Keepitsimple Posted February 22, 2015 Author Report Posted February 22, 2015 How about free speech, assembly, peaceful protest, privacy for starters. Maybe reading (and at least trying) to understand the bill. Nope - won't lose any of those. Tell me how you personally could lose ANY of those rights.....or give me a concrete example of what someone might do where this legislation would infringe on any of these rights. A concrete example please - just one. Quote Back to Basics
Argus Posted February 22, 2015 Report Posted February 22, 2015 I think the only thing that really frightens non-conservatives is how easily conservatives can be gathered together and herded into their pens whenever their leaders tell them to be scared of something....anything! The only thing that really amuses conservatives is how easily non-conservatives can get their panties in a twist over paranoid crap. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted February 22, 2015 Report Posted February 22, 2015 Exactly! Every one of us who has attended a demonstration or a protest march in the last 10 years, has had their picture taken and matched to find our identities...and who knows how much information about our private lives....it's not hard to figure out that the government is trying to establish the same chilling effects on all dissent that is typical for fascist and authoritarian societies. Doo doo doo doo, doo doo doo dooo! Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
On Guard for Thee Posted February 22, 2015 Report Posted February 22, 2015 Nope - won't lose any of those. Tell me how you personally could lose ANY of those rights.....or give me a concrete example of what someone might do where this legislation would infringe on any of these rights. A concrete example please - just one. Walk down the street carrying a sign protesting a pipeline project. Oops, you could be a terrorist. Any of your metadata can be turned over to various government bodies. And you could read the link I posted above for more information fro legal experts. Im afraid to say too much as I dont want CSIS on my doorstep. Quote
Argus Posted February 22, 2015 Report Posted February 22, 2015 VIDEO: Rex Murphy calls on Canada to go to war against Stephen Harper's terror bill He says nothing of the sort. He says this type of legislation should be very carefully examined as to its merits and justification. He actually doesn't even say if he's for or against it. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted February 22, 2015 Report Posted February 22, 2015 Nope - won't lose any of those. Tell me how you personally could lose ANY of those rights.....or give me a concrete example of what someone might do where this legislation would infringe on any of these rights. A concrete example please - just one. The tinfoil brigades are out in full force over this one. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Bob Macadoo Posted February 22, 2015 Report Posted February 22, 2015 The only thing that really amuses conservatives is how easily non-conservatives can get their panties in a twist over paranoid crap. Its amusing your ironic view of life is so laid bare Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 22, 2015 Report Posted February 22, 2015 He says nothing of the sort. He says this type of legislation should be very carefully examined as to its merits and justification. He actually doesn't even say if he's for or against it. He most certainly does. Rex says nay to the bill without the fullest oversight available, he refers to Mulcairs position as well Its already well known Harper does not want additional oversight for this bill and without it Rex doesnt want it. That was quite clear. Quote
eyeball Posted February 22, 2015 Report Posted February 22, 2015 Im afraid to say too much as I dont want CSIS on my doorstep. Screw that. You kick them in the nuts if they show up at your door. You fearlessly resist, you punch, bite, scratch and kick some more. You spit in their faces and you laugh at their threats and you refuse to answer a goddamn thing. And then when they're finally disembowelling you for your rebellious temerity, you scream Frrrreeeeeedoooommm with your last dying breath. You will surely be rewarded and welcomed in the place our departed grandfathers now occupy - the grandfathers that fought tyranny before us and before it invaded our once-great nation. Fear not. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
On Guard for Thee Posted February 22, 2015 Report Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) Screw that. You kick them in the nuts if they show up at your door. You fearlessly resist, you punch, bite, scratch and kick some more. You spit in their faces and you laugh at their threats and you refuse to answer a goddamn thing. And then when they're finally disembowelling you for your rebellious temerity, you scream Frrrreeeeeedoooommm with your last dying breath. You will surely be rewarded and welcomed in the place our departed grandfathers now occupy - the grandfathers that fought tyranny before us and before it invaded our once-great nation. Fear not. OK Ill do that. But I thought the new legislation said they werent allowed to kill me. At least without a warrant. Edited February 22, 2015 by On Guard for Thee Quote
jacee Posted February 22, 2015 Report Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) Nope - won't lose any of those. Tell me how you personally could lose ANY of those rights.....or give me a concrete example of what someone might do where this legislation would infringe on any of these rights. A concrete example please - just one. bill-c-51-the-good-the-bad-and-the-truly-ugly/ Everything hinges on the concept of 'lawful,'" Forcese and Roach wrote in a backgrounder posted online. "Unlawful conduct does, of course, include blockades. It also reaches workplace strikes inconsistent with labour law and street protests lacking the proper regulatory permits. Put another way, unlawful does not mean criminal. It just means without lawful authority." We don't ask for permission/permits to hold protests. Nobody can tell citizens when they can/can't protest. Thus ANY street protest is 'unlawful' by nature. If C-51 passes as is, all protesters are immediately 'unlawful', all protest is immediately criminalized, and all participants are subject to the Anti-terror Act - detention, search, seizure, arrest, incarceration, interrogation for 7 days. The detention/incarceration of over 1000 people at the Toronto G20 was not legal and is currently the subject of a class action suit. Under C-51, incarcerating peaceful protesters for a week of interrogation becomes routine, with no legal recourse. . Edited February 22, 2015 by jacee Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 22, 2015 Report Posted February 22, 2015 The tinfoil brigades are out in full force over this one. Someone has to protect those conservatives that have been herded into their pens. Quote
jacee Posted February 22, 2015 Report Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) CARTOONS! http://images.glaciermedia.ca/polopoly_fs/1.1769858.1424458760!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_563/bill-c-51-ingrid-rice.jpg http://www.dolighan.com/images/jpgs/dolighan_cartoon_feb2015.jpg http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ydWK16K2_ts/VOCoq9drG8I/AAAAAAAAJ24/O8b8i69XeNs/s1600/stephen-harper-is-watching-you%2B(1).jpg http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lSCltD-nnMM/T090faTuLOI/AAAAAAAAAZ0/Xfi-JJeOUGc/s1600/harper6.jpg Edited February 22, 2015 by jacee Quote
Keepitsimple Posted February 23, 2015 Author Report Posted February 23, 2015 bill-c-51-the-good-the-bad-and-the-truly-ugly/ Everything hinges on the concept of 'lawful,'" Forcese and Roach wrote in a backgrounder posted online. "Unlawful conduct does, of course, include blockades. It also reaches workplace strikes inconsistent with labour law and street protests lacking the proper regulatory permits. Put another way, unlawful does not mean criminal. It just means without lawful authority." We don't ask for permission/permits to hold protests. Nobody can tell citizens when they can/can't protest. Thus ANY street protest is 'unlawful' by nature. If C-51 passes as is, all protesters are immediately 'unlawful', all protest is immediately criminalized, and all participants are subject to the Anti-terror Act - detention, search, seizure, arrest, incarceration, interrogation for 7 days. The detention/incarceration of over 1000 people at the Toronto G20 was not legal and is currently the subject of a class action suit. Under C-51, incarcerating peaceful protesters for a week of interrogation becomes routine, with no legal recourse. . Gibberish. There are many situations today where protests COULD be disbanded but are not - at the discretion of law enforcement and the unwillingness of the courts to punish anything that has not led to violence. One need not look farther than Caledonia or Mohawks on bridges to acknowledge just how much patience the authorities demonstrate. There are already laws on the books that COULD result in charges - demonstrations in public places without a permit/unlawful assembly. As a society, we choose to give a lot of leeway to such situations. Your reference to peaceful protesters going through a week of interrogation is paranoid hogwash. Quote Back to Basics
On Guard for Thee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 Gibberish. There are many situations today where protests COULD be disbanded but are not - at the discretion of law enforcement and the unwillingness of the courts to punish anything that has not led to violence. One need not look farther than Caledonia or Mohawks on bridges to acknowledge just how much patience the authorities demonstrate. There are already laws on the books that COULD result in charges - demonstrations in public places without a permit/unlawful assembly. As a society, we choose to give a lot of leeway to such situations. Your reference to peaceful protesters going through a week of interrogation is paranoid hogwash. Again you have missed the boat on the language issue here. The bill refers to lawful protest, not peaceful protest. Quote
jacee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) Gibberish. There are many situations today where protests COULD be disbanded but are not - at the discretion of law enforcement and the unwillingness of the courts to punish anything that has not led to violence. One need not look farther than Caledonia or Mohawks on bridges to acknowledge just how much patience the authorities demonstrate. There are already laws on the books that COULD result in charges - demonstrations in public places without a permit/unlawful assembly. As a society, we choose to give a lot of leeway to such situations. That's over now. Your reference to peaceful protesters going through a week of interrogation is paranoid hogwash.So now it'll be a week ... Thousand+ protesters and Toronto locals inhumanely incarcerated in wire cages 24 hrs± without charges, Or made to pee in their pants kettled in the street ... Because a few somewhere MAY commit a property crime. It's wise for police to remember that as long as we eliminate waste, we always have a weapon. Edited February 23, 2015 by jacee Quote
Argus Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 OK Ill do that. But I thought the new legislation said they werent allowed to kill me. At least without a warrant. Nope. They can even kill your dog! Just for laughs! Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jacee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) The bill refers to lawful protest, not peaceful protest.Yup.And Protest is always unlawful. It's civil disobedience that MAY be overlooked ... Or not. Among tens of thousands of protesters a few commit property crimes. All protesters are immediately declared an " unlawful assembly". All can be detained subject to the anti-terror act. To interrogate for a week in case they may have been considering committing a crime. Under other conditions police would arrest you for peeing in the street. Can our police make us pee in the street? Oh ... they did. Is this what WE PAY THEM for? Have they forgotten THEY WORK FOR US !?! . Edited February 23, 2015 by jacee Quote
Argus Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 Protest is always unlawful. That's a ridiculous statement. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jacee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 That's a ridiculous statement. Walking on a road/street is always unlawful ... civil disobedience is unlawful by nature. We don't need no stinkin' permits. . Quote
Keepitsimple Posted February 23, 2015 Author Report Posted February 23, 2015 Again you have missed the boat on the language issue here. The bill refers to lawful protest, not peaceful protest. So all your "rights" issues come down to splitting hairs on words about peaceful protests?....... the splitting of which makes no difference whatsoever. As I said, even today, a "peaceful" protest could be viewed as unlawful assembly if they didn't have a permit and were on public property - or on private property without permission - yet we seldom if ever do anything about it unless there's violence or it drags on and inconveniences the public for too long. So if this is your big issue - tell me exactly what you are so afraid of? All I see from you is confused rhetoric. Quote Back to Basics
On Guard for Thee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 So all your "rights" issues come down to splitting hairs on words about peaceful protests?....... the splitting of which makes no difference whatsoever. As I said, even today, a "peaceful" protest could be viewed as unlawful assembly if they didn't have a permit and were on public property - or on private property without permission - yet we seldom if ever do anything about it unless there's violence or it drags on and inconveniences the public for too long. So if this is your big issue - tell me exactly what you are so afraid of? All I see from you is confused rhetoric. Perhaps you would be less confused, and repetitive, if you actually read and understood the bill. I cant do that for you. Ill give you a hint though, language in a law is extremely important. Quote
jacee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 So all your "rights" issues come down to splitting hairs on words about peaceful protests?....... the splitting of which makes no difference whatsoever. As I said, even today, a "peaceful" protest could be viewed as unlawful assembly if they didn't have a permit and were on public property - or on private property without permission - yet we seldom if ever do anything about it unless there's violence Not everybody's doing property violence. Some are. The cops know they're there ... somewhere. We are ALL unlawful, and subject to incarceration and interrogation until they find the window smashers who MAY be among us. . Quote
Keepitsimple Posted February 23, 2015 Author Report Posted February 23, 2015 Perhaps you would be less confused, and repetitive, if you actually read and understood the bill. I cant do that for you. Ill give you a hint though, language in a law is extremely important. You still haven't answered the question that's been posed to you by me and others. What rights are you losing? Just give us a reasonable situation where a law-abiding citizen might get caught up in this legislation through some nefarious application? Your peaceful protest example makes no sense. Quote Back to Basics
jacee Posted February 23, 2015 Report Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) You still haven't answered the question that's been posed to you by me and others. What rights are you losing? Just give us a reasonable situation where a law-abiding citizen might get caught up in this legislation through some nefarious application? Your peaceful protest example makes no sense.Yes it does.Because the word in Bill C51 is "lawful" protest. Protest is never lawful. . Edited February 23, 2015 by jacee Quote
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
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.