Tories on e-snooping: ‘Stand with us or with the child pornographers’

[SLM]

It seems that in the past, a police officer could ask a service provider (as a favor) for email addies or IP..
Now it's being written into law, but a record has to be kept of such requests and who made it now.

But it ain't over yet...it's up for review by all parties...Just hoping it doesn't turn out to be a political football game...but not holding my breath.....:smile:

Call me crazy but I'd rather have something legitimate with records than just something that is given over as a "favour". I'm not saying I doubt the integrity of those officers who request the favours, and maybe it's just the accountant in me coming out, but whenever there is a possibility of abuse or misuse that hole should definitely be plugged. Better to have it above board.

 

[DurkaDurka]

But they still need a warrant to obtain it, no? I'm not saying I'm for it but there is some kind of provision for 'just cause'.

No. The police would need a warrant to subpoena the ISP logs, but not your:

name
e-mail
address
IP address
device identifiers (mac address etc)
Phone Number

You can build a heck of a profile of someone with that sort of info, and frankly, I dont trust the government or the police to protect that data. Then it also comes down to, what is done with that data and how long is it retained?

Here is a good article about it by Michael Geist. Michael Geist - Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Lawful Access, But Were (Understandably) Afraid To Ask

So is the intel an Officer can glean from my plates. I'm still not that worried. Do I object to it? Of course I do. Will it be struck down in Court when the authorities try and introduce evidence gained without a warrant, through what is supposed to be private communications? Of course.

People like mentalfuzz were harping for more gov't control. The Cons placated them.

When the Court strikes it down, the Court becomes the bad guys. The left hate Harper no matter what he does. All one has to do is look at the song and dance they're doing in the thread on the dismal financial performance of Dolton. So what do the Cons care when they get their mincy balls in a knot.

The driving analogy doesn't really work though unless we start licensing internet users. Certain activities have a somewhat of an expectation to privacy and I believe internet usage is one of them.

 

[mentalfloss]

Vikileaks Twitter account traced to House of Commons | News | National Post

 

[mentalfloss]

Wow x 2

Tories accuse NDP of ‘dirty, sleazy’ Twitter attack on e-snooping champion


And the government are furious and demanding a non-pornographer's personal information.

Talk about irony.

Oh and Toews doesn't get involved in gutter politics.


Too many angles!!

 

[DurkaDurka]

Wow x 2

Tories accuse NDP of ‘dirty, sleazy’ Twitter attack on e-snooping champion


And the government are furious and demanding a non-pornographer's personal information.

Talk about irony.

Oh and Toews doesn't get involved in gutter politics.


Too many angles!!

Toews states that anyone who doesn't support his law is a pro-pedophile... yeah, gutter politics is not something he participates in. What a facking comedian he is.

 

[DurkaDurka]

Here's a good column from the National Post, the authors feelings reflect many, both on the left, right and middle.

"Vic Toews, stay out of my inbox. And no, it’s not because I’m trying to hide messages between me and kiddie porn providers.

I was about to write a column defending the Tories’ “lawful access” bill, albeit with strong reservations. Then Public Safety Minister Vic Toews accused anyone and everyone who wasn’t fully behind his bill of being supportive of the sexual creeps who prey on children by making and distributing pornographic images of them.

Seriously, Mr. Toews? Could you have done anything else that would have more thoroughly confirmed civil libertarians’ fears about your bill’s assault on privacy and personal liberty?

It is not a sign of indifference to the scourge of online child pornography to be concerned about giving police too much authority to snoop around in Canadians’ online activities. That’s a genie that cannot be put back in its bottle once it’s been released."

Vic Toews, you want to read my email? Get a warrant | Full Comment | National Post

 

[relic]

Re #114,is this an example of what the boys in the harper gang are going to do ,go nuts,start yelling "they did it !!" with NO evidence,Look at baird,pretty much froathing at the mouth,he KNOWS it was he NDP,I guess his invisable friend told him.

 

[L Gilbert]

Beating a horse to death because its shyte attracts flies. Sheer genius. It went over well for Canadian gun owners when the Glibs tried it, right?

 

[Ron in Regina]

Tories on e-snooping: ‘Stand with us or with the child pornographers’

.......

Wow....I've been off the grid (below it, actually) so I'm behind on pretty much everything.
I'll admit that I haven't read through this Thread yet, so if someone else has covered
this....I've missed it so far, but....

This seems like the beginning of a very slippery slope. Right now it's just limited info
that will be available to law enforcement (that would currently need a warrent for that
info, and justification to a Judge that it's justifiable in obtaining that information).

Will it remain "just" that info? Will this be used for more that just Pedo-Freak-Hunting?
Is it open to any and all Criminal Code vilolations in a free-for-all round-about to cut out
warrents in general once (if?) this is expanded upon?

What's wrong with the current system where Law Enforcement has to prove just cause
to a Judge to obtain a warrent before intruding upon someone's privacy, as a safeguard
against unreasonable searches?

This whole proposed situation just feels very wrong to me.

 

[lone wolf]

So ... uh ... Vic:

How much truth do you say you'll find online?...;-)

 

[Ariadne]

It's just like the gun law ... they'll be snooping on the honest people while the pornographers and terrorists are using public computers and proxy servers. It's a pointless resolution.

What I want to know is why Harper is following the US lead on this one ... is someone in the US pulling strings here?

 

[L Gilbert]

It's just like the gun law ... they'll be snooping on the honest people while the pornographers and terrorists are using public computers and proxy servers. It's a pointless resolution.

What I want to know is why Harper is following the US lead on this one ... is someone in the US pulling strings here?

I doubt it. Harpy seems to be a willing volunteer. No strings needed.

 

[wulfie68]

OK I don't like this proposed law, any more than I like the American versions of internet privacy laws aimed at stopping pirating. I am not involved in and have no intent of having anything to do with Child Porn (having a 2 1/2 yr old whom I love more than life itself, stuff like that tends to wake the Lion in me, not turn my crank). I don't see why the RCMP/other police forces need this, especially the warrantless proposals. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me and almost makes me wonder if this is Harper pulling a Chretien: putting something out in the public eye that he can back down from, to distract from something else (Jean did this with the brief proposed Canadian small market NHL subsidy at the same time Sheila Fraser was asking where $2-3 billion disappeared to at HRDC under Jane Stewart).

At the same time, I think this Vikileaks thing, is below board, especially given how sanctimonious the opposition parties are about attack ads etc. I know Toews chose to get into the public spotlight (where all the skeletons of your past will come out eventually) and he has voiced some unpopular stances/opinions BUT this is distasteful to me. Most of us have had relationships fail at some point, and usually the blame isn't all one way... and its not politically relevant if someone in the HoC has had a nasty divorce. Shame on the NDPers or whoever in the opposition that is behind this; congratulations you are as big an hypocrite and assinine idiot as those you claim to be against ever have been.

Re #114,is this an example of what the boys in the harper gang are going to do ,go nuts,start yelling "they did it !!" with NO evidence,Look at baird,pretty much froathing at the mouth,he KNOWS it was he NDP,I guess his invisable friend told him.

Reports I have read (i.e. Yahoo.ca and others) cite an email traced by an Ottawa Citizen reporter to the HoC, and specifically a site known to write pro-NDP stuff. Thats not necessarily iron-clad but its still a pretty strong link; more than the opposition has had in a number of cases to make inflammatory accusations about the gov't.

 

[Ariadne]

I doubt it. Harpy seems to be a willing volunteer. No strings needed.

It looks like fearful, mirror mongering Michael Moore style US attitude ... he thought Canada was a pretty safe place. Today, Canada is facing the same kind of llaws we saw implemented on US citizens about 10 years ago ... and nobody really noticed ... wiretaps without a warrant to" catch the terrorists" and, if in Canada, "pornographers". What about Canada. I sure hope this isn't passed ... I will be afraid to use my computer, cellphone .. and I'm one of the innocent people.The guilty people will find plenty of loopholes.

 

[DaSleeper]

Where was the outrage when the liberal tried to bring out a more aggressive version of that same law in "05?????

 

[Spade]

Where was the outrage when the liberal tried to bring out a more aggressive version of that same law in "05?????

Two wrongs...?
Ahhh... the perennial argument: "My bastard is no different from their bastard."

 

[CDNBear]

Where was the outrage when the liberal tried to bring out a more aggressive version of that same law in "05?????

Oh oh...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2009/06/19/f-internet-cellphone-wiretap-surveillance-law.html

Two wrongs...?
Ahhh... the perenniel argument: "My bastard is no different from their bastard."

True, but selective outrage is interesting. Pointing it out, oft gives some time to reflect upon their respective ideology.

Far to often, they miss important opportunities in their own evolution. As can easily be seen in the usual nonsense posted by the usual suspects.

 

[Tonington]

Where was the outrage when the liberal tried to bring out a more aggressive version of that same law in "05?????

Here it is:
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/canadian-politics/36527-big-brother-canada.html

Most of us weren't even members at the time. Though Michael Geist was still promninent in the news of the day.

 

[CDNBear]

Here it is:
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/canadian-politics/36527-big-brother-canada.html

Most of us weren't even members at the time.

Interesting as that thread is, I see it's full of the same bluster, deflection and baseless accusations as this thread.

Funny how that is.

I wonder if the usual suspects will be defending the Liberals on that issue, as they have their piss poor provincial spending habits in Ontario.

 

[Cannuck]

Where was the outrage when the liberal tried to bring out a more aggressive version of that same law in "05?????

The outrage probably never occurred because the Libs suffered an non-confidence vote within a week and the proposed legislation died. That's the big difference this time. The government has the ability to actually make this the law. While you may find it necessary to get "outraged" about things that aren't going to happen, I have better things to do with my time.