babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
Maybe I'm being cynical but anything the Harpercons are involved with-especially their paranoid tough on crime agenda--is in itsself cynical.
So the old guilt by association. Who is it that is in favour of police state mentality again?
The rules around citizens arrests are very murky and unevenly applied. Why is it shocking to anyone that the police often don't give a rats ass about a shop owner who is having stuff stolen? Chow's bill at least clarified when an arrest can be made, what the boundaries are, and gave those being stolen from a bit of protection if they have to detain someone. Step over that line though and you will be subject to reasonable force charges and so on.
This is mostly a nothing to see here update of existing regulations and laws that have been subject to contradictory precedents and a whole ton of urban myth making from American TV and movies.
But they are not tough on crime that pays. Harpercons are soft on corporate tax evaders and stock market fraud. Liberals just as soft.
It is true...The Reform Party's 'tough on crime' agenda has nothing to do with combatting crime and everything to do with right wing ideology.
Alternative policies in regards to prohibition is a REAL tough on crime agenda.
Instead,the Reform Party is committed in protecting the livelyhoods of organized crime and making these organizations richer.
Whether it be the Hell's Angels,the Triads,the Mafia OR Bay Street,their cronies and the biggest international crime syndicates in Oil,pharmaceuticals,insurance firms and weapon manufacturers.
Somehow,right wing ideologues in Canada and abroad have perverted the issues so if anyone was to inact any policies that would cripple organized crime and regulate industries and pay off all our debts while strengthening social policy,the economy and give the resources to slash income taxes all at the same time,would be tarred and feathered 'soft on crime' or a dreaded left wing liberal socialist.
How else has fascism become a populist alternative?
We haven't seen the Conservatives' bill on reforming citizen's arrest, but here's what Olivia Chow's private members bill C-565 proposes.
The following is the present Criminal Code provision. Olivia Chow proposes to add to it the words I have bolded. She does not propose any deletions:
Arrest without warrant by any person
494. (1) Any one may arrest without warrant
(a) a person whom he finds committing an indictable offence; or
(b) a person who, on reasonable grounds, he believes
......(i) has committed a criminal offence, and
......(ii) is escaping from and freshly pursued by persons who have lawful authority to arrest that person.
Arrest by owner, etc., of property
(2) Any one who is
(a) the owner or a person in lawful possession of property, or
(b) a person authorized by the owner or by a person in lawful possession of property,
may, within a reasonable period, arrest without warrant a person whom he finds committing a criminal offence on or in relation to that property or a person who, on reasonable grounds, he believes has committed such an offence.
Delivery to peace officer
(3) Any one other than a peace officer who arrests a person without warrant shall forthwith deliver the person to a peace officer.
=====================
Thus, if you have reasonable grounds to believe that someone has committed a criminal offence and is being "freshly" pursued by persons who have the legal power to arrest him, you may arrest him yourself (present law); but if it's a criminal offence against your property, or taking place on your property, the requirement for "fresh" pursuit is waived, and you - or your authorized private vigilante force - are free to arrest him "within a reasonable period".
The ' anyone can arrest without warrant' point disturbs me.
Maybe it's not Chow's intention but once the Cons get their hands on this,I think they are going to exploit that point of the bill.
Hence an increase in warrantless raids and arrests.
It's not Chow's bill I worry about...It's a bill which makes changes to our criminal code with the words ' arrest without warrant' in the hands of the Reform Party.
Their star candidate Julian Fantino made it expicitly clear that he wants to change our Charter of Rights...I DON'T trust the Harpercons with changes to our criminal code.
What a distraction this whole thing is.
It is a cold night in much of Canada. We have thousands and thousands who cannot afford shelter.
Sometimes people need some perspective.
We should look at this debate - barely more than semantics - in that context.
I think the clarification being proposed does not violate the principle of the law but the daily reality of thousands of our people ought to violate everything we believe in. If only we had as much debate about that.
Well that does it. It's a police state. And the NDP are to blame!! Cons-NDP in cahoots? Reeks of conspiracy it does.
Well, this is the politics forum, and it's a political issue, so I find this attempt to change the channel a bit annoying. Yes, there are other issues, but bring them up in another thread, okay?
The classic NDP would have tried to figure out why this person was stealing in the first place.
The new and improved NDP, tables a bill giving more people the ability to arrest others. Giving more credence to property rights.
Lets face it, the guy stole some shitty flowers, and what does the NDP do about it. Turn everyone into a snicht and cop.
My comment is not an attempt to change the channel if you are getting at that.
My point, on topic, is that this is overblown, not worth what is being devoted to it. Like it or not-- that is a comment on point and my way of expressing it, like it or not, was not detailed but a point about perspective.
I think context is valuable to an issue -- don't you?
Certainly I was not trying to direct the thread anywhere other than to point out that many of these comments are out of proportion to the problem being discussed.
So I guess be annoyed, but I still think I was on-topic and the relative value of an issue is a point worth considering.
Who are you to presume to make this decision for the rest of us - that's what I'm getting at. If others want to discuss this topic in an overblown (your word) way, what's it to you?
Sean, I agree. That's why I asked upthread to see a draft of Chow's bill to help alleviate the suffering of Mr. Bennett and the thousands and thousands like him. Remember him?
Instead, she sought photo ops for Chen - even serving as his interpreter for the media - and proposed expanded DIY legislation to catch criminals.
It is utterly irrelevant what words Chow proposed to amend the Code. What is utterly relevant is what you said, Sean. Why is the NDP talking about petty crime, when huge crimes are being committed against Canadians every day? Why are they giving the slimmest credibility to the Conservatives' agenda? Do they think some small businessperson will vote NDP rather than Con if they're looking for a tough-on-crime candidate?
Sean hit the nail on the head. Chow's private member's bill - and now the cooperation with Harper to pass some unknown crime legislation - is the rankest betrayal of the trust that so many people have placed in the NDP.
What a load of horseshit. This is a minor change to an area of law that needs clarifying. "The rankest betrayal of the trust that so many people have placed in the NDP" Do you even read your hyperbole? Do you think even good progressives have never had 'petty' or not so- crimes committed against them?
And here's a big shock for you too. The NDP has a lot of members and supporters in the small business community. Small business is everything from local gallery and artisan shops, farmgate stores, local conveinance shops and many more that are important aspects of our communities, but often vulnerable to property crimes.
And Olivia Chow has been out there fighting for the poor and dispossessed for a very long time while a lot of us having been pounding off on our computers. I would have greater trust in her understanding what might be needed than a bunch of utopian internet key pounders.
I was expressing my opinion that this topic is overblown. In the context of the sky is falling comments no less.
Now who are you to say that an opinion that the topic is overblown does not belong. Do you not think the relative importance of a topic is relevant to its discussion?
In any case -- I did. And who are you to say I should not have.
I did not say that it should not be discussed -- I just said that it is overblown.
Now let me move on to say your reaction to my post is rather--- shall I say Overblown?
The police have always had authority to arrest people without warrants in certain situations, particularly when the police catch someone in the act of comitting a crime or emergency situations.
Now Unionist, let me just pause a moment as I take those words you put in my mouth back out.
No, I don't have a huge problem with this bill -- either way-- nor do I see it as a betrayal of anything -- unless it is used as an excuse as to why the NDP or anyone else does not turn to the more important issues-- of which I gave one example. (If anyone doesn't like that one, I pick any number -- say conditions on FN reserves.) The point is not to discuss those as Boom Boom suggests but to show that this issue is not a high enough priority to justify any of the hyperbole here.
The fact that the NDP might organize lunch at a meeting I also do not consider a rank betrayal. And if someone wants to discuss, by all means, but if part of that discussion includes statements suggesting massive importance then people should be able to dispute that without Boom Boom's suggestion that it is out of line to say, no it is not that big a deal. Perhaps one of the problems in politics is that we treat all issues as equal and lack the tolerance to allow judgment of just how important something is. I think parliament is spending a lot of time on the small stuff while critical things go unattended. And i think that is very relevant to the discussion of both the things that are being discussed and the things that are not.
Now Unionist if you separate from this topic and you want to say the NDP is not getting at the things that matter, then yes, I can agree and I have made that point, but I don't think preoccupation with this is the reason-- it may be preoccupation with an endless stream of things like this but this one thing-- rank betrayal?
Now Boom Boom, just pause for a moment-- I don't actually have a habit of belittling other people's discussions nor do I frequently try to change the channel. My point was an on-topic discussion of the relevant context and importance of the topic at hand.
OK I am working late and need to go home.
Yes. But that's not a huge problem in Canada today - except in Harper's playbook. Someone who disagrees with me and thinks crime is a huge problem in Canada, probably should vote for Harper.
Then why did she propose a bill to solve Mr. Chen's problem, but not Mr. Bennett's? Why was apprehension of the criminal her first and only priority? Why didn't she speak out - then and there - about poverty, race, disability (addiction), treatment, prevention? Why only about apprehension?
I think her heart is in the right place. It's her head that's screwed on wrong. If she compromises with Harper's agenda on crime, and forgets what the source and solution to petty social crime is, then she and her party will lose. That's my opinion.
Wikileaks says billions of untaxed Canadian dollars salted away in Swiss bank accounts. Rev Canada estimated $88 billion years ago. We'd all go to jail if we refused to pay taxes we legally owe to the feds. It's treasonous imo.
Refusal to pay taxes = treason?
Where's Sean the Hyperbole Cop when you need him?
Talking about crime is not Harper's agenda. Real people in real lives are affected by crime. Trying to deal with their problems is responsible and progressive. Chow has said a great deal over the years and recently about poverty, housing and many other issues, but that doesn't fit into your constant framing attempts so you ignore it. She has been particularly eloquent on how we deal with the mentally ill in society, but again you ignore this. She walks the walk while others pound away on their keyboards.
The Harper agenda is pretend violent crime is right around the corner waiting for you. Harper's agenda is building more prisons as they divert prisoners away from things like the prison farms program. Harper's agenda is to create fear of the 'other'.
What Olivia Chow has suggested is a million, million miles away from that. All Chow did was try to help a victim of crime deal with the issues surrounding that incident and to make sure no one else gets caught up in that again. It was a responsible and thoughtful response to a small problem that clearly needs fixing.
But agian you don't actually care about that because your whole routine is a constant, bungling attempt to frame the NDP and to attack babblers under the radar so you can pretend to have some sort of higher moral ground.
Is Chow really in danger of losing her seat? That's news to me. Not sure how the party will lose, other than being confined to fourth place in the HofC as usual. But I agree with your sentiments - the NDP should concentrate on root causes of poverty and the root causes of petty crimes, not go along with Harper's playbook. But it does sound to me like she's between a rock and a hard place on this particular issue.
There's a difference....As it stands raids,for example,need the proper paperwork(hence warrants)or the case is null and void.
Re-writing the criminal code so that arrests can be made without warrants is yet another blow to civil liberties.
I don't think anyone is arguing a situation where someone is in the act of committing a crime..The issue,to me anyway,is this bill is worded in a way that will be perverted and exploited by the Reform Party and it encourages vigilanteism.
I have to agree with those who believe that petty crime should be dealt with at its root element and not in a fashion which legitimizes the Reform Party's unfounded,dishonest and imaginary stance on Canada's 'crime problem'
I think most will agree that scrapping the census and building prisons will artificially increase our extremely low crime rates to give the illusion that the billions of dollars the Reform Party will be spending on this issue is justified.
It almost makes me wonder if the ghost of Doug Henning is hovering over the Commons.
Concentrating on petty crime while major corporate crime and tax evasion go unpunished is a Conservative tactic. Gotta fill those new prisons somehow.
That's right Olivia Chow and no one else in the NDP has ever said anything about poverty, lack of social supports, addictions or any of that stuff. It has been all law and order all of the time
What a bizarre fantasy land some of you folks live in. I would strongly suggest getting out more.
You are forgetting that the messages going out on TV attack ads are the only input that the average masses will have. THey won't be into your more esoteric reasoning. I believe 48 per cent of them would vote in favour of the death penalty. It's too bad, but the politician today has to work with what's out there, or just go through the motions that you advocate. Very satisfying to one's conscience, I'm sure, even as the bastards bring back the really hardcore penalties by having a majority in Parliament.
We cross posted of course, LtU.
A+ for hyperbole.
That's right, the comments above are rational argument, while pointing out their over the top nature on a minor issue is hyperbole. Good one.
By the way this site wouldn't exist without hypebole and nervous nellies- so before you slag others have a look in the mirror.
The Achilles' Hell...er Heel.