Is this the same Toronto police that really loves the gun registry? So will those Libloggers who said "If the police think it's a good idea..." please comment on this story?
My Initial reaction to the search idea is negative, despite the heartrending predicament. I would likely say 'no' but i'd like to find out more about the law on warrentless searches in Canada. This might be more justified if the person was a known murderer but for a missing kid, it seems more like a fishing expedition. If novel, this becomes a slippery slope but it seems the public is apathetic about freedom issues (or issues in general). My apprehension increases about political/economic development.
"@The Rat: Will the Conservatives who use police at every turn to justify many a tougher sentencing policy be subject to explaining themselves too?"
I guess you missed the point. Conservatives talk about tougher sentences for those CONVICTED of wrongdoing, Liberals talk about tougher surveillance in case you MIGHT be wrongdoing. I know it's a nuanced point. Support the gun registry on non-criminals, support warrant-less searches - that would be consistent thinking. Support tougher sentences for convicted those who commit crimes, impose fewer restrictions on those who don't, that's our consistent thinking.
Rat - You may have a point but you are also missing the point. You made the good observation that just because the Police think something is a good idea doesn't make it so. You then change the subject to the validity of arguments in favour of stiffer penalties vis-a-vis the gun registry.
The fact that police like the gun registry should carry about as much weight as the police liking mandatory minimum sentences.
"The fact that police like the gun registry should carry about as much weight as the police liking mandatory minimum sentences.
I wouldn't argue that. Appeals to authority as evidence are one of the great debating errors. I would argue for mandatory minimums for a few reasons but I'd hardly suggest that police support is enough to bring them in. I'm a libertarian at heart and I really don't think the government should be bothering me unless I have done something wrong and they can prove it. I wouldn't let the police search my house without a warrant, not because I have anything to hide (that I know of) but simply because a search must be hard for police in order to protect everyone. And for similar reasons I stand against the long gun registry.
14 comments:
And legally can "we" say no?
WTF, we can but if you do they will take that a being hinky and focus on you.
Why? For fun?
can they use a refusal as evidence in getting a warrant?
Is this the same Toronto police that really loves the gun registry? So will those Libloggers who said "If the police think it's a good idea..." please comment on this story?
@The Rat: Will the Conservatives who use police at every turn to justify many a tougher sentencing policy be subject to explaining themselves too?
James C Morton said...
WTF, we can but if you do they will take that a being hinky and focus on you.
Not if EVERYONE just says NO!
People, this is to find Miriam. Obviously the cops think she's being held as a captive somewhere. CBC has the story.
CBC story here:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2009/11/09/mariam-makniashvilli.html
Toe and rww - thanks for your comments and link. I was wondering what this was about.
My Initial reaction to the search idea is negative, despite the heartrending predicament. I would likely say 'no' but i'd like to find out more about the law on warrentless searches in Canada. This might be more justified if the person was a known murderer but for a missing kid, it seems more like a fishing expedition. If novel, this becomes a slippery slope but it seems the public is apathetic about freedom issues (or issues in general). My apprehension increases about political/economic development.
"@The Rat: Will the Conservatives who use police at every turn to justify many a tougher sentencing policy be subject to explaining themselves too?"
I guess you missed the point. Conservatives talk about tougher sentences for those CONVICTED of wrongdoing, Liberals talk about tougher surveillance in case you MIGHT be wrongdoing. I know it's a nuanced point. Support the gun registry on non-criminals, support warrant-less searches - that would be consistent thinking. Support tougher sentences for convicted those who commit crimes, impose fewer restrictions on those who don't, that's our consistent thinking.
Rat - You may have a point but you are also missing the point. You made the good observation that just because the Police think something is a good idea doesn't make it so. You then change the subject to the validity of arguments in favour of stiffer penalties vis-a-vis the gun registry.
The fact that police like the gun registry should carry about as much weight as the police liking mandatory minimum sentences.
"The fact that police like the gun registry should carry about as much weight as the police liking mandatory minimum sentences.
I wouldn't argue that. Appeals to authority as evidence are one of the great debating errors. I would argue for mandatory minimums for a few reasons but I'd hardly suggest that police support is enough to bring them in. I'm a libertarian at heart and I really don't think the government should be bothering me unless I have done something wrong and they can prove it. I wouldn't let the police search my house without a warrant, not because I have anything to hide (that I know of) but simply because a search must be hard for police in order to protect everyone. And for similar reasons I stand against the long gun registry.
Post a Comment