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

[jacee]

you are seriously crossing over to the completely ludacris. Scratch that, what youve said here is straight paranoia. Now youre telling us PM Harper plans to water board all protesters...Do you have any proof of this whatsoever?

Do you have any proof he won't?

Are there any safeguards in Bill C 51 to ensure that he can't?

He does have a real burr up his ass about environmental and Indigenous protesters ... who win.

Real hissy about that.

I'll bet he'll read their torture reports for bedtime stories to give himself pleasant dreams.

.

Edited February 27, 2015 by jacee

[On Guard for Thee]

I wonder what new tortures have been dreamed up since Bush's day?

.

Jeez, I hate to think. Maybe being forced to listen to Harpers responses in QP.

[Smallc]

That is what Bill C51 says.

It must be amended.

.

That is obviously not the target or intent. I keep in mind though that this comes from someone who doesn't believe vandalism is bad and couldn't destroy a business.

[PrimeNumber]

Jeez, I hate to think. Maybe being forced to listen to Harpers responses in QP.

"Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear...."

Awwwwwhhh no not again! I'll tell you anything! Anything you want to hear! Just please no more of this inhumane torture!

[jacee]

Jeez, I hate to think. Maybe being forced to listen to Harpers responses in QP.

[On Guard for Thee]

"Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear...."

Awwwwwhhh no not again! I'll tell you anything! Anything you want to hear! Just please no more of this inhumane torture!

A friend gave me a present of these 4 sponges that are about the size of, and colored to look like bricks. A great way to blow off steam heaving those buggers at the TV during QP , and of course cheaper and less noisy than using the real thing.

[jacee]

That is obviously not the target or intent.

It's a pretty good indicator of intent that there are no safeguards.

I keep in mind though that this comes from someone who doesn't believe vandalism is bad

I said vandalism wasn't AS bad as the personal violence the police committed against a thousand innocent people.

and couldn't destroy a business.

You said it DID destroy businesses.

I said prove it.

.

[jbg]

Slightly left-leaning, political conservatives who bowl? How exactly do political conservatives gain (not to state the obvious, but I want to hear it from you)? And why do you buy into this?

Because Obama and other liberals are perceived as feckless. Obama's talking about a three-year effort against ISIS, which strongly suggests procrastination.

[jacee]

A friend gave me a present of these 4 sponges that are about the size of, and colored to look like bricks. A great way to blow off steam heaving those buggers at the TV during QP , and of course cheaper and less noisy than using the real thing.

That works.

.

[nerve]

I get what you want to do, but thats the wrost response you could possibly do to a Cop. The Cop only adds Assualt on a Policeman and you are screwed.Even with the poisoned fruit theory youd likely still get hammered on the assault.Whos the idiot if thats clearly not true?Reasonble suspicion, probable cause allow the Cops to do lots of things including arrest.

No its not, cops deserved to get a f.u. if they start trying to intimidate people without a crime having occurred. No charge and the cops assaulted you trying to arrest you without grounds it is totally defensible, the cop is the criminal. Regardless if they lie about what happened and they do lie, no, because the cop is acting unlawfully any court that supports that corruption can f.o. to. I don't need them.

Last thing I need is leatherheads setting political and cultural limits on my activities based upon what they feel comfortable with. Either it is legal or criminal, this aint Germany if it ain't a crime f.o.

If cops want to investigate a suspicious activity they should get a search warrant it is that simple.

I dont need anyone whether or not a cop intimidating and attempting to extort me, that is the crime, and they should be the ones kicked out of society because they are the scum. They are the breach.

Suspicion does not allow arrest.

They need the a reasonable expectation a crime has or will occur. Someone visiting a flagged website is not grounds even if it is suspicious. If the website ain't I juncted it is media. If people do not intend to engage in crime they arnt criminals.

Stop lying. Arbitrary arrest is criminal. Suspicion only allows for an attempt to gather more evidence, and without a search warrant will be the worst thing they could do as it creates liabilities and inadmisabilities by law. There are few exceptions such as distress calls, but you ain't

holding someone for 7 days without knowing they were involved in a crime.

So no you can't make a lawful arrest on suspicion alone. You are lying.

This isn't about cops it is about civilians doing this be, with no need to identify or share disclosure of what the accusations are. It is totally unconstitutional.

By law if a cop detains you you have access to counsel and the right to have the merits heard be fora j.p at the earliest time to determine the merits and lawfulness of arrest, this secret 7 day detention stuff by civilians is totally unlawful, and criminal.

Only thing cops are doing is getting disabled killed or arrested if they unlawfully assault me and persist in endangering my life. Either you have charges or you f.o.

If you persist I engaging in harassment you will get complaint and demand from superiors and t court to stop the harassment and if you continue to provoke me I will be justified to use a much force as is necessary to arrest you to get the criminal harassment to stop. That is the law.

Edited February 27, 2015 by nerve

[LemonPureLeaf]

Nerve, I don't see any reason for coming to this forum and acting like some neanderthal with your chest puffed out and your face turning red. Do us all a favor and stop it with the tough guy routine, it's tiresome. Anyone who has to proclaim that their some kind of tough guy usually isn't, so just stop.

So you're openly talking about killing cops. How are you planning to do that? Here's a hint, you can't do it hiding behind a keyboard, you'd actually need to go outside to do that. Plus you'll never win a fight against the cops, they'll just taze you or just flat out shoot you. Plus what's the end goal? Yo think you'll just keep killing cops until ALL the cops are dead? This isn't a video game, this is real life with real consequences.

Also this bill is going to pass and nothing anyone can do about it. I hope they make it an election issue so that the Liberals and NDP will look even weaker on terrorism, if that's even possible for the "Beard" and the "ShIny Pony".

I see nothing wrong with detaining a terrorist for 7 days. I don't care about their human rights, they aren't human to me. They don't act like any humans I've ever seen. They behave like animals so we should treat them as such. If it was me I'd torture him for 7 days to get the info I needed.

[On Guard for Thee]

Nerve, I don't see any reason for coming to this forum and acting like some neanderthal with your chest puffed out and your face turning red. Do us all a favor and stop it with the tough guy routine, it's tiresome. Anyone who has to proclaim that their some kind of tough guy usually isn't, so just stop.

So you're openly talking about killing cops. How are you planning to do that? Here's a hint, you can't do it hiding behind a keyboard, you'd actually need to go outside to do that. Plus you'll never win a fight against the cops, they'll just taze you or just flat out shoot you. Plus what's the end goal? Yo think you'll just keep killing cops until ALL the cops are dead? This isn't a video game, this is real life with real consequences.

Also this bill is going to pass and nothing anyone can do about it. I hope they make it an election issue so that the Liberals and NDP will look even weaker on terrorism, if that's even possible for the "Beard" and the "ShIny Pony".

I see nothing wrong with detaining a terrorist for 7 days. I don't care about their human rights, they aren't human to me. They don't act like any humans I've ever seen. They behave like animals so we should treat them as such. If it was me I'd torture him for 7 days to get the info I needed.

Um hmm. Then why come to this forum and act like a Neanderthal. You think torture is Ok eh...

[nerve]

Nerve, I don't see any reason for coming to this forum and acting like some neanderthal with your chest puffed out and your face turning red. Do us all a favor and stop it with the tough guy routine, it's tiresome. Anyone who has to proclaim that their some kind of tough guy usually isn't, so just stop.

So you're openly talking about killing cops. How are you planning to do that? Here's a hint, you can't do it hiding behind a keyboard, you'd actually need to go outside to do that. Plus you'll never win a fight against the cops, they'll just taze you or just flat out shoot you. Plus what's the end goal? Yo think you'll just keep killing cops until ALL the cops are dead? This isn't a video game, this is real life with real consequences.

Also this bill is going to pass and nothing anyone can do about it. I hope they make it an election issue so that the Liberals and NDP will look even weaker on terrorism, if that's even possible for the "Beard" and the "ShIny Pony".

I see nothing wrong with detaining a terrorist for 7 days. I don't care about their human rights, they aren't human to me. They don't act like any humans I've ever seen. They behave like animals so we should treat them as such. If it was me I'd torture him for 7 days to get the info I needed.

Don't defame me, at no point did I suggest killing cops, you don't seem to be able to rationalize defence to required force, if you are suggesting cops intend to use serious or lethal force to attempt an unlawful arrest then that is a byproduct. But yes I can justify killing people who try to murder me. Do you prefer to die?

Lemon you have a lamer perspective, defeatist and slaveish. Your

mindset is powerless and shameful in my opinion.

I have studied policing, I know how police could respond, and I know the law something you arnt willing to exercise as you support disenfranchisement and destruction of your right to life and liberty. That is a disgraceful position.

I don't care if it is a cop or not a cop if someone tries to murder me I will use whatever force is needed to prevent that.

You will never win a fight against murderers with that position.

I am saying nothing to constitutional rule but unconstitutional violence is not accepted by myself.

You see, cop can do anything they want.

I see, I can do anything I want with reason. If cop does something criminal and unlawfully they are criminal.

Government is not immune from criminality. Government that violates peoples human rights has no legitimacy, no right to rule and thus no recognition as having a right to sovereign exercise.

Your position is cowardly. Accepting state murder or unlawful political arrests is not dignified and your position is worthless to me.

Lemon leaf they arnt terrorists, they are suspects, that is the problem. You don't hold terrorists for 7 days you hold them for life.

I strongly urge you and any others to learn how defend yourself from unaccountable totalitarian regimes open to commit human rights abuses and crimes against humanity I have no faith in any government to protect me from victimization and abuse.History has taught us these lessons, do not submit yourself to unjust rule. If you can't defend yourself do not expect anyone else to.

Also my real issue was with civilians acting as secret police, not per se police acting as police, the police would be expected to perform a little better than non police, although I know there is room for improvement. Introducing laws that violate the charter or bill if rights will not make this an easier process, some cops can get confused and screwed up on extent of lawful exercise with all these flatly illegal laws being instituted.

It ain't gonna do nothing to stop terrorism.

It doesn't go far enough and it goes in the wrong direction.

For gods sake though if you don't have enough info to press charges how do you have any clue they are engaged in terrorism, and no you should not be throwing people into jail or holding whatever that may be for a week to interrogate them. Interrogation and coerced confessions are illegal for a reason. The changes to law completely invalidate legitimacy of the foundation of western justice.

Edited February 27, 2015 by nerve

[Keepitsimple]

Seems like new member Nerve has a lot of pent-up testosterone. Wouldn't be surprised if he had the label "known to police"....and I ain't kiddin'.

[Big Guy]

Another common term heard in question period that makes my teeth grind is "Mr. speaker, obviously ...." If it was obvious then you would not have to explain it!!!!

As to the anti-cop rhetoric - at least we have transparent civilian oversight on what the police do before and after the fact - the police services board. Nice to have something similar for the new powers to fed law enforcement.

[nerve]

Seems like new member Nerve has a lot of pent-up testosterone. Wouldn't be surprised if he had the label "known to police"....and I ain't kiddin'.

I am a nice guy who likes to help people out, I don't like abusers and victimizers.

I speak with police all the time on a variety of subjects.

I treat cops like everyone else, if a cop is rude they won't be warmly received. I tend to be more cautious around police because they often are armed, much like I am with anyone carrying lethal weapons in public.

I do not support submissiveness to public agents, they serve the public not the other way around, they are my servant not the other way around.

Any divergence from acting pro socio and pro bono in line with constitutional law is corruption and can not be accepted.

an officer engages in discreditable conduct when he or she uses profane, abusive or insulting language or

is otherwise uncivil to a member of the public

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/fv-vf/har/part3.html

It should be the govs responsibility to put websites, and social media on the banned list not use lawful materials as grounds to jail people for 7 days without having committed a crime.

Edited February 27, 2015 by nerve

[guyser]

No its not, cops deserved to get a f.u. if they start trying to intimidate people without a crime having occurred. No charge and the cops assaulted you trying to arrest you without grounds it is totally defensible, the cop is the criminal. Regardless if they lie about what happened and they do lie, no, because the cop is acting unlawfully any court that supports that corruption can f.o. to. I don't need them.

You are all so hopped up on venom one doesnt know what to think.

But hey, you go ahead with what you wrote. Good luck with that. Get bail money ready.

If cops want to investigate a suspicious activity they should get a search warrant it is that simple.

Not how it works. If RS is there, they can search. ie...smell pot in a car and the like.

Suspicion does not allow arrest.

Detainment does occur on suspicion

[guyser]

I see nothing wrong with detaining a terrorist for 7 days. I don't care about their human rights, they aren't human to me. They don't act like any humans I've ever seen. They behave like animals so we should treat them as such. If it was me I'd torture him for 7 days to get the info I needed.

Such a dumb statement especially in light of the Charter link youve been given twice now.

For the record, we respect everyones right as codified, whether born here, visiting or not.

Not to mention torture is a horribly unreliable way to get info.

Edited February 27, 2015 by Guyser2

[jacee]

Another common term heard in question period that makes my teeth grind is "Mr. speaker, obviously ...." If it was obvious then you would not have to explain it!!!!

'Let me be perfectly clear on this' ...

They're all pretty irritating. :/

As to the anti-cop rhetoric - at least we have transparent civilian oversight on what the police do before and after the fact - the police services board. Nice to have something similar for the new powers to fed law enforcement.

Yes it's absolutely necessary that there be public accountability and oversight of Harper/CSIS' actions under the Anti-Terror Act.

.

[nerve]

You are all so hopped up on venom one doesnt know what to think.But hey, you go ahead with what you wrote. Good luck with that. Get bail money ready.Not how it works. If RS is there, they can search. ie...smell pot in a car and the like.Detainment does occur on suspicion

Detainment is not arrest and police must both provide reason for detainment and provide for access to counsel immediately. Someone who is detained must be done so lawfully, not arbitrarily.

Mere suspcion is not enough for detaining someone.

A crime must have likely occurred or will occur.

Right to council and other rights must be provided for. You cant just stop someone and hold them for a week to jail them for a week.

A week of jail time without charge for no purpose is abuse and a human rights violation.

People have no obligation to say anything to police or provide any info but their name.

Police must provide a valid reason for any detention.

It is incredibly destructive and abusive to give people jail time for noncriminal grounds.

Anyone who disagrees, leave for a week after telling you employer you in jail for nan week while cops decide to press charges. Oh an don't show up to pick your kids up or for work without notice.

This isn't being a mp work for 10 days a year bs. People have real lives effected by time and law.

Edited February 27, 2015 by nerve

[guyser]

Detainment is not arrest and police must both provide reason for detainment and provide for access to counsel immediately.

Not immediately, but once booked in at the station then you can call your lawyer. But at the roadside or whatever? No, you dont get a lawyer call.

But you can shut up and not answers any questions, and you can invoke that you want a lawyer in which case they are supposed to stop asking questions

[guyser]

Mere suspcion is not enough for detaining someone.

Yes it is. And if they arrest that person they are held to explain what was it that tipped them off, IOW, what was the RS spider sense tingling?

Right to council and other rights must be provided for. You can just stop someone and hold them for a week to jail them for a week.

Im going to guess you meant 'can't' .

If so....yea, was anyone suggesting otherwise?

[CommunityOrganizer]

jacee ... To suggest that protesters blocking a road would after Bill C51 now be labelled ipso facto as terrorists and that PM Harper would advocate water boarding of such people or of anyone else is crazy talk. If you don't realize this, my sincere advice to you and also my hope for you is that you secure professional help. As for me, I am not going to waste my time replying to crazy talk albeit that others may indulge you in this regard. Good luck, Madam.

[nerve]

Not immediately, but once booked in at the station then you can call your lawyer. But at the roadside or whatever? No, you dont get a lawyer call.But you can shut up and not answers any questions, and you can invoke that you want a lawyer in which case they are supposed to stop asking questions

Wrong they can't ask questions until you get a lawyer.

It goes like this

Officer blah blah

Person.. Am I being detained

Officer you are being detained for xyz reason

You have the right to council if you can't afford council we will provide a number and let you obtain duty council .. Would you like to contact council

If yes... Cop cannot lawfully ask any questions

After person speaks with council cop can ask but person has no requirement to say anything.

After saying I do not wish to respond to any questioning, kindly release me. If the cop dosent they are being an a.h.

Any cop can do that without a lengthy detention. you can't hold them just to hold them only to prevent a crime, and form that you need to have evidence of a from, investigative detention is for questioning, 7 days of questioning is nonsense.

Edited February 27, 2015 by nerve

[jacee]

Under what law?

Detainment is not arrest

That's right. Arrest requires charges.

and police must both provide reason for detainment and provide for access to counsel immediately.

Did you see any lawyers at Queen and Spadina for 3 hours while their clients had to pee in their pants in the rain?

Dream on.

Someone who is detained must be done so lawfully, not arbitrarily.

Suspicion that the person MAY commit a crime.

And ...

Being part of a group of 10,000 protesters, a few of whom MAY commit property crimes a mile away from you ... is enough for detention in inhumane conditions with CIA style interrogation for 7 days ...

under Bill C51.

***************

A week of jail time without charge for no purpose is abuse and a human rights violation.

Yup.

Think Harper cares?

It's not coming out of his pocket.

Get this: We PAY Harper/CSIS salaries for our 7 day vacation of CIASIS interrogation.

We continue paying their salaries, pay a lot of money to sue for damages, and we win 5-10 years later.

Then we pay ourselves the damages.

Oooo ... I'll bet Harper is really scared of human rights violations. :\

People have no obligation to say anything to police ...

But they have 'ways' to make you talk,

to make up anything they want to hear.

.

Edited February 28, 2015 by jacee