Bill C-51: Federal Anti-Terror Legislation polling results

[guyser]

Maybe so, but I suspect a really lousy marksman. As in stormtrooper bad

[eyeball]

Our recent history? Any recent political change has come in a peaceful manner and generally lawful manner.

So Clayoquot Sound is relegated to the dim past?

I mean, the War of the Woods protesters still have an office in Tofino where they preach their violent evil ideology to whoever walks through the door.

[On Guard for Thee]

I suspect you are correct based on available data. Im breathing easier.

[cybercoma]

Gay marriage? Pot reforms? Abortion? Assisted suicide? How about other nations: Arab Spring?

Come on. All major political change comes from disobeying laws and often times violence.

I should also add that there's a moratorium on fracking exploration in NB too as a result of clashes between RCMP and First Nations here.

[Smallc]

Gay marriage? Pot reforms? Abortion? Assisted suicide?

People were generally not harmed or inconvenienced, and very few laws were broken (outside of abortion).

How about other nations: Arab Spring?

I didn't realize that Canada was another nation.

[Smallc]

I should also add that there's a moratorium on fracking exploration in NB too as a result of clashes between RCMP and First Nations here.

I would argue that isn't a positive development.

[cybercoma]

I would argue that isn't a positive development.

Positive, negative, whatever. It's political change.

[cybercoma]

People were generally not harmed or inconvenienced, and very few laws were broken (outside of abortion).

So what. Laws were broken. It was persistent civil disobedience that changed the laws, not peaceful appeals that were consistently ignored.

[jacee]

I would argue that isn't a positive development.

The people who live in the affected communities would not agree with you.

How close to your home/community would you be comfortable with drilling and fracking?

.

[Smallc]

Positive, negative, whatever. It's political change.

So, we should encourage behaviour that brings about negative political change?

So what. Laws were broken. It was persistent civil disobedience that changed the laws, not peaceful appeals that were consistently ignored.

In some instances some laws that hadn't kept with the time were broken, yes. The courts changed all of that, and it had nothing to do with disobedience.

[poochy]

Gay marriage? Pot reforms? Abortion? Assisted suicide? How about other nations: Arab Spring?

Come on. All major political change comes from disobeying laws and often times violence.

So when the violence comes in support of a view point that is the polar opposite of your own are you still in support of it? If anti abortionists smash all of the windows out of every clinic they can find and prevent women from attending would you be accepting of that violence as an expression of their beliefs and desire for change or will you not simply because you disagree with them? It cuts both ways. Violence isn't acceptable.

[cybercoma]

So, we should encourage behaviour that brings about negative political change?

Who said we "should" do anything? All anyone has said is that major political change has been brought about by violence and civil disobedience for longer than we've been a nation.

In some instances some laws that hadn't kept with the time were broken, yes. The courts changed all of that, and it had nothing to do with disobedience.

It had everything to do with disobedience. People disobeyed laws. The laws were changed because they had no effect and no support. You say they hadn't "kept with the times," but those laws were a part of the times. They had support. There's still people who think abortion needs to be outlawed. Possessing weed is still illegal despite its widespread availability and use.

Violence and disobedience. That's how laws change. Asking politely gets you ignored.

[cybercoma]

So when the violence comes in support of a view point that is the polar opposite of your own are you still in support of it? If anti abortionists smash all of the windows out of every clinic they can find and prevent women from attending would you be accepting of that violence as an expression of their beliefs and desire for change or will you not simply because you disagree with them? It cuts both ways. Violence isn't acceptable.

I never said I support violence. I said Smallc is wrong when he says violence never leads to political change.

[LemonPureLeaf]

Disobedience needs to be stopped. Lawlessness cannot and should not be allowed and in some cases should be classified as terrorism because these so called protesters are holding the rest of the public hostage and using terror to scare them into action.

[Sheogorath_The_Mad]

This is tinfoil hat stuff. It's all based on an RCMP report that opposition to energy projects had reached a point among some people where some kind of sabotoge/terrorism could be expected. Not like that would be the first time anyone bombed a pipline, btw....

Nope, the RCMP for instance has a good track record of covertly bombing pipelines.

[cybercoma]

Disobedience needs to be stopped. Lawlessness cannot and should not be allowed and in some cases should be classified as terrorism because these so called protesters are holding the rest of the public hostage and using terror to scare them into action.

Don't worry. People like you have been on the losing side of history for centuries.

[jacee]

Nope, the RCMP for instance has a good track record of covertly bombing pipelines.

??

Holy crap!

Their lawyer produced evidence that the RCMP bombed a wellsite and that they did it with the full support of the energy company that owned it. The Crown admits the allegations are true.

... they blamed it on his client, farmer Wiebo Ludwig.

And the RCMP operate with civilian oversight and accountability.

CSIS has none.

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/blog.html?b=news.nationalpost.com/2012/04/26/csis-office-of-the-inspector-general

The government did away with an office mandated to oversee the activities of Canadas spies Thursday, a move critics say opens the door to abuses of power by the secretive Canadian Security Intelligence Service.

...

The government quietly slipped the change into its omnibus budget bill, and did not publicly announce the abolishment of the Inspector Generals office.

[poochy]

Gay marriage? Pot reforms? Abortion? Assisted suicide? How about other nations: Arab Spring?

Come on. All major political change comes from disobeying laws and often times violence.

I never said I support violence. I said Smallc is wrong when he says violence never leads to political change.

You don't support violence? You have been arguing it's merits for days now, i suppose you could be doing that from a purely academic pov but who are you trying to kid here, anyway, I don't think Smallc would deny that violence can bring change, but that does not mean that the violence was necessary, or acceptable.

Who gets to decide just how much violence or property destruction is ok? In lieu of any possible quantification the only answer to that question is 0,

[jacee]

So when the violence comes in support of a view point that is the polar opposite of your own are you still in support of it? If anti abortionists smash all of the windows out of every clinic they can find and prevent women from attending would you be accepting of that violence as an expression of their beliefs and desire for change or will you not simply because you disagree with them? It cuts both ways. Violence isn't acceptable.

We're talking about history, where dissent has erupted into violence,

MOST OFTEN PERPETRATED BY THE POLICE against protesters, as in the New Brunswick drilling/fracking case.

Your example ... they'd be arrested of course.

I find such personal violence reprehensible, and that perpetrated by police against dissenting citizens.

Self defence ... property 'violence' ... not so much.

Accepting that violence has happened, has sometimes made a positive difference in the long run and may again in the future ... that isn't promoting violence.

It's just discussing the issue.

We do that here. ?

There was a whole lot of personal violence committed by cops incarcerating over a thousand innocent G20 dissenting citizens.

They MAYBE prevented some property damage, maybe not.

They made themselves look like unleashed attack baboons.

They attacked citizens WHO PAY THEIR SALARIES.

And when we sue,

WE'LL HAVE TO PAY THEIR F*****G DAMAGES TOO!!

No I don't accept personal violence at protests, so the police can just stop doing it.

.

Edited February 26, 2015 by jacee

[Smallc]

I never said I support violence. I said Smallc is wrong when he says violence never leads to political change.

In recent history it hasn't. Also, you very much seem to support it as a way of getting things done. Otherwise you wouldn't be defending it.

[Smallc]

We're talking about history, where dissent has erupted into violence,

And that isn't acceptable today, nor is it likely to bring positive change.

[On Guard for Thee]

And that isn't acceptable today, nor is it likely to bring positive change.

Without it they would still be forcing () to the back of the bus. Wake up!

Edited February 26, 2015 by On Guard for Thee

[Smallc]

Without it they would still be forcing () to the back of the bus. Wake up!

In Canada?

[On Guard for Thee]

In Canada?

So I take it you think racial discrimination didnt or doesnt happen north of the 49th.

[jacee]

Without it they would still be forcing () to the back of the bus. Wake up!

Would you edit that please. Thx.