Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

ottawacitizen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 1001 posts

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#101

Post by colechristensen »

barbazoo wrote: post #15
vorpalhex wrote: post #8

> The Emergencies Act is the modern-day replacement to the War Measures Act. It allows the federal government to force companies to provide services, it can require public protests to end, and limit mobility rights by preventing people from moving to designating areas. > > The act also allows for the military to be used as police, but several sources said that is not under active consideration. Not a good look for Tr…

What should be done differently? In Alberta restrictions have been lifted but the occupation of the border still hasn't ended.

Put the measures being protested directly up for a vote by the Canadian legislature (so they're not just executive actions), if they're not struck down the government should resign / do a no confidence vote, let people elect a new government. Let the people have their voice. If protests continue take actions that let them protest but reduce their ability to be disruptive.

With the current dynamics of the disease though, authoritarian medical requirements are making much less sense over time. Vaccination doesn't really help curb transmission much and omicron is considerably less dangerous than previous variants. SARS2 was originally pretty near the threshold where government might not need to do anything forced and the new variant and ineffectiveness of the vaccine against is is pushing it further lower.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#102

Post by synthos »

ameminator wrote: post #79
asdfaoeu wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blocking roads without permission is generally illegal. A protest doesn't allow you to inconvenience others without repercussion.

Uh, how is someone supposed to protest? I mean, I see clear differences between going up to someone's home or into someone's workplace and making noise in the street. Any protest is almost guaranteed to inconvenience someone, unless you want to limit a "protester" to yelling in their own home. So what would you suggest is the line?

Work with the city to park in a designated spot and then protest on foot in front of parliament. Not 'move-in' and set up hot tubs, saunas, and sleep in your truck on Wellington.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#103

Post by __blockcipher__ »

dbtc wrote: post #59
busymom0 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I along with my friends (who are vaxxed but only did so because their work coerced them) have been at the protest in Ottawa for 3 weekends. It's always been peaceful, friendly and almost like Canada day celebrations. It was loud the first week due to honking but even that's stopped. And even if there were honking, that's not violence. I am brown and my buddy is black and neither of us met with anything other than fri…

Hey, I respect that. I'm curious if the protests are just about the vaccine mandates, or are there other things too that are drawing people out?

Not the GP but it seems like for most people their line is a full end to all the COVID restrictions, not just the vax mandates.

That sentiment was echoed in this podcast I listened to the other night: https://youtu.be/H-T_EGVdYwk

The guy being interviewed is just a dude, not a leader in the movement AFAIK. But he’s probably a good representation of what the average person attending the protests wants.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#104

Post by s5300 »

colechristensen wrote: post #61
vorpalhex wrote: post #8

> The Emergencies Act is the modern-day replacement to the War Measures Act. It allows the federal government to force companies to provide services, it can require public protests to end, and limit mobility rights by preventing people from moving to designating areas. > > The act also allows for the military to be used as police, but several sources said that is not under active consideration. Not a good look for Tr…

It doesn't look like , it is authoritarian response to something which should be protected. Using government power intended for things like war to suppress a protest is ridiculous, if this is what being "liberal" is about, I'm out. I hope the response is a protest escalation. Not my country, not my protest, but I know who I'm rooting for. Contrast this to what was happening in Minneapolis a couple of summers ago... p…

Damage in Minneapolis was mostly confined to a singular street.

Singular.

At no point were fire and police “afraid” to go places in the city either, though I can imagine you may have been watching certain “news” coverage that may have claimed that.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#105

Post by Mountain_Skies »

karpierz wrote: post #68
vorpalhex wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recommend reading up on Shay's rebellion from US history: https://www.history.com/topics/early-us/shays-rebellion The truckers assert their livelihoods are already heavily impacted. This crowd appears to be much larger than simply anti-vaxxers.

Shay's rebellion consisted of veterans, still armed with their weapons from the rebellion they'd fought a few years ago, at a time where the US government didn't have a standing army. I don't think those lessons quite transfer over here.

On the other hand, the protestors are armed with thousands of cameras. Any violent act by the authorities will be quickly spread worldwide. They have to use kid gloves here or will quickly amplify the opposition to themselves. That the truckers won't get violent makes it even worse if the police do.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#106

Post by synthos »

busymom0 wrote: post #31
ameminator wrote: post #12

Shameful that a peaceful protest is met with this response. How can a person protest meaningfully if any peaceful protest can be called illegal? I do understand that the truckers were disturbing the peace of ordinary people - I think this should be discouraged. However there must be a way to peacefully assemble without the government's approval. I don't see how we can have meaningful civil discourse if you need permi…

I along with my friends (who are vaxxed but only did so because their work coerced them) have been at the protest in Ottawa for 3 weekends. It's always been peaceful, friendly and almost like Canada day celebrations. It was loud the first week due to honking but even that's stopped. And even if there were honking, that's not violence. I am brown and my buddy is black and neither of us met with anything other than fri…

False: 'got natural immunity which is superior'

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#107

Post by ameminator »

joshlemer wrote: post #77
tomohawk wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's right. Only the government is allowed to shut everything down and put people out of work.

Yes that's correct, our democratically elected government with a charter of rights and freedoms and independent judiciary is allowed to impose reasonable restrictions on citizens freedoms under specific circumstances. No, a mob of thugs who represent a minority public opinion are not allowed to impose their will on society. If that's supposed to be a mic-drop comment you're going to have to try harder.

I think there's difference in what "reasonable" means here, regardless of what the issue is and who is doing it. My argument is that there must be some form of protest that is always legal (even if not sanctioned by the government) and that minimal form of protest must be public. That no restrictions can be reasonable on this minimal form of protest.

All the people who are cheering this emergency powers move, have not made clear to me why this particular protest has surpassed that point outside of noise issues in private (and non-public) areas (which I do understand are difficult).

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#108

Post by [deleted] »

tomohawk wrote: post #30
itslennysfault wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeeeeeah, I don't know about that. Anyone with their truck there risks forfeiting the asset that was used in commission of a crime. AKA their livelihood and likely most expensive asset. There is certainly not a bottomless pit of people wishing to do that.

So, instead of stopping and blockading, people just start driving the minimum legal speed everywhere. Totally legal, but would totally get the point across. And you don't need a truck.

[deleted]

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#109

Post by dblohm7 »

voisin wrote: post #78
dblohm7 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There have been multiple incidents of protesters using large vehicles to smash through police barricades. What do you call that?

Source? I have not seen anything about this on the news.

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/convoy-protesters-break-through-surrey...

"At about 8 p.m., police said a large farm tractor and a semi-truck attempted to ram a police vehicle. The officer in the vehicle was able to reposition and avoid the collision." https://globalnews.ca/news/8618494/alberta-coutts-border-pro...

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#110

Post by colechristensen »

Jackim wrote: post #54
makomk wrote: post #24

Headline on the front page of BBC News right now: "Trudeau vows to freeze anti-mandate protesters' bank accounts" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60383385 This feels downright dystopian, especially if the move away from cash and towards centrally-controlled electronic payment systems is anywhere near as widespread in Canada as elsewhere.

That is an exaggerated headline. Accounts being used to fund illegal activities can be frozen. Protesting is not and will not be illegal. Blocking critical infrastructure is illegal.

The adjective critical though has been used very broadly during the pandemic. It's clear that it needs a very specific definition or such language could be used to make any protest illegal because it blocked access to a pizza place, etc.
Post reply on HN