Martial Law in Canada? Need to be aware

[Captain Awesome]

The whole situation was a violation of Canadian law.

I didn't realize it's against Canadian law for finance minister of 20 countries to meet up. If this is the case, all 20 ministers should have been apprehended by RCMP.

...and if they held the G20 in the country they wouldn't have had to build a Berlin wall in TO, violate a few thousand Canadians rights and erode trust in the community.

I'm sure college students would see it as a violation of their rights to protest the meeting as they have no money for Greyhound bus tickets to Middle of Nowhere, Alberta.

[FreeRights]

I watched part of the "film", and I'm curious.

Which rights, specifically, did the police violate?

A peaceful protest was permitted; when it stopped being peaceful, the protest was not protected by right.

The police a secured the area around the G20 conference to ensure that the safety of those who were there was not at risk. Based on the violence that spilled out of the "peaceful" protest, even in hindsight they were right in restricting access to the immediate area.

All of the police that I observed in that video were professional, despite the "reporter" (?) yelling silly, rhetorical questions to the police. Asking why the police had, available to them, a live weapon at a "peaceful" protest is either a question made by a person seriously lacking common sense, or by someone who simply wanted to get a rise out of everyone else.

The police do not know what intent or capabilities the criminal element of a protest shows up with; we'd have a thread criticizing the police for not having a live weapon at a protest, if it resulted differently.

[SurplusElect]

I watched part of the "film", and I'm curious.

Which rights, specifically, did the police violate?

A simple Google search would have lead you to the findings of the commission.

It was the worst violation of civil rights in Canadian history. Which rights were violated? All of them pretty much.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/201 ... eport.html

They were illegally searching, arresting and detaining people days before the actual protests. Your reactionary justification is severely flawed.

All of the police that I observed in that video were professional

So the officer who was illegally assaulting a amputee, and all the others that were charged with assault - professional? The officer that threatened to arrest a female protester for assault - for blowing bubbles - professional?

Good thing the commission and practically every lawyer in Canada disagree with you.

[FreeRights]

To be fair, I didn't watch all of the video, just skipped through and watched clips.

The way that the protest turned out (ie. violent) is enough justification, to me, that what the police were attempting to do is reduce the risk posed by the protesters. It's quite clear that they had forecast the "protest" will become violent, and apparently they were absolutely right.

[Donald G]

Captain Awesome and Ken7 ...

Right again ... as usual.

[logicalview]

They should just hold these summits in Grande Prairie in January. If any of these hippy dippies and misguided college kids show up and want to get violent, just "accidentally" turn a fire hose on them. A gout of water hitting you in -40C should be enough to turn back even the most determined protester and give them incentive to return to school to complete their useless sociology degrees and shirking their student loan repayments. And from what I've seen of these violent protester types they could all use a good bath too. Plus, the good old boys up there in Northern Alberta just love meeting long haired entitled greasy hippies who want everything given to them for nothing. They'd all get along just fine. Everyone's happy, as no one's "rights", real or imagined, are violated. Win win.

[Donald G]

There is a strong element of paranoia or paranoid schizophrenia running through a few of the comments in this and other similar threads about the police. That, coupled with a significant amount of unfounded allegations are badly distorting the true picture of the actual situation. Free speech is a sacred right, but not when it is used to completely distort reality. In which case it serves a destructive purpose ... like a politician mailing out disinformation letters containing knowingly false information that they think will help their case and hurt the opposition. I find that disconcerting as well as dishonest.

[steelrules]

Earthweaver, what left wing commie person rock did you just crawl out from under? I see you have posted several links starting several threads. If you hate Canada, get lost!

Spoken like a true Nazi!