Slashdot Mirror
Days After Shooting, Canada Proposes New Restrictions On and Offline
New submitter o_ferguson writes As Slashdot reported earlier this week, a lone shooter attacked the war memorial and parliament buildings in Ottawa, Canada on Wednesday.
As many comments predicted, the national government has seized this as an opportunity to roll out considerable new regressive legislation, including measures designed to* increase data access for domestic intelligence services, institute a new form of extra-judicial detention, and, perhaps most troubling, criminalize some forms of religious and political speech online. As an example of the type of speech that could, in future, be grounds for prosecution, the article mentions that the killer's website featured "a black ISIS flag and rejoiced that 'disbelievers' will be consigned to the fires of Hell for eternity." A government MP offers the scant assurance that this legislation is not "trauma tainted," as it was drafted well prior to this week's instigating incidents. Needless to say, some internet observes remain, as always, highly skeptical of the manner in which events are being portrayed.
(Please note that some articles may be partially paywalled unless opened in a private/incognito browser window.)
Honestly there's no way that this legislation passes the Oakes test. Section 1 allows for limitations, but not like this.
Restrict freedom, that'll make them stop trying to take it all away...
Not really sure why I should go to the trouble of properly formatting with paragraph tags, italics and footnotes (using Slashdot's own markup conventions) just to have the editors strip it all out again before pushing to the front page. If you want to optimize for mobile, just remove the option to use markup tags in the first place.
- In Soviet Korea, only old people loose all their bases to Natalie Portman's petrified hot grits overlords.
So, they've said that they knew something like this was going to happen eventually.. If they knew it was going to happen eventually, they should have planned for it. And, if they were happy with the security measures before, why do they need to change them now?
Let's keep this in context.. One guy, seemingly acting alone, shot a few people. Unfortunately he did it on government land, so the instant response is 'Terrorism'.
One guy (well, two if you count our PM), screwing with our freedoms.
One begins to wonder which of the three possibilities is accurate... coincidence, waited for such an event, or furnished the event.
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once
One lone whackjob is now poised to destroy the liberty of an entire country. He didn't even have to get a high body count.
If I was a bit more cynical I would think some people had these waiting for the right time. A perfect chance to tighten the fences keeping the citizens in check.
I think that mental instability and social issues is at the heart of this tragedy, not terrorism nor insufficient power to monitor or detain. He actively tried to be detained, to no avail, and made himself well enough known to the authorities.
No sir bigots like you and other extremists are.
If you're angry about losing your civil rights, maybe you should be angry at the people taking advantage of situations like these and trying to take them?
Can we throw everyone in the South in jail now? Oh wait, Canada. Darn.
Seriously, this is just nuts. Are people really this easily scared into giving ground on basic rights?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Its introduction was obviously waiting for a trauma to capitalize on.
"I don't like Islam." Then, it causes a bunch of nutjobs to kill others in response to your speech. Therefore, you need to ban all speech, because anything could offend nutjobs and cause them to kill others.
Good idea, genius.
Punish the citizens and ignore the causes!
Gonna get me some of that sweet Patriot Action up in Canada now!
Please, if they are posting on /., then clearly they cannot be a source of fucking evil. At most, they are a source of celibate evil. ;)
And all this simply proves just how deluded these terrorists truly are. The deaths of our soldiers is tragic, but do they really think bumping off some of our politicians will get under Canadian's skin? I think not. We might even thank them.
Because we never had people trying to wipe us out before Muslims came along...
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
This is not some random thing. The authoritarians are scared of the internet, and they have to sell the *war*. The work of the propagandist is never done.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Is Canada going to create a US-style Patriot Act? hahahahaha. freedom is a dated concept apparently.
Hey Canada, It's America,
We gave our guys all these fancy abilities. Well, they took them and we didn't complain, which I guess is the same thing. Anyway, they haven't actually managed to CATCH anyone yet. Well, they've found some impressionable people with mental issues, chatted with them online, gave them a plan, weapons for the plan, talked them into it, and then instead of just getting them some mental help they "caught them" so they could tell us what a good job they were doing....
Never mind that I could bring my city to it's knees with $100 and a trip to Home Depot. We're kind of wondering if there are any actual real Terrorists out there at all. They're probably bogarting all the Ebola. I mean, we've got deranged people with guns but those are impossible to find beforehand and so far we just clean up after them and use them to pass new laws.
Don't fall for it. Sincerely,
Americans
If you don't care about constitutionality, you prohibit your legal draughtsmen from reporting on it, and you pass what you want. It's up to your opponents to find a good test case, and figure out how to pay for a challenge when they don't have standing.
davecb@spamcop.net
Well, it was very lear the Patriot Act was drafted well in advance too.
ONE person dies and they go full retard? WTF? This was one guy with a gun. It's no reason to engage in national hysterics. They have managed to outdo us in US by a country mile.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
No, we aren't. But our government, like most governments, couldn't care less about what we want when they see an opportunity to extend their power.
Under the table Winston's feet made convulsive movements. He had not stirred from his seat, but in his mind he was running, swiftly running, he was with the crowds outside, cheering himself deaf. He looked up again at the portrait of Big Brother. The colossus that bestrode the world! The rock against which the hordes of Asia dashed themselves in vain! He thought how ten minutes ago -- yes, only ten minutes -- there had still been equivocation in his heart as he wondered whether the news from the front would be of victory or defeat. Ah, it was more than a Eurasian army that had perished! Much had changed in him since that first day in the Ministry of Love, but the final, indispensable, healing change had never happened, until this moment.
The voice from the telescreen was still pouring forth its tale of prisoners and booty and slaughter, but the shouting outside had died down a little. The waiters were turning back to their work. One of them approached with the gin bottle. Winston, sitting in a blissful dream, paid no attention as his glass was filled up. He was not running or cheering any longer. He was back in the Ministry of Love, with everything forgiven, his soul white as snow. He was in the public dock, confessing everything, implicating everybody. He was walking down the white-tiled corridor, with the feeling of walking in sunlight, and an armed guard at his back. The longhoped-for bullet was entering his brain.
He gazed up at the enormous face. Forty years it had taken him to learn what kind of smile was hidden beneath the dark moustache. O cruel, needless misunderstanding! O stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast! Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.
Need Mercedes parts ?
> Because we never had people trying to wipe us out before Muslims came along...
Were you trying to be funny? The Muslims have been trying to conquer Europe for a very long time. If anything, the last couple of centuries is just a temporary lull. They have been at this pretty much since their religion was founded.
"before Muslims came long" gets back to about 700AD.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
and politics do not mix.
Your speech advocating for the restricting of speech makes me want to kill others.
Now what?
He was doing a ceremonial guard duty, as an honour. He probably didn't expect to be shot in the back.
The operational bases were on moderate alert, but apparently the PM didn't think he or anyone else needed to be careful...
davecb@spamcop.net
Actually, you are not a racist for noticing that the perpetrator is a muslim. You ARE a racist for infering that all muslims are terrorist because of the action of one person. Any time you're making a broad generalization about an entire people based on the actions of a tiny few or one, yes, you're a racist... and possibly funny, but still racist.
Literally crazy, in this case. He tried to get himself thrown into jail to recover from at least his addictions, if not his possible insanity. Without success!
davecb@spamcop.net
Specifically the "Reform Party" extending their power. Yes, my friends, we to have a Canadian Reform Party, and it's way farther to the right than Ross Perot ever was. They did a hostile takeover of the Conservatives, and now run the place.
davecb@spamcop.net
This summery is appalling.
The bill in question Bill C-13 was introduced almost a month ago and passed two readings in parliament before the attack. Canada has been debating this bill in parliament and in the media for some time. I don't agree with this bill, but to label it a reaction to the shooting is completely wrong. Especially bad is the fact that a quick google search would have been enough to identify the mistake.
http://openparliament.ca/bills/41-2/C-13/
Wow. It's like a different language, but in English.
No doubt. Legislation is written all the time and filed away until the public is sufficiently swept away by momentary passion. In the US gun control proponents have cabinets full of bills they pull out, like ghouls, every time there's a school shooting, just as the government has legislation that trims away privacy rights ready to go the next time the head-loppers hit the news.
Actually, you are not a racist for noticing that the perpetrator is a muslim. You ARE a racist for infering that all muslims are terrorist because of the action of one person. Any time you're making a broad generalization about an entire people based on the actions of a tiny few or one, yes, you're a racist... and possibly funny, but still racist.
Am I a racist for noticing that many, if not most, of the terrorist incidents of the last few years have been perpetrated by "radicalized islamists"? Seriously, these news stories have become so cliched now. Some guy goes on a rampage and kills a bunch of people. We quickly learn that he has a "middle eastern" sounding name. Then we learn that he is a new convert to Islam or that he has decided that "he needs to take his religion more seriously". I realize that not every muslim in the world is a terrorist. Many muslims are decent nice people. I know, I have met a few. Absolutely delightful people, really. But,...there really does seem to be a major problem in dar al-Islam which desperately needs to be addressed. Unfortunately, you will have one side scream RACIST if you should dare try to broach this uncomfortable subject. On the other side you will have a bunch of backwood knucklescrapers want to latch on to this as an excuse to "nuke all them muzzies to hell!" Is there any way for people of goodwill to find some middle ground where we can honestly address this problem without bringing us to the brink of another round of Crusades?
"disbelievers will be consigned to the fires of Hell for eternity"
INPPE (I'm no Papal Emissary), but from cursory knowledge of common religions, such a statement not exactly new or unique.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_Hell :)
It worked so well in the United States that Canada has to follow suite in one more lock-step Me-Taoism.
They've ALWAYS had a draft like that. And any excuse will do to try to push it through.
If there is no excuse, try to push it through anyway.
It's not a conspiracy. It's not a coincidence. They are not waiting for or furnishing events.
They see such events as INEVITABLE. It is a part of their view of reality. It is their life philosophy.
Their BELIEF SYSTEM.
They think they're the good guys.
And once you look around, you'll notice that in other groups of people as well.
Gun nuts really do believe that government is after their guns.
Rich people really do believe that poor people are all lazy.
Hippies really do believe that all people are good, just misunderstood.
Justin Bieber fans really believe that he can sing.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Actually, you are not a racist for noticing that the perpetrator is a muslim. You ARE a racist for infering that all muslims are terrorist because of the action of one person. Any time you're making a broad generalization about an entire people based on the actions of a tiny few or one, yes, you're a racist... and possibly funny, but still racist.
Except, of course, that Muslim isn't a race. It's a belief system.
And in its mainstream forms, it's a very public-oriented, all encompassing belief system, that is not at all content with people simply choosing not to believe in it.
I figured they'd wait until next week before the Harper regime tried a `Patriot Act'-style takeover of Canadians' rights.
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
Guy was a crackhead not a terrorist, a man with no plan other than death by cop. If he wanted to shoot up Parliament he wouldn't have shot the soldier.
Nobody would listen to him so he came up with some topical way to make them.
Because we never had people trying to wipe us out before Muslims came along...
True. We also had communists, and we weren't supposed to notice that either.
On the other hand, if the purpose of the legislation is to reduce senseless deaths, it would be much more effective to simply outlaw driving by private citizens.
Cheers, Bruce.
Bruce A. Knack
Silicon Surfers
That's the official definition of the language of Canada, the Canadian.
Harpers a Christian, not a Muslim.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Just like that, the terrorists won....
And another sad part is that when I say that, people are actually going to think of the guy who ran in with the gun, i'm not.
They used the guy with the gun as an opportunity for their terrorist attack on your freedoms with something they were already trying to push though that would have never made it if it were to ever reach the light of day under a rational population.
Now the question really becomes both to Canada and the US, how long till you finally oust the attackers from power and start to undo the damage they have done and continue to do?
Yeah, the Canadians are the pussies. Had a body cavity search while queueing for a flight lately?
In Canada no-one is using the word 'terrorism' (except the usual suspects who would have pulled out the terrorism card no matter what). We honour a soldier who died in the line of duty, but this is a drug use issue, not a security issue.
Politicians who try to exploit fear will likely reveal themselves, and themselves alone, to be weak-minded cowards.
A Revolution is clearly needed in canada and the UK to restore freedom to the common man.
HAVE YOU LOOKED at zengardner.com ?
Why is nobody shocked that the summary contains a link to a nutjob whackos website labeled merely as "internet observers" ?
Well, apparently the direct approach of trying to just shoot people you disagree with in power doesn't work.
If they actually make this a law, my money is on that there won't be any set penalties or specific guidelines for enforcement, so in actuality nothing will really change, but it will give them an excuse to enforce it when it is convenient for them.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Any one of various people who would want the new measures could have hired the guy. This would be far more cost-effective than lobbying, especially if they needed to sway public opinion instead of just legislators.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
And I always thought that the 'draughtsmen' were the guys that tapped the keg, ay?
Or you could try doing something about crazy people with a crack addiction that are begging you to put them in jail and help them with their addiction. Instead of waiting until they kill someone and then pushing some random religious agenda cause muslims.
http://bc.ctvnews.ca/ottawa-shooter-tried-to-rob-vancouver-mcdonald-s-with-stick-1.2068636
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
PATRIOT (drafted in 1995 by Joe Biden and signed into Law 45 days after the WTC incident with barely a single word having been changed)
Before 1914 one of the more unusual features of the United Kingdom's unwritten constitution was its lack of any specific provision for civil and military emergencies: in particular, the government lacked the power to proclaim a state of emergency, and thereby free itself to govern by regulation, suspend civil liberties, and impose martial law. Under the common law the British government's emergency powers were wide but poorly defined. According to English jurist and constitutional theorist A. V. Dicey, the crown and its servants had the right and the duty to restore peace and order by any means necessary: “they are, each and all of them, authorized to employ so much force, even to the taking of life, as may be necessary for that purpose, and they are none of them entitled to use more” (Dicey : 289). But servants of the crown whose actions exceeded the demands of the situation were liable to prosecution afterward — and in such cases, obedience to superior orders was no defense. “Hence,” as Dicey admitted, “the position of a soldier is in theory and may be in practice a difficult one. He may, as it has been well said, be liable to be shot by a court martial if he disobeys an order, and to be hanged by a judge and jury if he obeys it” (Dicey 1960: 303).
The various War Powers Acts enacted just prior to The Great War (in that case the Defence of the Realm Consolidation Act), WWII, and the various civil emergencies since (1920, 1926, 1939–1940, 1964...), have all been expertly drafted and enacted to cover every contingency *before* the events they describe even occur, not as a reactive legislation afterward. That in itself should raise suspicions as to the motive behind such legislation and the machinations behind such as the Russian invasion of Poland (yes, they went in first and they were basically ignored by all but Germany) and the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
Actually, this is one of a collections of bills that have been bandied about for some time, but our PM knows they are not generally popular, and despite holding a majority, has pulled several times before.
The events this week are being used to elicit support for their collective passing with no debate, which again, is moot due to his party majority.
But I really think our leader is concerned about what history will write, and there is a strong voice here, partly in thanks to our public broadcaster, which has been trying to keep a level tone, as has been widely reported in other media. (Few of the other television stations are sadly, following suit.).
By using this window to pass this in a less partisan fashion, perhaps he won't shoulder the blame fully for destroying our great nation by making mental health, not a health issue, or even a criminal issue, but a military/natsec one.
I hope we can collectively shame him away from it again, because he does actually seem sensitive to this when we speak out.
Just last month PM Steven Harper refused to consider even an inquiry into the murder of more than a thousand indigenous Canadian women. http://www.thestar.com/opinion... Now somebody murders people closer to himself and suddenly he's ready to challenge the constitution? Tells you how much he values some women over his own skin.
He said the murder of Native women (8x that of non-native women in Canada) was "criminal" but not "sociological." He believes it should be dealt with as a police matter, without looking at larger causes and prevention – no changes necessary. But suddenly now we hear calls of "terrorists" and necessary measures because it appears some murders effect politicians more than others. Canada's indigenous women have been "terrorized" for a long time. I'd think if we reduce violence against the most vulnerable it will make us all safer, but maybe I'm being sociological?
I really doubt that a Christian minister who preaches that non Christians will burn in hell for eternity would be jailed. But if a Muslem claimed the same he would be jailed. Hell fire and brimstone preachers were the norm in the Christian faith until about 1920 or so. I also feel that when people are hampered in their speech they are much more likely to become enraged. Essentially the govenrment is impident and acting foolish with a knee jerk reaction.
So which is Judaism?
The Romans achieved it. So did the Germans. The French also conquered much of it. Suggesting that the Muslims are particularly evil just because they did is intellectual dishonesty at its worst.
It wasn't the Muslims who made extinct the knowledge of reading the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs, it was the peace-loving Christians who murdered the priests at the last temple, because they were evil infidels.
After the Christians retook Spain, it wasn't the Muslims who expelled or converted (by the sword) the Jews and Muslims who lived there, it was the Christians.
The First Crusade was initiated by the Pope, not by the Muslims. Once they captured Jerusalem, they put many to the sword, regardless of their faith - Jewish, Muslim, or Christian.
Humans have engaged in warfare and conquest to increase their empires and wealth, to spread their influence and gather more adherents to their faiths, since pre-history. I don't know why you think Islam is particularly unique, but it's no different to how Christianity was and is.
Oh, and to prevent you from claiming that the Christians never turned to terrorism: bullshit!
I've never heard anyone called sectarian, and the word 'sectarian' hasn't been a part of mainstream vocabulary for over 20 years. The word 'bigot' is not being used much either. I recently watched a Tv show where people were repeatedly called racist for disagreeing with the ethical values of another clique.
Very recently, Canada's domestic intelligence agency (mandate to operate exclusively in Canada), has asked for money to 'track people outside of Canada'. ... but tracking actions outside of Canada is not part of their mandate. ...and Canada has a much older foreign intelligence agency with the explicit mandate of tracking the state of the world (and Canadians on foreign soil, and has connections to the NSA, GCHQ, ASD, GCSB, ). Clearly one government agency isn't getting along with another, there are silos, and one agency is taking the opportunity to both increase its budget, and expand its mandate (and maintain the silo). And its just another week in Canada.
Muslim isn't a race. It's a belief system.
And in its mainstream forms, it's a very public-oriented, all encompassing belief system, that is not at all content with people simply choosing not to believe in it.
Therein lies the problem. Other people have other belief systems, and don't want to give theirs up, and don't want to accept a new one (and aren't happy when someone yells loudly 'convert or die'). And the whole 'convert or die' thing isn't new. Ivan the Terrible of Russia refused to convert when Muslim armies tried to take Russia by force (Ivan's wife threw herself out a tower window rather than convert). Likewise the less than "Librel" treatment of any other religion (in spite of the demand by athiests that Islam and all its abuses be allowed just like everyone else). Its just that the others don't want here what is going on there. Since the convert or die thing has been going on for a while, its also not likely to be an idea that will change.
This happened with john ashcroft and the PATRIOT act. Same bullshit, different country. Fuck these tyrants.
Not to say the shooting wasn't cowardly and horrific, but it was an attack on government and military personnel and not civilians...
You're already heaps more annoying than Haselton has ever been.
ProTip: If you don't want to read his submissions, DON'T READ HIS SUBMISSIONS. (And don't bother telling us about it. We don't give a shit what you read, or don't.)
The acting-out bullshit is about what we'd expect from a 14 year old kid who's pissed off because someone else got a date with a girl who wouldn't go out with him in any event.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Wrong.
Wrong twice.
I'll concede "was", but "is" is just a plain lie.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I'm sure Bennet Haselton could come up with some incredibly complicated system involving voice activation, queueing theory and fingerprint recognition to solve all that.
Or you could put another non-ceremonial guard.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Aren't you fucking special.
All nut jobs are not posting crazy talk on-line. This is just more of the people in power getting worried that the shit they are up to coming out and there being a revolt, this is revolt prevention.
It's tragic what this gunner did and I don't believe he had that right reasons to do what he did. One day however, if all the dirty laundry comes out, people might have a reason to force a new vote, and disrupt the governments ability to tamper with it. Naturally the government will be opposed to this, and people will protest / try to stop the government.
They want their finger on all of that so they can keep putting in 'security measures' so they can quickly silence legitimate protests and a legitimate revolution over the way the government operates.
Canada does a lot better than the U.S. of dealing with people with mental disorders.
It's reflected by the relative number of these types of events in either country.
Canada does a lot better than the U.S. of dealing with people with mental disorders.
It's reflected by the relative number of these types of events in either country.
That doesn't prove that at all, nor does it even try to.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
nope, its mainstram forms are just fine with people choosing not to believe in it. The fringe extremist want us to believe that they are part of mainstream muslim belief system.
Does no one read the second amendment? Where does it say firearms? We have laws against switch blades, slung shot, and computer programs (now revoked due to first amendment stuff) and other "arms". Restrictions are all a joke going off of fear and often racism rather than what is logical and the best for society.
It is about time the world stopped hearing the rubbish spouted by religion but banning it will not make that happen, they will just see themselves as victimised. By far the best thing to do is allow free speech so that such ideas are ridiculed by the world.
We do tend to become the thing we are fighting. That's why people like Gandhi would not fight...
A man is but the product of his thoughts what he thinks, he becomes.
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
Much like Christianity was 500 years ago.
Mainstream Islamism is right now a way of life which is not compatible with modern society (western society, but also nations like Korea or Japan). Before it is accepted it should reform and become milder.
I don't understand why the same people who say we have to accept it, wouldn't accept christian religion in the most hard core forms.
But oh well, with Sweden's current immigration policy, we will all be Muslims in about 20 years, so why bother...
ProTip: If you allow an anonymous coward to affect you that much, the anoynmous coward has pwned your lame ass.
So the same as fundamentalist christianity basically?
Where did the articles mentions that speech such as "'disbelievers' will be consigned to the fires of Hell for eternity" will be criminalized?
1) Rouleau's website featured a black ISIS flag and condemn disbelievers
2) Bill C-13 will criminialize hate propaganda, including Rouleau's website
And therefore, the bill criminalized condemnation of disbeliever?
A few years back, some drunk jerks were caught on camera peeing on the war memorial. The government thought this wasn't very good. So they posted a ceremonial guard, to essentially ward off the drunken pee. To be effective at that, one needs to stand there, so drunk people don't feel comfortable peeing there. Giving the guy a fully loaded automatic weapon might be seen as a bit of overkill... Is he realistically going to bullet spray potential drunken pee jerks?
As previously mentioned, the guy was just standing there and got shot in the back. Having a loaded weapon, or even bullets, wouldn't have been any help.
I do find it a bit dishonorable that the government is using this as an excuse to push though draconian laws however.
Actually I buy that it was terrorism. Both perps seemed to be Islamic converts and true believers in Jihad. It wasn't organized and that's why it caught the police off guard. First offence for both criminals.
What put me off was the excessive media coverage. Yes it's a big story, but the Canadian news channels went all Fox/CNN on us and ran nothing but this story all day and all night. After a while they had nothing new or important to say, so they resorted to "a different point of view" stories or "let's ask some random commentator their opinion".