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

141–150 of 1001 posts

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#141

Post by [deleted] »

tedivm wrote: post #70
e4e78a06 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Confiscating peoples' assets does not exactly engender you to a lot of political support. You're risking a massive loss in the next elections if you do that, just like how Democrats in the US are also facing huge electoral pressures on crime and COVID restrictions [1]. [1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/08/us/politics/new-york-mask...

This idea that there's a crime wave seems to be pushed here and on reddit by month old accounts with no real proof. The reality is that crime is down in most places. Lets look at San Francisco. I'm going to get my stats right from the San Francisco Police Department. Homocide - Down 20% Rape - Down 23.8% Robbery - Down 20.7% Assault - Down 8.8% Human Trafficking - Down 83.3% Burglary - Down 45.4% Motor Vehicle Theft…

[deleted]

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#142

Post by amscanne »

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.

As usual, the devil is in the details. I would agree that the bridge is critical, and that forceful removal was justified. I’m less convinced that Wellington St. is critical, and I would be concerned that only the broadest brushes will be used to determine which accounts will be frozen and why.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#143

Post by pkd »

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…

There is no loss of mandate, if the opinion polls are anything to go by. Besides, the Canadian people chose the government in the middle of the pandemic last year. Is there a more comprehensive definition of a "mandate" than a federal election?

Whether the response is authoritarian depends on how it is enforced. The police have basically failed to enforce any law on the occupiers on parliament hill (I live here). If the local enforcement had happened preemptively and as per the law, the situation wouldn't have escalated as far as it has done.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#145

Post by colechristensen »

s5300 wrote: post #104
colechristensen wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I've spent more than a decade living in Minneapolis, I wasn't confused by crazy news sources.

>At no point were fire and police “afraid” to go places in the city either

The police abandoned the 3rd precinct station which was burned down later that night. How's that for being afraid to be in a place?

There were plenty of stories of fire trucks not going places for security reasons, and eventually firemen had national guard escorts. I don't know what that is besides "being afraid" to go places in the city.

>>“We were faced with these fail fail fail options,” Mr. Frey (Minneapolis mayor) said. “We were literally having to choose between preventing additional looting, protecting a precinct and providing escorts to firefighters to put out fires. There was no way we could do all three.”

>Damage in Minneapolis was mostly confined to a singular street.

A main street which crossed the cities, miles long. And damage wasn't at all confined there. There were several hot spots around the cities.

>I can imagine you may have been watching certain “news” coverage that may have claimed that.

Well, here's the New York Times backing up my claims.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/03/us/minneapolis-government...

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#146

Post by PeterisP »

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?

You get to make your point in a protest, but the society has the right - and should have the practical ability - to ignore your protest if they wish to do so.

You get to make your point heard to anyone who cares - both to the government and other people - but they don't have to care. If it turns out that general public does not want to hear and support your protest, then you simply wait until elections, and either get what you request or watch your candidate lose and peacefully accept that your requests are simply not going to be met. You don't get to stop the rest of the society until your demands are met, they don't owe you that. If the other voters disagree with your opinion and don't want to listen to it, you don't get to make them listen.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#147

Post by ameminator »

dang wrote: post #96
tedajax wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Please make your substantive points without swipes. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Good luck in this thread - and probably on the front page. Thanks for doing such a good job moderating this website.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#148

Post by markdown »

edmcnulty101 wrote: post #112
Jackim wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Locking bank accounts at all WITHOUT A TRIAL, seems dystopian. That's a lot of power for the state to have to be able to reach into some ones bank accounts with no due process. Edit: changed AT ALL to without a trial because on second thought resized it's possible that there are some legit uses for freezing bank accounts.

Wait till you hear about civil forfeiture in the United States.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#149

Post by jsnodlin »

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.

Good, blocking critical infrastructure and affecting hundreds of thousands of bottom lines is a crime.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#150

Post by encryptluks2 »

WesternWind wrote: post #116
edmcnulty101 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Locking bank accounts at all WITHOUT A TRIAL, seems dystopian. That's a lot of power for the state to have to be able to reach into some ones bank accounts with no due process. Edit: changed AT ALL to without a trial because on second thought resized it's possible that there are some legit uses for freezing bank accounts.

Blocking bridges with trucks to protest public health members seems dystopian.

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN