[flagged]
If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it. Note this one:
"Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."
and this one:
"Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity."
I can tell you're already very convinced of who was right and wrong in this and you're trying to make this a left vs right thing, but there are limits to how many problems you can cause when you protest - no matter the cause - before civil society (via it's police force and/or government) says "ok, that's enough".
Either that, or civil society sides with you, and then major change happens.
And I guess no one wanted to side with the COVID-denying racists.
Can you elaborate why it is "and/or government". Why is it acceptable that the government by-pass the normal legal system in dealing with protestors?
I'm not going to debate whether it was legal or not with you because (I'm assuming) neither of us are lawyers.
I'll say that I don't particularly agree with the bank account shenanigans they pulled, but they only did that because the Ottawa police force completely failed to do their job in dealing with the blockade.
I definitely don't like the precedent that was set, but having seen the blockade first hand (it was not a "peaceful protest", it was an aggressive encampment that was regularly threatening to passerbys and locals) and the impact it had on the area - my parents live nearby - they had to do something.
I support the rights of citizens to protest but as I said, there's a limit.
The question I was after is if the concept is ever moral or reasonable to deal with protestors with methods outside the legal system. Common methods are the military, but also martial law, suspending bank accounts (without a court decision), and other methods.
Current in Sweden we had recent several demonstrations that lead to riots, and historically we had major ones including one that lead to several demonstrators getting shot. Every single time, researchers and government investigations has found that using anything other than the regular legal system is counter productive, and in some cases very deadly. If the police don't do their job you get more police from other regions. In a event just a few months ago, they even got police from nearby countries to help (despite massive demonstrations and influx of tourists, crime went significant down during that period).
In general, the problem of police not doing their job seems to stem from when they are afraid. Either because of being extremely outnumbered, or in combination with poor instruction (with can lead to being afraid of doing mistakes in a political hot situation). Both are problems that can be solved by politicians without going outside the framework of the legal system.
Why didn't the government shut down these protestors bank accounts?
I will say that First Nations issues in Canada are pretty complicated, particularly when it comes to unceded territories and the rights around those.
It's also worth mentioning that those rail line blockades in Ontario were done in support of other protests in BC where the government eventually sent cops in riot gear to dismantle the blockades by violence.
Something that didn't happen in Ottawa, and I'll let you figure out why.
The Ottawa police did the exact same thing.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/19/world/canada/canada-truck...
Have you seen videos or pictures of the protestors? They were all different races, there wasn't an ounce of "racism" anywhere in there.
I don't need to see "videos or pictures" I saw it with my own eyes, repeatedly.
I saw first hand the confederate flags, the screamed slurs at passerbys, the aggressive racist-coded chants and associated violent rhetoric..
One night my mom got screamed at by a drunken asshole waving a big confederate flag, she was shaking so badly she didn't sleep that night..
So your hearsay "there wasn't an ounce of racism anywhere in there" can take a hike.
You don't get to do that to other people. Not in my idea of a civil society.
[1] https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/yCWPkLi8wJvewPbEp/the-noncen...
Truckers take over the city and make life a living hell for thousands of innocent residents? Lock their bank accounts and starve them out, and (ideally) prosecute the perpetrators alongside anyone who donated to them.
Soldiers raping and killing civilians? Blow them to kingdom come if possible (it's a war, after all). Otherwise, identify them, convene a tribunal after the war, and hang those found guilty.
FA, FO.
If someone is non-violent protesting in a location they arent allowed to be, the appropriate response it to arrest and move them, not lock their bank accounts and starve their families.
Locking someone in a cell and keeping them awake for the purpose if inflicting suffering is torture. Making noise so that someone in the freedom of their own home has to put ear plugs in is not.
conflating them ignores the clear differences and stretches the meaning of the word. You might as well say an ice cream display in the super market is torture.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
(Yes, the other commenter was also breaking the site guidelines and I've responded to them elsewhere.)
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
(Yes, the other commenter was also breaking the site guidelines and I've responded to them elsewhere.)
The city of Ottawa's law enforcement officers were ordered to remove the protesters weeks before the federal government stepped in. The cops basically just didn't do their job. The emergency act was not invoked lightly.
If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.
The other commenter was breaking the site guidelines too, but in a different way, and I've responded to them also.