MF YYC Politics - there, I mega did it

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Not easy enough to conceal, no one is going to notice one of these in the flowerbed until it says "Hiiiiiiii!":

I was going for the deterrent angle. I'd suspect an ED-209 out front would be a lot better at it than an ADT sign on your lawn.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I'd support laws that make it illegal for anyone to show up at or protest at an elected representatives home. There is zero reason for this, and is not helpful in a democracy. Kenney already made it illegal to protest at some places, just add this to the list.

And I would vehemently reject such a law. I'm fine with outlawing things that are harmful (noise, threats, obstruction) but protest itself should be legal. Not useful is not enough to ban something in a liberal country: it has to be unduly harmful, and expressing displeasure with someone outside of their home is not that. To pass such a law would imply that it is, and I would consider anyone who takes that position unfit to govern.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by SebC

And I would vehemently reject such a law. I'm fine with outlawing things that are harmful (noise, threats, obstruction) but protest itself should be legal. Not useful is not enough to ban something in a liberal country: it has to be unduly harmful, and expressing displeasure with someone outside of their home is not that. To pass such a law would imply that it is, and I would consider anyone who takes that position unfit to govern.

It's not making protests illegal. You really think it is OK to go to someones home and protest? In front of their families? Disrupting neighborhoods? You want to protest, go to city hall. I would object to banning protests there.



Unreal you think this is an OK thing to do.

[btimbit]

Especially when those protesters make a habit of doing more than just protesting

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by SebC

And I would vehemently reject such a law. I'm fine with outlawing things that are harmful (noise, threats, obstruction) but protest itself should be legal. Not useful is not enough to ban something in a liberal country: it has to be unduly harmful, and expressing displeasure with someone outside of their home is not that. To pass such a law would imply that it is, and I would consider anyone who takes that position unfit to govern.

Where are all these quiet protests that don't get in the way and inevitably threaten their target(s)?

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by SebC

And I would vehemently reject such a law. I'm fine with outlawing things that are harmful (noise, threats, obstruction) but protest itself should be legal. Not useful is not enough to ban something in a liberal country: it has to be unduly harmful, and expressing displeasure with someone outside of their home is not that. To pass such a law would imply that it is, and I would consider anyone who takes that position unfit to govern.

Care to post your address so that those of us who disagree can come tell you in person?

If you were an individual of any prominence I’m sure we could track that in for down ourselves…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

It's not making protests illegal. You really think it is OK to go to someones home and protest? In front of their families?

As already stated, I think it meets the threshold for legality. You don't have to ask me again.

I don't believe the state has any business criminalizing victimless actions, nor do I think that being protested makes one a victim.

If I want to stand outside Kenney's house with a sign that says he's an ass, and you would have me arrested for that, then there is little that separates your ideology from that of a despot.

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Where are all these quiet protests that don't get in the way and inevitably threaten their target(s)?

Well, I've been part of at least one! So I can confidently say that not only is is theoretically possible, but in practice as well.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by SebC

As already stated, I think it meets the threshold for legality. You don't have to ask me again.

I don't believe the state has any business criminalizing victimless actions, nor do I think that being protested makes one a victim.

If I want to stand outside Kenney's house with a sign that says he's an ass, and you would have me arrested for that, then there is little that separates your ideology from that of a despot.

Well, I've been part of at least one! So I can confidently say that not only is is theoretically possible, but in practice as well.

Private lives of politicians should be off limits. I don't see why that's a line that is despotic. How do we get good people to become politicians and make tough decisions, if they have to live with the threat of harassment of them and their families in their homes? Who needs that ####? It's entirely unnecessary, and does not infringe on your right to protest because you can do it at city hall. Honestly I think it's just ####ty way to treat people who are serving the public.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Private lives of politicians should be off limits.

Justify this. If I'm allowed to stand on your sidewalk to try to sell you a vacuum cleaner, or to tell a politician I disagree with their policies, what difference does it make? Or should both be illegal?

Fundamentally, protesting at a politician's home is freedom of movement, freedom of association, and freedom of expression. To infringe on those freedoms, there better be a good reason.

And I allow for good reasons. Threats, hate speech and excessive noise are all good reasons to limit expression. Obstruction is a good reason to limit freedom of movement (i.e. to preserve it for others). A viral pandemic is a good reason to limit association.

I just don't see a good reason why a political motivation necessitates extra restrictions.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by SebC

Justify this. If I'm allowed to stand on your sidewalk to try to sell you a vacuum cleaner, or to tell you I disagree with your policies, what difference does it make? Or should both be illegal?

I did justify it in the following sentences. Some laws are just generally about making society a better place, and do not remove your right to protest.

[Amethyst]

To me, protesting outside someone's home makes you as much of a jerk as protesting at a hospital. Want to protest in front of a government office, business, busy street? Go for it. All people, regardless of their job, should be allowed peaceful enjoyment of their home, without someone standing on the sidewalk, calling them an idiot.

I want good people to run for office and if protestors can hang out at their homes, the only ones who run will end up being people like Jason Kenney, who are looking for a fight.

I want the politicians who are elected to have some breathing space at home where they can "turn off" the job for a bit, so they can be refreshed. Having protestors outside your house doesn't allow that.

Many politicians live with others. Those people should not be subjected to the harassment or fear of protestors in front of their house, just because their parent, spouse, sibling, child, whatever, is a politician.

And finally, if a vacuum cleaner salesman ever show up at my door, I can tell him to leave and close the door. The protestors I've seen don't come across as quite so cooperative.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by Amethyst

Many politicians live with others. Those people should not be subjected to the harassment or fear of protestors in front of their house, just because their parent, spouse, sibling, child, whatever, is a politician.

Not to mention their neighbors as well

[Fuzz]

Ya, a street in a residential neighbourhood is no place for a protest.

[Bill Bumface]

^ basically Hitler

[ThisIsAnOutrage]

Welp, looks like the bunglers down at city hall got one thing right. According to this article, Calgary is cleanest city on the planet!


https://www.thediscoverer.com/blog/1...HyVpKgiwAG5atl

[btimbit]

Calgary Police looking into the possibility of charging people that protest at private residences

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...ission-meeting

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Calgary Police looking into the possibility of charging people that protest at private residences

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...ission-meeting

Yeah I'm ok with that.

Dislike their decisions and policies all you want.

Protest at City Hall all you want.

Leave homes and families out of it.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Yeah I'm ok with that.

Dislike their decisions and policies all you want.

Protest at City Hall all you want.

Leave homes and families out of it.

Yes that's perfect. Protesting and freedom of speech is a public right for a public space. You should have no expectation of that at a private/personal residence.

[Bigtime]

And on her 100th day in office Jyoti no longer has Carter as her chief of staff. Sounds like he got the boot.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

And on her 100th day in office Jyoti no longer has Carter as her chief of staff. Sounds like he got the boot.

Awesome news! Now maybe she can act like she's trying to run a city and not pre-emptively setting up the narrative for the 2025 re-election campaign against a Murray Edwards sponsored stooge.