Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is Canada (greatly) defunct? Many canucks around the world that I met seem to be of this opinion, but I've never been there and only know Canadians as hard workers.
Meeting expats from any nation will hold a bias untoward the place they're from, so you're asking a poisoned well how thirsty it is.
Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
371–374 of 374 posts
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#372Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you suggesting that police should not be allowed to investigate anyone?
It sounds like they're suggesting that police shouldn't be allowed to bypass your civil liberties.
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#373Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would be inadmissible if the court deems it to impact the fairness of the trial, no? https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/chec...
You used a conditional so I assume you also know how such a system can fail. It's not hard to figure out how that can be exploited, right? You can't rely on that conditional being executed perfectly every time, even without adversarial actors. But why ignore adversarial actors?
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#374Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is an interesting perspective, because from my point of view, the criminals ceasing their illegal activity would be a "win". Whereas, the alternative is the government knowingly allowing illegal activity to continue as they build their case with the goal of a "big bust" and larger jail sentences.
If their co-conspirators were also to cease, I would agree. But if that were realistically the case, arresting a single person would stop all crime.