I'm just so glad there's another Newfoundlander who turns every thought into a thread to take the spotlight off me.
I don't know if it's a new era, really. It could be, if the Harper government passes what it's proposing.
From our "What should Canada do now?" thread in the St. John's section:
Quote:
Originally Posted by delesseps
Firstly, there should be no new legislation. The changes the Harper government has announced were planned before this week. They include allowing CSIS to spy on Canadian citizens who are outside of Canada, including Canadians resident in another country, allowing CSIS to conceal the identities of its sources from Canadian courts, and making it easier to detain people for extended periods of time without charge. The changes are bad for our privacy and our criminal justice system and should be resisted.
Secondly, there should be no visible changes in security. Better training on situational awareness for peace officers, security guards, and at-risk workers could be helpful, but installing metal detectors or increasing the number of armed guards in public buildings will NOT deter an attack by a lone nutter. An increase in visible security in one location would simply cause a would-be attacker to change his target. Instead of attacking people in a government building, for example, a lone shooter could target people at a bus stop or cafe used by government staffers. There will always be somewhere crowded that can't be protected.
Thirdly, it needs to be more difficult to obtain firearms and ammunition. Thanks to the abolition of the long gun registry, we'll never know where Zehaf-Bibeau's gun came from, but we do know he was neither eligible for nor carrying a possession and acquisition license (PAL). It's impossible to buy ammunition legally without a PAL, so the availability of ammunition to people without one is a failure of law enforcement. Better efforts need to be made to locate ammunition being smuggled into Canada, monitor the loss of legal ammunition from the supply chain, and identify and charge people who are selling or distributing ammunition illegally. I know that reviving the long gun registry is a political impossibility, but without it there's no way track the circumstances in which law-abiding gun owners are parted from their firearms. That makes enforcing laws related to the possession of long guns extremely difficult.
Finally, I'll link to an article about the police use of firearms. (Please ignore the silly bit at the end about uniforms.) Shooting someone who's brandishing a knife at a safe distance, as happened in Quebec, is NOT acceptable police work. Unarmed policing with access to armed backup works, and it helps keep both officers and suspects alive. The RCMP has a terrible history of sending officers with sidearms into harm's way alone or in small groups, putting the officers at risk even if there is no immediate danger to the public. The Mayerthorpe tragedy is one example of this, and the Moncton shooter exploited the MO to kill Mounties one at a time. We should think long and hard about the circumstances where peace officers are issued firearms, and ensure they have adequate training in the use of less lethal weapons such as batons and cs spray. Officers guarding specific people and places, executing search warrants, or looking for a known violent offender should probably carry sidearms, for example, but there's no reason a shotgun in the trunk shouldn't be adequate for an officer on traffic duty.
http://theindependent.ca/2014/10/22/...he-university/ |
So, I agree. It could potentially be a different era if we don't get some left-wingers in power soon.
And there's definitely a... you know my politics. My first gut reaction when I heard the news was, "Aww fuck... I can't believe this happened to
them." But the past few days, Rex Murphy's response, the Afghan memorial in St. John's... it's created a bit more of a "we". So that's different for me, at least.
I think, though, we're entering a critical period. Nothing has changed yet, but it could, significantly, and for the worse, if we're not careful. The U.S. is a bit of an outlier in the developed world in many things, from domestic surveillance to healthcare. Normal there is absolutely terrifying in much of the developed world.
But they're Canada's closest influence. Some conservative in Ottawa is going to be looking south with some admiration. And that terrifies me. It's fine in the States, where each state has more rights and places like Vermont can exist in the same union as places like Mississippi. But Canada tends to behave, to my dismay, as more of a nation state, and Ottawa expects FAR more influence over St. John's than Washington would.
So little lurches to the right on the mainland are more damaging here.
So all of that worries me, yes.
But definitely no new era yet. Just the potential for one.
Prev
Linear Mode
