yada yada..

Edited May 8, 2012 by Peeves

[Guest Manny]

Like I said.." Finally, a law none can possibly object to!"

Given the nonsensical flights of fancy I read, I should have added a qualifier ; No reasonable and sensible person using rational thought..yada yada..

I do not object to the law, but I object to the circumstances that make people behave like criminals. It's that double-standard that crates the situation. Laws like this do not solve the real problem and ultimately people only become more violent when facing continued injustice.

This same anger leads to anti-capitalistic beliefs, anti-consumerism. If people know that the goods or services they are purchasing goes towards those who carry out injustice against them, they will find ways to undermine that. Not even directly, not even consciously. They simply stop spending money. Then the whole system contracts upon itself, until it dies with a whimper.

[cybercoma]

If we had the kinds of things happening here that have actually happened in other countries over the last year and a half (that is, trying to violently overthrow the government), then I would wholeheartedly support our government shooting those protesters. I'd volunteer to do it.

If that were the case here, I would fully support protesters burning parliament to the ground.

[jacee]

Comrade, I hope you have done your civic duty and forwarded names and IP addresses to the authorities so they may deal with these traitors of the state. They do not deserve the freedom of speech earned for them by hooded protestors.

Do you now ... wonder that is ... ?

Perhaps as Michael says, now would be a good time for a public retraction and clarification of your views on the merits of shooting-to-kill student protesters.

Sometimes a joke's not just a joke ... Who am I to decide what you really mean?

[Michael Hardner]

Sometimes a joke's not just a joke ... Who am I to decide what you really mean?

Jokes and sarcasm are hard to discern on here, which is one reason we have emoticons.

[Shakeyhands]

Awesome eh guys!!!! We need this sort of stuff here!!

Ouchie....

[Guest Manny]

Suggest, the site could be renamed to "MapleLeafFront".

[jacee]

I do not object to the law, but I object to the circumstances that make people behave like criminals. It's that double-standard that crates the situation. Laws like this do not solve the real problem and ultimately people only become more violent when facing continued injustice.

Quite true Manny, and of course that's something that Harper & Co. just don't get but they're going to have their chance to learn ... very soon. I get the feeling Harper and the oil boys who pull his strings think they can do the rebellions of 1837-38 all over again ... send the mounties to shoot them, jail them and tell the judges to hang them. ... or something like that. We'll see how that works for them this time: I think not.

This same anger leads to anti-capitalistic beliefs, anti-consumerism. If people know that the goods or services they are purchasing goes towards those who carry out injustice against them, they will find ways to undermine that. Not even directly, not even consciously. They simply stop spending money. Then the whole system contracts upon itself, until it dies with a whimper.

Interesting ... so many tactics available and 'unintended consequences' of oppressive acts against free people ... humiliations that HarperCo can't even imagine. You know the TSX took a dip during the G20. ... apparently the TSX doesn't cope well with people in the streets ... unintended consequences of oppression of protest = escalation of protest = loss of confidence in the economy, etc etc. It'll be "interesting times" for sure ... historic.

[Wilber]

The proposed bill doesn't apply to peaceful protests, only riots and unlawful assemblies. You can wear what you want as long as you behave yourself. Don't know that it will do much good though.

How many protesters did you see wearing masks during the Tienanmen Square protests or during the Arab Spring? Those people were in real danger but had the courage to be accountable for their actions.

[jacee]

The proposed bill doesn't apply to peaceful protests, only riots and unlawful assemblies. You can wear what you want as long as you behave yourself. Don't know that it will do much good though.

Well we know how that goes ... cops disguised as protesters incite a riot then declare an "illegal assembly" and disperse protesters with tear gas ... protesters cover their face for protection - that's why they have bandanas and vinegar - and poof! FIVE YEARS IN JAIL in Harperland. In HarperCo's dreamworld, that scares people out of protesting but Harper has no clue how people really work and he'll be furious to see that the more he tries to crack down, the more protests will grow and escalate.

It's just a stupid plan, guaranteed to fail.

How many protesters did you see wearing masks during the Tienanmen Square protests or during the Arab Spring? Those people were in real danger but had the courage to be accountable for their actions.

Ya? They're your heroes are they?Disingenuous much?

[Wilber]

Well we know how that goes ... cops disguised as protesters incite a riot then declare an "illegal assembly" and disperse protesters with tear gas ... protesters cover their face for protection - that's why they have bandanas and vinegar - and poof! FIVE YEARS IN JAIL in Harperland. In HarperCo's dreamworld, that scares people out of protesting but Harper has no clue how people really work and he'll be furious to see that the more he tries to crack down, the more protests will grow and escalate.

It's just a stupid plan, guaranteed to fail.

Give me a friggin break. No one is forced to riot.

[jacee]

Give me a friggin break. No one is forced to riot.

Except the cops who are paid to.

Define "riot"?

One cop throwing a stone?

Two cops throwing stones?

One person wearing a mask?

Two people wearing a mask?

It seems to change all the time.

How's a person to know they're participating in a riot when the problem may be blocks away?

And how do you protect yourself from the tear gas if you can't cover your face? How do you see to "disperse" when you're blinded by tear gas??

There's a hundred reasons why this law is a collossally stupid ... but who am I to try to talk Harper out of something that will blow up in his face!

[bush_cheney2004]

....And how do you protect yourself from the tear gas if you can't cover your face?

Use the poly bags filled with urine and feces that you brought to the "peaceful protest".

[eyeball]

If that were the case here, I would fully support protesters burning parliament to the ground.

I would suggest protesters disguise themselves as police to make this job even easier.

[Guest Peeves]

Except the cops who are paid to.

How's a person to know they're participating in a riot when the problem may be blocks away?

And how do you protect yourself from the tear gas if you can't cover your face? How do you see to "disperse" when you're blinded by tear gas??

There's a hundred reasons why this law is a collossally stupid ... but who am I to try to talk Harper out of something that will blow up in his face!

There's a hundred reasons why this law is a collossally stupid .

Above truncated for brevity.

Covering up due to tear gas ?

If such were indeed the case, it would be because of anarchy and rioting. If tear gas is being used

I'm sure covering up would be the least of your problems.

In response, I would also suggest that there's a hundred reasons to also call "colossally stupid" those situations and scenarios that have been suggested using fanciful, dizzyingly convoluted and ridiculous extremes to vilify a sensible law, but I won't, I don't need to, I'm sure those turning to such as these silly scenarios are capable in determining that themselves.

I could call such inane scenarios simply contrary and argumentative and anti-Harper , but I don't need to, I'm sure those employing such biased and jejune tactics are able to determine that themselves.

[Tilter]

Only if the cops wear identification and not hide behind riot gear that conceals their identity.

However, this won't stop the Agent Provocateurs from doing what they do.

Public has to be open, while the government and police are getting more closed.

The cops have every right to wear masks--- after all Mace is a real throat irritant & it's hard to cuff people while violently coughing especially when the subject of your interest is having an asthma attack from the same mace.

[Tilter]

Use the poly bags filled with urine and feces that you brought to the "peaceful protest".

Yes, it is said that yhis semi-liquid, poured over your head will counteract tear gas.--- try it , you'll like it. Or Not :lol:

Edited May 8, 2012 by Tilter

[Guest Peeves]

Yes, it is said that yhis semi-liquid, poured over your head will counteract tear gas.--- try it , you'll like it. Or Not :lol:

I think the official utility name is precautionary countering blivic.

Edited May 8, 2012 by Peeves

[jacee]

Omigod it's so obvious that these Con MP's have no idea what the law currently is, how the new one will work ... or not work. They are such knee-jerk 'law-n-order' junkies they don't know yet just how badly this is all going to blow up in their faces. Oh well ...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/05/06/pol-ottawa-bill-targets-masked-protesters-jail-fines.html

"Certainly I've heard of instances where it is egitimate that there might be reasons that someone needs to protest anonymously and this bill certainly still allows for that," said the second-term MP from Airdre, Alta. representing the riding of Wild Rose.

Unh-hunh ... so we can cover our faces during protests ... Good ... some of us need dust masks for the toxic asphalt dust from a thousand feet marching ... Some of us need jobs we would lose if bosses saw us protesting ... some have violent exes and don't want to be seen ... some of us have skin conditions that can't take the weather exposure ... winter protests, etc etc ... as she says, lots of reasons people want to cover their faces.

So we're good ... until ... the police arbitrarily decide to declare the protest an "illegal assembly" ... and it's VERY UNCLEAR what the criteria for that are:

"I think it strengthens the right for peaceful protest. It's only when individuals engage in criminal activity or become violent where this law would apply."

She's just WRONG about that. Once the police declare an assembly illegal, EVERYONE THERE IS ILLEGAL, can be arrested, charged for illegal assembly AND now also for wearing a mask.

So once the tear gas starts, I can assume I'm illegal and I have to take off my mask to avoid arrest ... BUT ... my mask (and vinegar) is what I need to deal with the tear gas.

This is so screwy that if police are smart they will just ignore the new law. It's ridiculous.

If the Crown wants to lay a charge of wearing a disguise during a crime, they can already do that under current law.

The new law does absolutely nothing to deter illegal tactics.

All it does is give police carte blanche to cherry pick, arrest and press serious charges against ANY PEACEFUL PROTESTERS STUCK IN THE TEAR GAS with their protective masks on.

That's ALL it does is put peaceful protesters at risk.

Ms Wild Rose twit is misleading people to believe that peaceful protesters wearing masks are ok. NO. Once the assembly is declared illegal, everyone there is illegal, liable for arrest and up to five years in jail.

And the change from peaceful protester in a mask to illegal rioter in a mask can happen in a split second and you don't even know it happened until you get teargassed or arrested.

So stupid. I guess Harper's counting on his law-n-order core supporters to not understand just how stupid this is.

Or ... it's a devious way of criminalizing even peaceful protesters.

It can be used that way.

Edited May 8, 2012 by jacee

[huh]

Omigod it's so obvious that these Con MP's have no idea what the law currently is, how the new one will work ... or not work. They are such knee-jerk 'law-n-order' junkies they don't know yet just how badly this is all going to blow up in their faces. Oh well ...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/05/06/pol-ottawa-bill-targets-masked-protesters-jail-fines.html

Unh-hunh ... so we can cover our faces during protests ... Good ... some of us need dust masks for the toxic asphalt dust from a thousand feet marching ... Some of us need jobs we would lose if bosses saw us protesting ... some have violent exes and don't want to be seen ... some of us have skin conditions that can't take the weather exposure ... winter protests, etc etc ... as she says, lots of reasons people want to cover their faces.

So we're good ... until ... the police arbitrarily decide to declare the protest an "illegal assembly" ... and it's VERY UNCLEAR what the criteria for that are:

She's just WRONG about that. Once the police declare an assembly illegal, EVERYONE THERE IS ILLEGAL, can be arrested, charged for illegal assembly AND now also for wearing a mask.

So once the tear gas starts, I can assume I'm illegal and I have to take off my mask to avoid arrest ... BUT ... my mask (and vinegar) is what I need to deal with the tear gas.

This is so screwy that if police are smart they will just ignore the new law. It's ridiculous.

If the Crown wants to lay a charge of wearing a disguise during a crime, they can already do that under current law.

The new law does absolutely nothing to deter illegal tactics.

All it does is give police carte blanche to cherry pick, arrest and press serious charges against ANY PEACEFUL PROTESTERS STUCK IN THE TEAR GAS with their protective masks on.

That's ALL it does is put peaceful protesters at risk.

Ms Wild Rose twit is misleading people to believe that peaceful protesters wearing masks are ok. NO. Once the assembly is declared illegal, everyone there is illegal, liable for arrest and up to five years in jail.

And the change from peaceful protester in a mask to illegal rioter in a mask can happen in a split second and you don't even know it happened until you get teargassed or arrested.

So stupid. I guess Harper's counting on his law-n-order core supporters to not understand just how stupid this is.

Or ... it's a devious way of criminalizing even peaceful protesters.

It can be used that way.

I think you're probably deranged, and in need of some help, and in a nutshell an example of whats wrong with a sector of our society, but aside from that, you need a mask for 'asphalt dust'? Sure you do, anyway, how about you peaceful protestors not damage property while protesting, but like the leader of the quebec student union who admitted on camera that he see's nothing wrong with smashing windows, because windows aren't people, you don't seem to understand that this law is in response to the acts of those people you desperately support.

In other words, if people like yourself spent more time trying to better yourself and less time in the streets blaming the world for your decidedly first world problems while smashing private property (im sure those two words-private property, are words you really hate) this bill would never have been introduced.

It's your fault, your actions have made our society less free. Fyi, don't wear a mask and you won't be an "illegal rioter in a mask".

Im sorry, i can't help it, asphalt dust? My god, can you imagine how dusty downtown to must be during rush hour? I bet you can't see two feet in front of your bumper, o what? cars don't produce the dust? ahahahaahh LOLOLOL.

Edited May 9, 2012 by huh

[Michael Hardner]

I think you're probably deranged, and in need of some help, and in a nutshell an example of whats wrong with a sector of our society,

I was looking forward to a retort to jacee's post, and I STOPPED READING AFTER I SAW THIS INSULT. Do you understand why insults are against the Rules and Guidelines ? They are street litter on an otherwise enjoyable avenue to enlightenment.

Stop it, won't you ?