What right have you lost.

[Derek 2.0]

I guess you don't know about this issue then. Again, my point has been made but I'm glad to be your personal Google guide through this issue, for now:

This blog reprints a Toronto Sun article:

We're NOT in the makings of a police state in my opinion, so I can't answer your question. But if you feel like I can also ask you questions, as your personal Googler, maybe you can tell me what happened to the 3 officers who were found out by the crowd.

Right, but the usage of “Marshall Law” in a democratic society is hardly new and is a reactionary response to civil unrest….akin to a “declaration of a state of emergency”, which doesn’t result in a hurricane or earthquake….

As to the 3 officers "found out" I haven't a clue.......in the cited example in Quebec (several pages ago), one officer was charged.

[Derek 2.0]

Um, not when it catches them using excessive force and taking their badges off.

But if the use of cameras smokes out illegal police action(s), and as a result, only two officers are charged, out of thousands present, that clearly helps police.

[GostHacked]

Right, but the usage of “Marshall Law” in a democratic society is hardly new and is a reactionary response to civil unrest….akin to a “declaration of a state of emergency”, which doesn’t result in a hurricane or earthquake….

As to the 3 officers "found out" I haven't a clue.......in the cited example in Quebec (several pages ago), one officer was charged.

MARTIAL LAW. Not Marshall Law. Maybe this is why you are confused.

[On Guard for Thee]

But if the use of cameras smokes out illegal police action(s), and as a result, only two officers are charged, out of thousands present, that clearly helps police.

The only way ANY were charged. That helps the public, somewhat anyway. At least they didnt all get away.

[Michael Hardner]

Right, but the usage of “Marshall Law” in a democratic society is hardly new and is a reactionary response to civil unrest….akin to a “declaration of a state of emergency”, which doesn’t result in a hurricane or earthquake….

Which part is right ?

This wasn't "Marshall [sic] Law", nor was it done in reaction to anything.

Again, my point has been made and you continue to confirm it: you (and most Canadians) are perfectly comfortable with police overstepping their bounds and taking away rights now and again.

[Derek 2.0]

No cite is needed. Their actions made it obvious.

Oh, ok.....

Sorry, no, that is not what happened. What happened was that Jean Carle, from the PMO, ordered the RCMP to move back the fences they had established because while they were far enough away to protect world leaders it would still have been possible for some of the attending dictators to at least see them - at a distance. Chretien, who was always the friend of every dictator he could wrap his arms around, had promised Asian dictators he would make sure they would see no protests, so Carle, a political operative, was put in charge of the RCMP, and they obeyed his orders to the letter and without question, regardless of the illegality of those orders.

Cool story....

And as I said, the RCMP also arrested people on their front lawns for holding up paper signs, and in one case even moved onto someone's property to tear down a Tibetan flag from the flagpole in case it might offend the Chinese when they drove past. Sgt Pepper sprayed people who were sitting down in the street, not 'attempting to breach security'.

Really....wow.....were just sitting down in the streets eh......

How does one knock over security fencing sitting in the streets though.......and when they did sit in the streets, they blocked off a major artery of the city (Marine drive), attempting to close off access to the airport from the downtown core....

[GostHacked]

So when the TSP blocked access to the public in some areas of Toronto where the G-20 was taking place, that's seen as ok? Foreign 'dignitaries' have more rights than you as a Canadian. All protected by the police services you and I pay for.

[Michael Hardner]

So when the TSP blocked access to the public in some areas of Toronto where the G-20 was taking place, that's seen as ok?

As I said, most are ok with this.

[Derek 2.0]

Again, my point has been made and you continue to confirm it: you (and most Canadians) are perfectly comfortable with police overstepping their bounds and taking away rights now and again.

If warranted, certainly, then again, we have prisons full of Canadians that have had their “rights taken away”………

[Michael Hardner]

If warranted,

Well, you actually won't get a say in THAT part, although if citizens and journalists pitch in you might find out after the fact.

[Derek 2.0]

Well, you actually won't get a say in THAT part, although if citizens and journalists pitch in you might find out after the fact.

Likewise, I (and you) don't get a say when some citizens choose to smash storefronts and torch police cars......or commit murder and rape.....drink and drive....neglect their children etc.

[Michael Hardner]

Likewise, I (and you) don't get a say when some citizens choose to smash storefronts and torch police cars......or commit murder and rape.....drink and drive....neglect their children etc.

Good point. The police are committing criminal acts as well. Point taken.

[Derek 2.0]

Good point. The police are committing criminal acts as well. Point taken.

I assume you meant: some police are committing criminal as well........

[Michael Hardner]

some

Some, Few, Many...

[Derek 2.0]

Some, Few, Many...

Right, and of those police members committing criminal acts, they too (like all Canadian citizens), are held to account.....and rightfully so.

-----

All of this of course doesn't speak to the presumed rights to be taken away by C-51.......or lack there of.

[Argus]

Likewise, I (and you) don't get a say when some citizens choose to smash storefronts and torch police cars......or commit murder and rape.....drink and drive....neglect their children etc.

Or sit in a park in what the police had predetermined would be a 'safe area' resting their one leg until being bowled over by police, separated from their artificial leg, and dragged to a paddy wagon.

Is there any misbehavior by police severe enough for you to be critical of? I mean, if they walked up and down the street shooting babies and laughing, would you at least agree that this might be something we ought to look into punishing?

Edited February 15, 2015 by Argus

[eyeball]

And it is the responsibility of the police to protect free speech, not suppress it. WE PAY THE POLICE TO PROTECT OUR RIGHTS FROM INCURSION BY THE STATE.

Speaking for myself, the police are way down near the bottom of any list of institutions I look to for protection from the state.

[Derek 2.0]

Or sit in a park in what the police had predetermined would be a 'safe area' resting their one leg until being bowled over by police, separated from their artificial leg, and dragged to a paddy wagon.

Is there any misbehavior by police severe enough for you to be critical of? I mean, if they walked up and down the street shooting babies and laughing, would you at least agree that this might be something we ought to look into punishing?

I already said, from the cited examples, that those individual members that broke the laws got deserved repercussions……..I just don’t buy into the casting of blanket, yet baseless and unsupported, assertions.

[Argus]

I already said, from the cited examples, that those individual members that broke the laws got deserved repercussions……..I just don’t buy into the casting of blanket, yet baseless and unsupported, assertions.

Who was punished for the widespread abuse of police power during the APEC summit? Who was punished for the widespread abuse of police power during the G20? Who was punished for false imprisonment for arresting people, dragging them to holding center, strip searching them, and then writing "Mickey Mouse" or "Paul Revere" as 'arresting officer'?

[Derek 2.0]

Who was punished for the widespread abuse of police power during the APEC summit? Who was punished for the widespread abuse of police power during the G20? Who was punished for false imprisonment for arresting people, dragging them to holding center, strip searching them, and then writing "Mickey Mouse" or "Paul Revere" as 'arresting officer'?

None, but then the APEC inquiry didn’t find any criminal wrongdoing on the part of the RCMP (or the PMO) and recommended in future that both better response planning (i.e. the prevention of protestors from blocking numerous roadways, which required a haphazard police response during APEC) and clearer communications with protestors prior to police action that could result in physical confrontation between police and protestors…………

Of course such recommendations are now implemented by all Canadian police forces and is why in an example like the G20, numerous no-go security zones were set-up prior and police would repeatedly tell protestors to disperse prior to cracking skulls.

[jacee]

None, but then the APEC inquiry didnt find any criminal wrongdoing on the part of the RCMP (or the PMO) and recommended in future that both better response planning (i.e. the prevention of protestors from blocking numerous roadways, which required a haphazard police response during APEC) and clearer communications with protestors prior to police action that could result in physical confrontation between police and protestors

Of course such recommendations are now implemented by all Canadian police forces and is why in an example like the G20, numerous no-go security zones were set-up prior and police would repeatedly tell protestors to disperse prior to cracking skulls.

Ya the best one was ordering them to disperse while kettled. :\

.

[GostHacked]

I assume you meant: some police are committing criminal as well........

Just like SOME people are commiting crimes, but we need to blanket everyone to go after them. Makes sense?

[GostHacked]

None, but then the APEC inquiry didn’t find any criminal wrongdoing on the part of the RCMP (or the PMO) and recommended in future that both better response planning (i.e. the prevention of protestors from blocking numerous roadways, which required a haphazard police response during APEC) and clearer communications with protestors prior to police action that could result in physical confrontation between police and protestors…………

Of course such recommendations are now implemented by all Canadian police forces and is why in an example like the G20, numerous no-go security zones were set-up prior and police would repeatedly tell protestors to disperse prior to cracking skulls.

The areas that were blocked for G-20 'dignitaries' contributed to the problems of blocking the roads. Ketteling people the nex day at the intersection on Spadina also contributed to road blocks. Allowing the police cars to burn contributed to road blocks. Anyone who walks up to the barriers were searched without cause or reason. Cuasing delays even with foot traffic.

They did not crack the skulls of those who torched the cop cars and broke store shop windows. That was done right in front of them. Again RIGHT in front of them, but no action by the police was taken. The cars burned and the shops were trashed. They had the chance, they blew it. So let's ask this ,,, why did the cops not try to stop their cars from being torhed or the shop windows from being broken?

Cops were scared but the news media were documenting the actions only a few feet away from the action. Something does not seem right.

Edited February 16, 2015 by GostHacked

[Big Guy]

We should not question our government when it passes legislation to protect us from danger.

"The people can always be brought to the bidding of their leaders. All you have to do is tell them that they are in danger of being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." - Herman Goering

Hey it worked before, why not use it again?

[Argus]

Of course such recommendations are now implemented by all Canadian police forces and is why in an example like the G20, numerous no-go security zones were set-up prior and police would repeatedly tell protestors to disperse prior to cracking skulls.

Funny how they declared Queens Park a 'safe zone' then started cracking skulls and dragging off bodies, huh?

Over a thousand people were arrested. I believe the number of convictions sustained was a few dozen. All the rest were illegal detentions, according to the report by the Office of the Independent Police Review Director, without proper warrants or reasonable grounds.