Will the proposed law banning masks during a riot withstand a charter challenge?
Fascist, police state, Nazi.
These were just a few of the choice words that followed my column last week on the federal government’s backing of private member’s Bill C-309, which would make it an offence to wear a mask while taking part in a riot.
Such hyperbole typically comes when one has an opinion that is at odds with the other side’s distorted view of reality.
Let me explain it a different way. First, it is not a right to disguise oneself from authorities. Nowhere in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms does it say that it is a right. So, can we move past that red herring at the outset?
Will the proposed law withstand a charter challenge? Who knows? That is what those ermine-clad wonders inhabiting the bench of the Supreme Court of Canada decide. It isn’t up to politicians, nor anarchists or the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, to decide.
It is the government’s job to create legislation and the court’s job to interpret it, whether the court supports the intent of the government or not.
That’s one of the checks and balances in our system.
Having said that, there are reasons to question the government’s motivations in supporting the piece of proposed legislation aimed at making the wearing of a mask or disguise at a protest gone amok a crime. Aren’t there always reasons to question any government’s motivations? But, that doesn’t mean the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper is wrong.
For example, the rest of Canada does not enjoy the idyllic climate we do on the West Coast. Toques and balaclavas are de rigeur during the winter months in most of the country when winter delivers its worst. What then does a young idealist wear when mouthing platitudes on Parliament Hill on a cold day?
The answer is that the law is not intended as an absolute. That is why a police officer has discretion in the execution of his or her duty and that discretion is used every day by police officers across the country. The proposed law is intended as a tool for police if they perceive that a group of agitators are about to take a peaceful protest south. Like all police actions, officers are then subject to judgment and scrutiny internally and externally.
If any police officer anywhere makes an arrest for anything, that officer has to justify the arrest as lawful or face the consequences which could be as severe as facing a criminal charge of unlawful confinement. It stands in stark contrast to what you would face if you made a mistake at your job or what an anarchist would face if they actually had a job.
Police state? Fascism? Hardly. It is a tool for the police and, in my view, a worthwhile one.
- post by Leo Knight
Print 
PDF
“…your mass conformism is masked by the appearance of mass nonconformism.”
Great stuff Leo. Your readers need to check this out too:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304451104577389750993890854.html
I don’t really care about this bill, but when you say:
‘…that officer has to justify the arrest as lawful or face the consequences…’
The RCMP’s track record on doling out consequences for its members actions is suspect to say the least.
“The RCMP’s track record on doling out consequences for its members actions is suspect to say the least.”
I think this is a great point and shines a light on one of the main issues in the criminal justice system – the police. I struggle with the implementation more than I do the law itself. RCMP/VPD/etc. have all had bad press in the past couple of years that has created this distrust or lack of confidence in their ability to police properly and as Boohoo points out, weed out their own bad apples. When we have laws created that would give the average constable a wide scope of discretion, I for one, find that concerning.
I am not saying all police officers (or even most) are a problem and I do respect the work they do. However, I am questioning the standard with which they hold themselves to and ask do we have the right people in place to handle this kind of responsibility. If you had asked me 10 years ago would I have been surprised to hear a police officer shot and killed a kid wearing a mask, I would have emphatically said yes I am shocked. Today, I don’t know if I would. That may not be a fair assessment of policing today, however, the police need (and the responsibility) to give us confidence in the organization before we give them more discretion in the interpretation of a law.
The police are always judged by their worst examples and the good work completely overlooked. It does not excuse of justify criminal behaviour or riots as much as you’d like to use that as an excuse.
I can’t see how you jumped from Paul’s comment to your response.
That is why you fail.
Karla–Where was this logic when it comes to teachers! LOL.
Where does Paul attempt to ‘justify riots’?
@ Karla
I’m not justifying bad behavior of rioters anywhere in my post. I am simply saying the police need to earn the right to have more discretion and where they stand now, I don’t believe the public confidence is there. I am not disputing there are lots of good officers, however, it only takes a few to irreparably damage peoples’ lives – as you point out Mrs. Dzkanski (sp?) lost her son to an officer who went on the kill someone else’s son and was still on RCMP payroll until recently. It isn’t just the behavior of the officers it is the lack of accountability by the force be it RCMP or Municipal force, to properly weed out these bad actors both before they join the force and long into the job.
On this we can agree. If the RCMP commissioner had immediately fired the YVR officers the RCMP would not be facing a crisis of confidence now. They would have to act fast and decisively. But the CYA that was going on in light of what actually happened strains credulity.
It’s not so different from the environmental charities framing the issue as a free speech issue or saying critics are against charities or saying look at all these other bad actors, or attacking the people who produce the condemning documents.
The issue in dispute here isn’t the police. The issue is people wearing masks to escape the consequences of their crimes. It proves a consciousness of guilt. It proves the intent to commit a crime. It’s an overt act in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy at the least.
I still say the issue is the Crown. I absorb a lot of media and it’s clear that the local police are very proficient and professional and solve way more crimes than people realize. But that’s where the justice ends. There’s no real punishment.
The public perception is like this. There is a lot of crime. Most goes unreported. Of those crimes reported, few are solved. Of those solved, few are arrested. Of those arrested, few are charged. Of those charged, few are convicted. Of those convicted, few are punished. Of those punished, few are punished very much. This is what a real world police officer faces. They are just as much a victim of what is happening in Canada. It’s a thankless job that still must be done and such problems will always exist because we are limited to hiring human beings.
But bad officers are not a prevalent problem. We’ve got some seriously screwed-up young adults who were not properly raised out of delinquency. If they suffered consequences for their bad acts we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Protesting means you are standing for something. Why then would you need to cover your face, unless you are ashamed or you have other intentions.
I would be curious to know how many of these ‘student protesters’ are not students at all, but the typical shit disturbers we see time and time again, hijacking a cause – for their own puposes.
What is taking place is shameful. Regardless of what your opinion, you have zero right to terrorize others in order to push your cause. The ‘students’ that interrupted a calss in progress and threw around desks and threatened other ‘students’ should be kicked out. At some point they need to grow up and realize there is consequence to their actions. Let’s put it this way – would you consider hiring someone like that? I wouldn’t give them a second glance.
“Protesting means you are standing for something.” I think the same applies to people commenting on a blog.
@Max You said the below in an earlier post but have yet to respond to my request that you supply the link as I have not been able to find it. I have not received an investment from, made an investment in, joined, or advised Endswell/Renewal/Renewal2 though I have no objection to doing these things as I support this kind of investment vehicle and indeed investment in Vancouver innovation generally.
“MaxMay 15, 2012 at 11:03 am –
@Steven Forth:
Question: Do you have any ties to Endswell/Renewal/Renewal2 ? Or is the mention of a Steven Forth and a pic on the web site another ‘Steven Forth’?
@Steven Forth:
There is a series of pictures on the Renewal Partners phto stream. Two links:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/renewalpartners/2432514822/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/renewalpartners/2431700565/
And this is a passage taken off of one of the web pages:
Social Venture Institute (SVI) Toronto – A Great Launch
By Joel Solomon on April 29, 2008 – 11:13am
The Social Venture Institute, Hollyhock and Renewal version, hosted a very cool SVI at Kingbridge Centre near Toronto last weekend.
The speakers line up was pretty well perfect. Gary Hirshberg told some of his stories of building Stonyfield Yoghurt from the first cups of yoghurt up a muddy farm road in rural New Hampshire into a $350million market leader. All along the way, mission and quality carried them through a decade of losses and every hardship you can imagine. His new book, Stirring It Up, was eagerly bought by conference attendees and Gary signed them for a long time. Now Gary hosts every Democratic Presidential candidate, due to the location of a model employer in the nations’ first primary state. Tantalizing tales by Gary on that topic Im sure!
Tzeporah Berman, Forest Ethics star, hosted Tom Katzenmeyer, SVP of Limited Brands, along with Nicole Rycroft, founder of Markets Initiative and
Steven Forth from Indigo Books & Music. Inspiring stories were told about strategic methods for moving large companies towards ecological reforms, sometimes with the carrott and sometimes with the stick. All the time, being astute about how they work, what their needs are, and what can realistically be accomplished. This one also needs to be a book.
Sweet. And the added bonus of all the other photos of Renewal/Tides and their followers at their retreat. Classic collection of lost liberal 50 – 60′s something yuppies with too much money and time o their hands.
I wonder if this law was in place would these cops have been charged. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqiba2m4mbw
So people who are not participating in an unlawful assembly, who wish to protect themselves from the aerosol chemical weapons that police deploy (CS Gas, etc.) will be allowed to continue wearing their gasmasks, right?
How is introducing another law going to change anything when the authorities choose not to enforce existing laws? There are sufficient laws to prevent a minority from infringing on the rights of others – like the criminals in Montreal disrupting classes – but having a law on the books doesn’t do any good if our political leaders can find some way to rationalize not enforcing them.
Since everyone wants to talk about brutal police officers… it’s time to resurrect and oldie but a goodie that real police officers often refer to for reference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65zXlytv01c
@Karla:
During the 2010 Olympic Protests, I went to watch.
It is surprising at the amount of crap the police officers put up with: being spat at, wood chucked at them, those orange barrels the city uses to mark construction were thrown at them, bottles & pieces of rubber tires … And not once did the move – they held the line. Let’s not forget in Victoria some of those nice ‘peaceful protesters’ threw marbles on the pavement hoping to take down police horses. (I can’t even begin to tell you what my reaction would have been had I witnessed that situation)
Those ‘peaceful protesters’ were doing all they could to engage the police and it failed.
So do I think a lot of them get what they deserve, you bet. Yes, there are those ‘innocent’ bystanders that get caught up in the mess – but if you don’t have brains enough to avoid the situation altogether, well, you roll the dice and take your chances. Most people can aniticpate how things are going to unfold and will get out. Others will stick around, might get hurt, and then cry foul – everybody else’s fault -no personal responsibility. Honestly, I don’t hold a lot if any, sympathy.
And on the other hand there are the officers that tazed and eventually killed the Polish immigrant at the airport without even trying to figure out what was going on. Those officers should have been fired immediately. But I think they are still on the job. Every time I look at that video, I shudder to think how they kept their jobs. And the irony of it all is that the telephone on the pillar in the room where it happened was a direct line to a translation service that could have opened a clear line of communication.
There are bad cops. But there are a lot more bad people who try their best to shift the blame away from their own actions and blame the cops for hassling them to justify anything.
I think much of the blame for the riots lies squarely on the Crown Prosecutors. The police seem to be very proficient at actually solving a lot of crimes. Their percentage must be very good. But the Crown just does not file proper charges and there are no real punishments in the courts.
@Karla:
Oh, I fully agree there are bad cops that need to be weeded out and in cases of criminal acts – face the same music the general public does without the support and interference of the police.
But there are way too many folks walking around with the attitude that they are untouchable regardless of their actions.
‘Protesters’ that destroy private/personal propertybecause they think they have some ‘right’ are a prime example.
Here is an interesting youtube posting by Harsha Waila and No one is illegal and their thoughts on the Black Bloc, their tactics – destruction of property/violence. I believe this is the clip that shows NDP Libbly Davies in the audience.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhvUG3ejplo
I tried to go the distance on that video, but it’s unwatchable. Who sits quietly and listens to this drivel? That’s going to convince someone who disagrees? There just can’t be too much time left for humanity on Earth. At some point, some real life occurrence along the lines of “Atlas Shrugged” will take place and I don’t think these rocket scientists are going to make it. Social Darwinism seems inevitable.
@Steven Forth:
I’ve posted the photo links. My comment is awaiting moderation.
This section of the Criminal Code has sat, rarely used, on the books for many years.
The unnecessary Private Members Bill regarding masks and riots, and the Government’s support of it, are simply pandering to an overheated — and overloud — section of the electorate who are temporarily frightened and, therefore, angry.
The existing Section 351 would seem entirely adequate.
“Section 351
Disguise with intent
(2) Every one who, with intent to commit an indictable offence, has his face masked or coloured or is otherwise disguised is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.”
All of the Anarchists are complaining about Bill 78 in Quebec- funny how they don’t realize that it was only passed because of their idiocy…
http://genuinewitty.com/2012/05/19/montrealers-unhappy-about-bill-78-blame-it-on-the-bloc/
@Greg:
I saw the web pages they put up with pics of all the people that will not abide by bill 78. Always love when people place placards in the hands of small children because a 4,5 even 10 year olds know the true ins and outs of what is taking place.