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

731–740 of 1001 posts

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#731

Post by 908B64B197 »

kerneloftruth wrote: post #303
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.

Trudeau is calling the whole protest illegal. Last week they arrested an old man for merely honking his horn to show support. So, anyone attending a protest is joining an illegal activity...and can have their accounts frozen. There's no guarantee of due process in Canada's constitution?

> Last week they arrested an old man for merely honking his horn to show support

Managed to hurt him too.

Imagine being in law enforcement. Coming home to your family and brag about how you physically hurt an old man and bullied him out of his constitutional rights.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#732

Post by [deleted] »

Banana699 wrote: post #631
abledon wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

was it only the 10% fringe farmers protesting? or the 90% majority of farmers?

Protests are only legitimate if they have more than 10% percent of the population? So, for instance, no gay pride demonstration was ever a legitimate protest? Some revolutions were carried out by less than that percentage.

[deleted]

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#733

Post by canadian-on-hn »

thepasswordis wrote: post #513

There are too many people making making similar comments to reply to all of them, so I'm going to make a top level response to all of them. The truckers are NOT protesting against the vaccine itself, and if you believe that they are, I would highly encourage you to find different sources for news. The truckers are protesting the idea that the government can force them to take the vaccine against their will. I would h…

This argument is fallacious and also worded extremely disingenuously.

1) The "Common Denominator Fallacy" accepts both of an argument or position on the grounds that both sides share at least some common assumptions. In this case, you're attempting to draw common ground between the issues of bodily autonomy involved in abortion, and the protester's views of bodily autonomy w.r.t. vaccine mandates. This is incorrect; someone having an abortion or not fundamentally only affects that person; it does not cause someone else to get sick or die. Not being vaccinated, in some circumstances, does.

I don't support mandatory vaccination for all jobs (e.g. cutting down trees outside can be done just fine if you're not vaccinated), but part of living in a society is accepting certain restrictions on oneself to support the common good. The argument being made by the Canadian government is that vaccine mandates are such a restriction.

2) Nobody is "forcing" anyone to take a vaccine. People may choose to not be vaccinated, but if they make that choice, then they must live with the outcomes of that choice. In this case, truckers are perfectly capable of choosing not to be vaccinated, but the outcome of that choice is not being allowed to cross borders. Not "lose their job" - just live with certain restrictions on their behaviour as a result of their choice.

(Side note: owners of trucking companies may choose to terminate an employee for not being able to drive to the USA if that's a job requirement, but that's at the discretion of the company and is not mandated by the government. They could, for example, also choose to retask unvaccinated employees to drive routes that are not subject to mandates.)

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#734

Post by jessaustin »

oneplane wrote: post #684
ALittleLight wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I've never understood about protests of the "you've made your point" variety is what they're supposed to do. I'm thinking of the Women's March and things like that, where there's a scheduled day and people walk around and then they are done. What is that supposed to do? It's less of a protest and more of a parade in my opinion. The trucker protest, on the other hand, I can understand what it is supposed to…

A protest is a sign of disagreement, and a signal for change... not a "We are a small, non-representative but loud group. Now give us what we want." If the point of a protect is go 'get your way', it's essentially a crappy "Might makes right" play. Might as well not vote, ignore all the rules etc. Society doesn't work if you pick-and-choose at scale.

If society keeps on "working", the protest wasn't effective. We never got any changes for the better by voting.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#735

Post by listenallyall »

listless wrote: post #675
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.

I agree with this and I generally support their cause. But you don’t have the right to shut down commerce and affect citizens ability to move across a border. IMO they have let this go on far too long.

The government is restricting border crossings -- the protesters are seeking free access to cross!

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#736

Post by version_five »

Imagine if Trump had declared martial law during his mandate to push through something he otherwise couldn't. This is literally the equivalent. There is one question of whether or not you support the cause of the protestors. The relevant question here should be whether the government can break usual norms and declare an emergency to grant itself power it otherwise wouldn't have. If you don't agree with the protestors, fine. But that shouldn't be carte blanche to ignore the rule of law and grant outsized powers to the state. If it can happen with something you support, it can also happen with something you don't support. I can't believe that so little time has passed since all the concerns about what trump could do with unchecked power, and people are suddenly perfectly cool again with the government having unchecked power

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#737

Post by 908B64B197 »

belval wrote: post #290
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 don't support the convoy, but this still makes me extremely uncomfortable. This is an actual extreme measure. When his father used it, he JAILED communists and "suspected terrorists" in Montreal for more than 24 hours without any evidence, effectively suppressing their rights. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_Crisis > police officials sometimes abused their powers without just cause, and some prominent ar…

> When his father used it, he JAILED communists and "suspected terrorists" in Montreal for more than 24 hours without any evidence, effectively suppressing their rights.

You'll never guess who was actually planting the bombs at that time. [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involvin...

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#738

Post by analogdreams »

SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #711
analogdreams wrote: post #702

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

I don’t think blocking up and honking in a random city where the politicians don’t actually live will do all that much, just expressing frustration at other citizens who have done nothing to harm them. I think those citizens in turn are right to be angry and upset and feel they are being disrupted because they are. I don’t begrudge them this and I don’t think it has anything to do with social betters or not. Having s…

No post body was provided.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#739

Post by [deleted] »

klyrs wrote: post #658
gwicks56 wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure Trump could have come up with reason BLM protesters were doing something illegal, and needed to shut down their bank accounts.

BLM protests happened in a completely different legal jurisdiction. Trump couldn't invoke the Emergencies Act, because that's a Canadian law.

[deleted]

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#740

Post by dotnet00 »

JamisonM wrote: post #553
screye wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was certainly less than 10% of Indian farmers. It was rooted in Punjab, and had weak support in Eastern UP and Haryana. That's it. Also, unlike Trudeau's mandates which had questionable backing from the constitution, the Farm Bill was passed by a Democratic Govt. with the necessary popular mandate.

The current government of Canada was very recently elected in an election that was mostly about the pandemic response and mandates in particular, the notion that this represents some undermining of the democratic process is a bit of a stretch.

We're literally in a post about Trudeau invoking powers that allow him to suspend even civil rights (EDIT: I misread, that was the previous version of the act, he cannot suspend civil rights) (even if he probably won't do that) over a protest that has gone on for a month without any attempts made at reconciliation, it's hard to argue that this isn't an undermining of democracy in Canada.

The protests in India lasted over a year with several rounds of talks despite being in the midst of a worse wave of covid than now, yet they didn't resort to using their equivalent of these powers.

It really does make India's democracy look stronger than Canada's.

Post reply on HN