[EyeBrock]

I watched and assisted in quite a few actual demo's that had a cause.

The ones you are so vocal in defending didn't have a cause or a message.

Radicals without a message and embarking on criminal and/or anti-social behaviour will face police actions and arrest.

Tell me again andy. What were these guys protesting about?

[Benn]

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

$1:

Covering them up too often eh? Its that rampant is it? No transparency? The Ottawa Police make a point of mentioning to the media every time one of their officer ends up in trouble. Name, years of service, charges, results. Very untransperent indeed.

Or the Taman inquiry where a Drunk Winnipeg police officer Derek Harvey-Zenk, drove into and killed Crystal Taman . witnesses to the inquiry gave clear testimony that they were intimidated by police, not to mention an intentionally sloppy investigation by the East St Paul police. and whats happened to Denk. He gets to plead out and no jail time after killing a woman

Not to mention the "Midnight" rides in Saskatchewan where aboriginals were dropped off outisde of town in sub-zero weather that resulted in deaths

Taman, east St. Paul Police; you'll note the province disbanded the East St. paul Police because there were too many bad apples and problems. It may not be enough to cover the loss, nothing can, but it shows Police are not allowed to be above the law, eventually someone will drop the hammer.

[andyt]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

I watched and assisted in quite a few actual demo's that had a cause.

The ones you are so vocal in defending didn't have a cause or a message.

Radicals without a message and embarking on criminal and/or anti-social behaviour will face police actions and arrest.

Tell me again andy. What were these guys protesting about?

As usual, I can't tell who you're talking about, because you lump them all together. As I said, I don't care what legit protesters were protesting about, I don't judge the right of somebody to protest by whether I deem their protest worthy. As for the black bloc, who cares, since by their violence they de-legitimized themselves anyway. See how that works? D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n - you could look it up.

[EyeBrock]

I didn't need to look the word up andy. I saw the protests and demos close up.

The legitimate ones had a cause and a point. The horde that got arrested after the anarchists burnt our cruisers, well they didn't.

Your argument fails when you don't even know what these people were demonstrating about.

Oh and check-out the Toronto Star article on the public's views of police actions at the G20. Seems like 73% dug how the police handled it.

[andyt]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

The legitimate ones had a cause and a point. The horde that got arrested after the anarchists burnt our cruisers, well they didn't.

I guess this is where our disagreement lies. You're right, I wasn't there. But from what I read, the horde was arrested the next day, long after the bb's did their thing, and this "horde" was in fact not doing much in the way of violence. Maybe I'm wrong about this, I dunno.

[EyeBrock]

The horde had a very large anti-social element.

BB suspects were all over the place. We were stopping people on Adelaide who had goggles, mitts, spikes etc as were our guys on Richmond.

It wasn't quiet on Sunday andy. It was a tense day with a lot of arrests prior to Queen Street. You read wrong and the media are not a credible source on these events.

From articles I read it was like I was not at the same event.

Very biased reporting and lots of untruths.

The media believed that they could do and say anything at these scenes. They have no more rights than any other citizen and a crime scene is a crime scene, as is an area of high risk remains high risk, even with a press card.

They didn't like the fact that they were being told 'no' and we see their petty digs back at us for what they are.

Life will be a lot tougher for the media in Toronto. There is very little good will left and those little heads-up phone calls they used to get 'aint gonna happen for a long time.

[andyt]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

The horde had a very large anti-social element.

BB suspects were all over the place. We were stopping people on Adelaide who had goggles, mitts, spikes etc as were our guys on Richmond.

It wasn't quiet on Sunday andy. It was a tense day with a lot of arrests prior to Queen Street. You read wrong and the media are not a credible source on these events.

From articles I read it was like I was not at the same event.

Very biased reporting and lots of untruths.

The media believed that they could do and say anything at these scenes. They have no more rights than any other citizen and a crime scene is a crime scene, as is an area of high risk remains high risk, even with a press card.

They didn't like the fact that they were being told 'no' and we see their petty digs back at us for what they are.

Life will be a lot tougher for the media in Toronto. There is very little good will left and those little heads-up phone calls they used to get 'aint gonna happen for a long time.

Just to spin that around, is it possible you were caught up in the heat of the moment, making very legitimate arrests, but the media was seeing the bigger picture? I'm always uncomfortable when media conspiracies are invoked, by either left or right.

[EyeBrock]

The media seeing the bigger picture!

That really is funny!

I let you know another reason the media were pissed off. We changed our radio system to encrypted. The media are so used to listening into police radio traffic on scanners. They were not happy and were scrambling to find the dirt and where it was kicking off.

Oh and the National Post reporters were a bunch of wankers just like the Globe or CBC guys were.

[HyperionTheEvil]

Benn Benn:

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

$1:

Covering them up too often eh? Its that rampant is it? No transparency? The Ottawa Police make a point of mentioning to the media every time one of their officer ends up in trouble. Name, years of service, charges, results. Very untransperent indeed.

Or the Taman inquiry where a Drunk Winnipeg police officer Derek Harvey-Zenk, drove into and killed Crystal Taman . witnesses to the inquiry gave clear testimony that they were intimidated by police, not to mention an intentionally sloppy investigation by the East St Paul police. and whats happened to Denk. He gets to plead out and no jail time after killing a woman

Not to mention the "Midnight" rides in Saskatchewan where aboriginals were dropped off outisde of town in sub-zero weather that resulted in deaths

Taman, east St. Paul Police; you'll note the province disbanded the East St. paul Police because there were too many bad apples and problems. It may not be enough to cover the loss, nothing can, but it shows Police are not allowed to be above the law, eventually someone will drop the hammer.

The point is that they are not above the law, and to make sure of that they need community oversight

[Benn]

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

Benn Benn:

Taman, east St. Paul Police; you'll note the province disbanded the East St. paul Police because there were too many bad apples and problems. It may not be enough to cover the loss, nothing can, but it shows Police are not allowed to be above the law, eventually someone will drop the hammer.

The point is that they are not above the law, and to make sure of that they need community oversight

Obviously they were not, they were disbanded.

[Curtman]

Benn Benn:

Obviously they were not, they were disbanded.

It took a lot of commenting to get that inquiry too.

[Dayseed]

Hey, what happened to Hurley? All it took was some proof and calling him on his bullshit and he disappeared! I was looking forward to how he spun him accusing Eyebrock of libel and/or not having his facts straight when it turned out to be Hurley guilty of his own accusations!

Also, for those interested, Eyebrock has called it correctly. The instant Curtman drove pot from one spot to the next, he was guilty of trafficking. But, Eyebrock is being generous, Curtman's actually guilty of a whole lot more. By agreeing to drive the pot, he's guilty of S. 465(1)(c) of the Criminal Code, which is conspiracy to commit an indictable offence, in this case, trafficking marijuana. Also, because he accepted a "free car", he's actually committed the crime covered by S. 354 of the Criminal Code, Possession of the Proceeds of Crime.

That's 3 criminal charges based on one drive. Now, I haven't even scratched the surface of any Criminal Organization charges because I don't know the nature of the group for which he trafficked pot.

[BartSimpson]

Dayseed Dayseed:

Hey, what happened to Hurley? All it took was some proof and calling him on his bullshit and he disappeared! I was looking forward to how he spun him accusing Eyebrock of libel and/or not having his facts straight when it turned out to be Hurley guilty of his own accusations!

Also, for those interested, Eyebrock has called it correctly. The instant Curtman drove pot from one spot to the next, he was guilty of trafficking. But, Eyebrock is being generous, Curtman's actually guilty of a whole lot more. By agreeing to drive the pot, he's guilty of S. 465(1)(c) of the Criminal Code, which is conspiracy to commit an indictable offence, in this case, trafficking marijuana. Also, because he accepted a "free car", he's actually committed the crime covered by S. 354 of the Criminal Code, Possession of the Proceeds of Crime.

That's 3 criminal charges based on one drive. Now, I haven't even scratched the surface of any Criminal Organization charges because I don't know the nature of the group for which he trafficked pot.

Yeah, but you don't understand. Given the situation Curtman was in it was really no big deal what he did because everyone he knew was doing it.

Thus demonstrating an example of why I do not abide situational ethics. Anything becomes excusable when you can redefine right and wrong on the fly.

Hmmm. Thinking about it, if Curtman still has the car he's still in violation of the law.

[EyeBrock]

Dayseed Dayseed:

Hey, what happened to Hurley? All it took was some proof and calling him on his bullshit and he disappeared! I was looking forward to how he spun him accusing Eyebrock of libel and/or not having his facts straight when it turned out to be Hurley guilty of his own accusations!

Also, for those interested, Eyebrock has called it correctly. The instant Curtman drove pot from one spot to the next, he was guilty of trafficking. But, Eyebrock is being generous, Curtman's actually guilty of a whole lot more. By agreeing to drive the pot, he's guilty of S. 465(1)(c) of the Criminal Code, which is conspiracy to commit an indictable offence, in this case, trafficking marijuana. Also, because he accepted a "free car", he's actually committed the crime covered by S. 354 of the Criminal Code, Possession of the Proceeds of Crime.

That's 3 criminal charges based on one drive. Now, I haven't even scratched the surface of any Criminal Organization charges because I don't know the nature of the group for which he trafficked pot.

Nicely said and well researched! I'm sure besides the Criminal Code stuff we are probably looking at a vehicle with no insurance and a zillion other things wrong, but I do like the proceeds of crime one. Nicely put together!

[ASLplease]