11–20 of 24 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment is unbelievably bad. What are you talking about, "probably with his green bandanna over his face?" Refusing to show ID is being "passive-aggressive?" I'd call it common sense (if you don't know that you're legally obligated to.) Either you have a lot of evidence that you're not telling us about, or you're casting aspersions onto this guy that are totally indefensible.
[deleted]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Totally agree. You have this guy (probably with his green bandanna over his face) while "exploring the G20 perimeter with his friend". Being passive aggressive landed him in jail but will probably have his court date dropped before July 28. Then again this appears to only be his side of the story. You want to bet that he was being a little more than passive aggressive ;) I don't really mind people who protest but I h…
This comment is unbelievably bad. What are you talking about, "probably with his green bandanna over his face?" Refusing to show ID is being "passive-aggressive?" I'd call it common sense (if you don't know that you're legally obligated to.) Either you have a lot of evidence that you're not telling us about, or you're casting aspersions onto this guy that are totally indefensible.
Your suggestion has been noted.
Updated original post; added disclaimer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment is unbelievably bad. What are you talking about, "probably with his green bandanna over his face?" Refusing to show ID is being "passive-aggressive?" I'd call it common sense (if you don't know that you're legally obligated to.) Either you have a lot of evidence that you're not telling us about, or you're casting aspersions onto this guy that are totally indefensible.
Sorry, I deleted my comment, saying; "really? I'm not allowed to make assumptions." Your suggestion has been noted. Updated original post; added disclaimer.
When I hear that a guy was walking around, I don't usually start off by assuming that he had his face covered and he was acting suspiciously. And I sure don't consider "the police arrested him" to be credible evidence about it, either.
EDIT to respond to your reply: I guess we just won't see eye-to-eye on this. I've worn a bandanna as an accessory before, and I don't see anything wrong with walking around near a security fence, or even "checking it out." I completely disagree that those things on their own are suspicious enough to warrant arrest.
That's a pretty broad title... What the law actually changes is that if you're within 5 meters of the 'fence' surrounding the G20 zone, police have the right to ask you for ID and what you're doing there. If you don't show ID or answer their questions you are subject to arrest (but, as with this guy, probably no prosecution).
Totally agree. You have this guy (probably with his green bandanna over his face) while "exploring the G20 perimeter with his friend". Being passive aggressive landed him in jail but will probably have his court date dropped before July 28. Then again this appears to only be his side of the story. You want to bet that he was being a little more than passive aggressive ;) I don't really mind people who protest but I h…
A five dollar hooker could help someone beat that ticket/fine.
Public Works == city services, so its a by-law. Yawn.
A better story is the guy they stopped with a crossbow at the G20: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100624/national/g20_car_w...
"A guard or peace officer, may require any person entering or attempting to enter any public work or any approach thereto to furnish his or her name and address, to identify himself or herself and to state the purpose for which he or she desires to enter the public work, in writing or otherwise;"
I don't know what qualifies as "attempting to enter". Sounds arguable enough to be abused for this purpose though. Also I don't think a large part of the downtown core qualifies as a public work all of the sudden.
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_stat... - no idea if this is current or complete "A guard or peace officer, may require any person entering or attempting to enter any public work or any approach thereto to furnish his or her name and address, to identify himself or herself and to state the purpose for which he or she desires to enter the public work, in writing or otherwise;" I don't know what…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not everywhere - Europe is not homogeneous. There's no state-mandated ID in the UK, for example, so the police can't demand it here. In most circumstances you're not required to even disclose your name and address to a random plod.
My rule of thumb is that any government proposing to introduce ID cards in the UK is about to lose the next election. It's happened twice (Conservatives in 1997, Labour in 2010).
Any details on this new law? Is it federal, provincial, temporary? A better story is the guy they stopped with a crossbow at the G20: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100624/national/g20_car_w...
Public Works Protection Act: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_stat...
Amendment: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/source/regs/english/2010/el...
Map of fence: http://www.g8-g20isu.ca/g20/resources/10-06-11-map.pdf