2022 Freedumb Convoy(s) Thread

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by Locke

Which is what the Cops should have done in the first place.

There is no problem if they want to protest, you show up, honk a bit and then get moved along.

Again, people are allowed to protest, even if its something stupid. You're not allowed to occupy a city.

The whole mess across the country is 100% on the senior cops. The orders should have been simple once the numerous laws were broken. 1) Warn them 2) Warn them with a threat 3) Arrest and charge 4) Ticket/seize/tow the asset/vehicle 5) Tell it to the judge

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Yikes

The whole mess across the country is 100% on the senior cops. The orders should have been simple once the numerous laws were broken. 1) Warn them 2) Warn them with a threat 3) Arrest and charge 4) Ticket/seize/tow the asset/vehicle 5) Tell it to the judge

Pretty much.

I've been on this merry-go-round a few times in this thread.

Its very much:

"I may not agree with what you're saying, but I'll defend your right to say it so long as you accept the consequences of saying it."

They have the right to protest, even if I think they're protesting something dumb as all hell. Thats fine.

But you cant just do whatever you want. The last Ottawa Convoy thing was a huge breakdown in the systems and application of law and order from the Cop on the street all the way up.

You show up...you honk around a bit...you make your displeasure known with your "Down with this sort of thing" signs and then you have to leave...whether you want to or not.

You dont have to go home...but you cant stay here.

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by Locke

Pretty much.

I've been on this merry-go-round a few times in this thread.

Its very much:

"I may not agree with what you're saying, but I'll defend your right to say it so long as you accept the consequences of saying it."

They have the right to protest, even if I think they're protesting something dumb as all hell. Thats fine.

But you cant just do whatever you want. The last Ottawa Convoy thing was a huge breakdown in the systems and application of law and order from the Cop on the street all the way up.

You show up...you honk around a bit...you make your displeasure known with your "Down with this sort of thing" signs and then you have to leave...whether you want to or not.

You dont have to go home...but you cant stay here.

100%, you have the right to protest but not to break numerous laws doing so. You break laws and stuff happens, had the cops done their jobs early on, arrest/charge, ticket, tow/impound we would not be having this discussion. The blocks would have never happened. ALL OF THIS IS ON THE COPS.

[b1crunch]

Originally Posted by Yikes

100%, you have the right to protest but not to break numerous laws doing so. You break laws and stuff happens, had the cops done their jobs early on, arrest/charge, ticket, tow/impound we would not be having this discussion. The blocks would have never happened. ALL OF THIS IS ON THE COPS.

Surely some of the responsibility should fall to those breaking the law.

[holden]

ALL of this is on the cops?

[Locke]

I wouldnt say its all on the Cops, theres a lot of blame to go around, but it starts with not allowing the protesters to become entrenched in the first place.

Once that happens it makes life a whole lot harder.

The whole thing reminded me of the Simpsons episode where the Carnies move in and take over the Simpsons' house.

If you dont let them settle down in the first place then it doesnt escalate.

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by holden

ALL of this is on the cops?

By not doing their jobs and enforcing NUMEROUS laws they shifted the power to the criminals...and here we are. So, yeah...this is ALL ON THE COPS. They should have done their job and enforced law during the first days. As soon as law is enforced and the "protesters" see that it is being enforced, realize the risks, the fringe players leave and whole thing goes away.

[b1crunch]

Originally Posted by Yikes

By not doing their jobs and enforcing NUMEROUS laws they shifted the power to the criminals...and here we are. So, yeah...this is ALL ON THE COPS. They should have done their job and enforced law during the first days. As soon as law is enforced and the "protesters" see that it is being enforced, realize the risks, the fringe players leave and whole thing goes away.

Yikes

[Fuzz]

There are definitely a few cops who bear far more responsibility. Those in charge, and those muppets on the front lines who were sympathetic to the protests, didn't do their job, and in the case of worst of them, passed police operations info on to the occupiers. Those ones should be tried for treason. Do they still have jobs? They should not have jobs, because they failed the basics of doing them.

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by Yikes

By not doing their jobs and enforcing NUMEROUS laws they shifted the power to the criminals...and here we are. So, yeah...this is ALL ON THE COPS. They should have done their job and enforced law during the first days. As soon as law is enforced and the "protesters" see that it is being enforced, realize the risks, the fringe players leave and whole thing goes away.

Just curious, but does that go for all protests? Or just this one?

I mean generally, isn't the purpose of protest to bring awareness by pushing the boundaries of what we, as a society will accept, to draw attention?

Even "peaceful" protests are accompanied by some sort of civil disorder or unrest.

I think protests and the decisions made therein, are significantly more nuanced than just a simple break law/bylaw get ticketed/arrested.

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Just curious, but does that go for all protests? Or just this one?

I mean generally, isn't the purpose of protest to bring awareness by pushing the boundaries of what we, as a society will accept, to draw attention?

Even "peaceful" protests are accompanied by some sort of civil disorder or unrest.

I think protests and the decisions made therein, are significantly more nuanced than just a simple break law/bylaw get ticketed/arrested.

I think most would agree that what happened is a tad more serious/destructive than a peaceful protest or some form of sit in. Economic havoc aside we have a few dudes sitting in prison on firearms charges with intent. Cops let the crazies take power by not doing their job from day one, how it is these fools still have jobs is amazing...but hey, cops cover for cops, it's what they do.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Just curious, but does that go for all protests? Or just this one?

I mean generally, isn't the purpose of protest to bring awareness by pushing the boundaries of what we, as a society will accept, to draw attention?

Even "peaceful" protests are accompanied by some sort of civil disorder or unrest.

I think protests and the decisions made therein, are significantly more nuanced than just a simple break law/bylaw get ticketed/arrested.

You're conflating protesting with civil disobedience. It is entirely possible to have a demonstration with or without law-breaking. Civil disobedience, however, is illegal, by definition.

[topfiverecords]

NSFW!

https://twitter.com/user/status/1494106335280910342

Have we all kept Ottawa Balcony Guy in our hearts and our minds? I know I have.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by SebC

You're conflating protesting with civil disobedience. It is entirely possible to have a demonstration with or without law-breaking. Civil disobedience, however, is illegal, by definition.

Civil disobedience is a form of protest, but I don’t even know if the freedom convoy can really be defined that well as a protest. They were engaging in civil disobedience but not against any of the laws or regulations they were apparently protesting, and did not have a clear, consistent goal or message.

I think it’s generous to call it a protest at all (even under the terms of civil disobedience). It was one probably the most ineffective and simultaneously disruptive “protests” in history.

Anyway I thought this link was interesting in terms of defining dissent vs. Civil disobedience and what is/isn’t legal in a protest: https://www.aclrc.com/dissentdisobedience

Makes it even more apparent that the freedom convoy acted as dumb as they could possibly act and deserved what came to them.

[Ozy_Flame]

I mean, it was just a confluence of complaints that didn't really know what they were doing. Mandates? Vaccination passport? Freedom? Nazism? Anti-Liberalism? There was no clear message.

In fact in looking back on it, I see a few parallels to the Occupy Movement protests back in the day. Even a quick quote I pulled from Wikipedia from political scientist Gene Sharp said about the protests:

"The [Occupy] protesters don't have a clear objective, something they can actually achieve. If they think they will change the economic system by simply staying in a particular location, then they are likely to be very disappointed. Protest alone accomplishes very little."

The right loved to harp on the Occupy protests as aimless but this was basically the same thing - hard to discern. Any normal Canadian watching on TV just saw a bunch of non-sensical signs, half-naked PPC supporters, hot tubs, grimy, unshaven transients wearing Oakleys and confronting cops, and annoying truck horns flanked by USA ,Diagolon, Nazi, and F Trudeau flags.

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by Yikes

I think most would agree that what happened is a tad more serious/destructive than a peaceful protest or some form of sit in. Economic havoc aside we have a few dudes sitting in prison on firearms charges with intent. Cops let the crazies take power by not doing their job from day one, how it is these fools still have jobs is amazing...but hey, cops cover for cops, it's what they do.

I guess that's a no to my question lol.

The fact that it was a "tad" more serious I think should provide some context into what the police were dealing with. I would also suggest that there were other parties that played a significant role in forming the policies and procedures police undertook. I get it, they're an easy target and the face of the enforcement (or lack thereof) but let's spread the blame equally.

Hey, I'm with you in some respect. I would have loved to see those losers get rolled over just as much as you did. I'm not sure why they were even let into the core anyway. But I'm also not naive enough to think things weren't that simple.

Definitely a lot to learn from something that was particularly unprecedented in Canada. Some poor decisions for sure. But to blame the police isn't, IMO, a particularly well thought out position.



Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[Yamer]

"This is going well, right? I think we're doing well."

https://twitter.com/user/status/1605699796207079424

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Yamer

"This is going well, right? I think we're doing well."

https://twitter.com/user/status/1605699796207079424

I mean...'Nazi Consultant.'

I guess theres a market for that? I wonder how he does in interviews? Does he have to provide his own Nazi paraphernalia? I have questions.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Locke

I mean...'Nazi Consultant.'

I guess theres a market for that? I wonder how he does in interviews? Does he have to provide his own Nazi paraphernalia? I have questions.

Can you be a bankrupt lawyer and manage a trust account? I guess we are about to find out.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Can you be a bankrupt lawyer and manage a trust account? I guess we are about to find out.

Yes! Creatively!

But for the moment lets go back to the Nazi Consultant...is there like a drop-down menu on Temp Agency sites where you can select this criteria?

"Must bring own Swastikas" ?

"Actual opinions concerning the Jews optional" ?

Really though...you have to wonder how one even gets into this line of work. Did he answer an ad one day? From where? And for why?

Was he just really down on his luck and he got this opportunity to make buck? But...ya know...you gotta be a Nazi?

What were the circumstances?