Critics angered by new law making it illegal to wear a mask at unlawful protests
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
Even if there is an accident they need to notify trans. ministry of a closure. I don't know where TS got the idea that it was the cops who make the decision.
I got that from a cop but since you mentioned it that is probably not the best source on what a cop can or can not do.
I do know that firefighters can close the highway for emergencies. I don't know if we have standing authority to do this or how it works but I have personally ordered hwy 19A closed as officer on first in truck to a MVA and have been involved in several others. If anyone is stupid enough to drive through we just give there license number to the RCMP and they deal with it. One idiot not only got a fine but earned an impaired charge as well.
What I would do about replying to a question in an interview is totally irrelevant to the discussion about the legality of wearing masks during protests.
You're right. A cop is a sh*tty source for the truth.
Emergencies are a whole different ball game. It can sometimes take a full day to investigate a fatality.
Are you trying to sever your statement which was in regards to profiling?
As far as I am concerned peaceful protests are fine, but I think protests and massing of the public has seen an increase in violence. I am sure there are people who just attend protests to cause trouble and I think this law is to help cops identify the troublemakers. The Charter (Section 2) says we have the right to peaceful assembly. I think "peaceful" is the key word there and this law came about because of those few idiots that attend demonstrations and protests to cause trouble.
If you don't agree, tough shyte. It won't change my opinion.
Nope. You said this law is about nothing except profiling. I said I think it's likely to be more to help cops identify troublemakers that attend protests and that some types of profiling works.
If you don't agree, tough shyte. It won't change my opinion.
That's news top me. Have you any data to support that notion? There wre large demonstrations during the early 20th century that seomtimes turned violenet, like the Winnipeg General Strike. There was the peace protests of the 60s. There were many large demonstrations against the Iraq War. I don't think it is any worse now that in has ever been.
It's news that that is my opinion? Sorry. I guess you missed the flyer I tossed into everyone mailboxes.
Been looking for some research. It could be that I'm just influenced by the sensationalism that news media spews.
Good for you. You may be right.
(In see Cannuck is back in his typically paedomorphic form. Funny shyte).
Last edited:
Well done. and a good point, the provocateurs will be outed.
I'm Sure It Is Just A Coincidence
Clear Evidence That Corporate America Wants the Govt. to Treat Protesters as 'Terrorists'
Major company behind the Keystone XL pipeline wants American police to treat people sitting in trees like Mohammad Atta.
June 20, 2013 |
Corporations are trying to use the PATRIOT Act in ways that have nothing to do with Osama Bin Laden because the PATRIOT Act gives transnational corporations the power to snuff out the activism of all those who oppose them.
Terrorism, as it is commonly considered, is the use of violence against civilians to achieve any number of political ends: the destruction of the federal government, the overturning of Roe V. Wade, the restoration of a Caliphate. If you try to kill people – or succeed in killing people for a political purpose - you’re a terrorist. If you blow up the Alfred P. Murrow Federal Building and kill 168 civilians, like Timothy McVeigh, you’ve committed an act of terrorism.
Seems pretty self-explanatory – right? Not according to TransCanada Corp., the Canadian owned energy conglomerate that is the backer of the Keystone XL pipeline extension. A new set of documents obtained by the group Bold Nebraska shows that this foreign corporation is encouraging American law enforcement agencies to treat anti-pipeline protestors like terrorists. Yes, terrorists.
The documents, which Bold Nebraska got a hold of through a FOIA request, were part of a briefing given to Nebraska law enforcement agents about the “emerging threat” of groups like Tar Sands Blockade and Rainforest Action.
And what are the “terrorist” activities that TransCanada is so concerned about? They include things like monkey-wrenching, tree-sitting, and tying yourself to a construction vehicle with a device called a “dragon-lock.”
more
http://www.alternet.org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/corporations-think-protesters-are-terrorists?akid=10601.1069644.ACSHca&rd=1&src=newsletter858146&t=3&paging=off
"new law making it illegal to wear a mask at unlawful protests"
So in other words, you have to already be breaking the law to break this law? Seeing that the person breaking the law is already breaking one law, how likely is that he'll obey this one too?
Isn't it like saying the use of wapons is illegal in criminal activity.
So in other words, you have to already be breaking the law to break this law? Seeing that the person breaking the law is already breaking one law, how likely is that he'll obey this one too?
Isn't it like saying the use of wapons is illegal in criminal activity.
About time. The place for peacefull protests is in front of legislatures not on someone's jobsite. There is such a thing as economic terrorism and that is exactly what the protesters are doing. The same as the tree spiking that went on 20 years ago. Some honest taxpayers got hurt by cutting into a tree that had been spiked. Many of us have jobs that depend on resourse extraction and any illegal stoppages are at least costing us money and possibly even someones life. SO what ever it takes to put the ba$tards away longer is good with me.