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

221–230 of 1001 posts

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#221

Post by refurb »

WesternWind wrote: post #191

Some facts (and a few polls) suggest that the Trucker convoy isn't a broadly popular movement of truckers as much as a well funded tiny minority without broad support even from truckers. First 90% of Canadian truckers are vaccinated. https://newrepublic.com/article/165341/fox-news-vaccine-cana... Evidence suggests that funding for this protest is in large part foreign (IE not from canada) and that most canadian donat…

I’m not sure any of those things matter?

- Plenty of vaccinated people against vaccine mandates and other restrictions. Doctors are allowed to be Covid positive and treat patients in BC and QC. But apparently truckers who are Covid negative are a problem?

- Foreign money influence is a problem, sure, but businesses? They can’t support a protest?

- Last poll I saw (Ipsos) said 1 out of 3 Canadians support the protest. 1 out of 3. That’s HUGE.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#222

Post by jsjsbdkj »

tonfreed wrote: post #117
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.

Sounds a little silly to confiscate the assets of the people bringing the food to your table. That and the towies in the area are refusing to move any of the trucks. Trudeau just looks weak at this point, and for a prime minister that got in because of his good looks and his dad's popularity it's not a good omen.

Surprisingly, I still have food on my table even though none of these people have worked in 3 weeks. If you're going to have a strike, you need to actually have an impact.

Heavy equipment tow operators have recieved threats of violence, which is why at least some of them have not helped.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#223

Post by Covzire »

barbazoo wrote: post #46
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 think it stops being a peaceful protest if you erect structure and continually inconvenience residents by blasting your horns 24/7. Go on the street, show what you protest against, what you want. But don't permanently take over a part of the city, let alone start swearing in your own peace officers [0]. [0] https://youtu.be/0DvVtDHEizk?t=51

Was it even ever honking 24/7?

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#224

Post by x3n0ph3n3 »

pas wrote: post #216
buscoquadnary wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First 90% of Canadian truckers are vaccinated. https://newrepublic.com/article/165341/fox-news-vaccine-cana ... My understanding was this was about the mandates and restrictions themselves not about the vaccine. I mean I am vaxxed and oppose vax mandates.

> oppose vax mandates why? could you explain your stande on other mandates/requirements and what's this vax mandate does that makes it so different? (eg. you need a passport/visa-like thing to enter, you need clothes, if you arrive by car that needs papers and a valid safety profile, you need to use the seatbelt, and so on)

All government mandates are enforced at the barrel of a gun.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#225

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#226

Post by jleyank »

A) Trudeau still has a minority government, so oversteps could be correct almost immediately.

B) throwing 1000’s of people out of work as collateral damage is pretty selfish. These people aren’t involved in what they’re protesting.

C) The original item of the protest was based on a us action. Can’t enter the us unvaccinated per their regs. Perhaps they protested the wrong people/places?

D) the national defence act enables the military to be involved if requested by the appropriate premier. This has not been invoked.

E) most of the mandates are imposed and controlled at the provincial level. Train, air and entry to Canada along with the federal workforce is under federal mandate.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#227

Post by School-Cotton »

jsjsbdkj wrote: post #197
School-Cotton wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is there a more comprehensive definition of a "mandate" than a federal election? Governments chosen by a first-past-the-post system can barely be considered democratically legitimate, if at all.

If we had ranked choice you'd have a Liberal/NDP supermajority. Vote splitting on the left is the only way the CPC has held on.

> If we had ranked choice you'd have a Liberal/NDP supermajority.

That's unlikely to be true, because there would be way more viable parties. Maybe you would indeed have a supermajority of left-of-center parties but you can't conclude that they'd all have the same Covid restriction policies as the current ones.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#228

Post by ipaddr »

voisin wrote: post #62
ipaddr wrote: post #3

The changing image of Canada.

Paid for and largely organized by members of the far right in the US.

I was referring to the use of the emergency act for the first time ever on protesters which is a decision by Trudeau.

This is in conflict with the message he gave to Indian farmers.

Canada has lost a virtue leg to stand on.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#229

Post by malermeister »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #179
MattGaiser wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Two-thirds of Canadians support military force to end Ottawa protests: poll https://toronto.citynews.ca/2022/02/12/two-thirds-of-canadia... The current approach seems to be a lot more mild than what the public would accept.

Two thirds doesn't seem like a particularly significant majority for such an authoritarian measure, and moreover the masses will always trade principle and liberty for a mere moment of catharsis--that's the whole reason we elect representative politicians: to be the prevailing cool heads who look out for our rights and liberties and not just the emotion of the moment.

A small minority has decided to infringe on everyone's right to liberty by occupying their city with heavy machinery.

The pro-liberty move is to get rid of the occupiers.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#230

Post by ff317 »

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…

Serious question though, which applies to both the Canadian truckers case and the Minneapolis example above - does a right to protest an issue also include a right to inflict economic harm (on broader society, in poorly-targeted fashion) in order to raise awareness? Is the amount of economic harm (say, %GDP of the town, region, or country) or how broadly it's targeted ("random retail stores"? "Anything that relies on ground-based trade between Canada and the US"?) a factor in how allowable it is? Where does one draw a line of reasonability here?
Post reply on HN