[Newsbot]

Title: G20 arrests result in just 24 convictions
Category: Law & Order
Posted By: Curtman
Date: 2011-06-20 17:21:25
Canadian

[andyt]

By that ratio we can expect 3 convictions or so from Vancouver. Of course our cops may have actually arrested only peopple who actually did something, so maybe we'll have a higher conviction rate. Doubt that any Vancouver cops will be convicted of brutality or we'll get video of them beating down innocent people.

[martin14]

No surprise, the system doesn't work. The people feel it now; thus the 'outing' sites
popping up everywhere.

[ShepherdsDog]

it's like a good old fashioned shunning. It's showing that society can deliver justice without having to resort to violence. On a macro scale nations apply this tactic in the form of trade and cultural embargoes.

[EyeBrock]

You guys arrested too many 'innocent' people at the G20 to gain control of the streets.

You guys didn't arrest enough guilty people in Vancouver and lost control of the streets.

More second guessing by arm-chair law enforcement 'experts' and a police-hating media.

[Thanos]

Here's an indication of the non-punishment that the Vancouver rioters will receive if judges in BC are as limp & flaccid as the ones in Toronto are. Accompanied of course by photo of happy 'n' smirking left-wing 'activists' in the background.

And the bad people who meet the Canadian justice system and end up winning again! Yay?

[andyt]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

You guys arrested too many 'innocent' people at the G20 to gain control of the streets.

You guys didn't arrest enough guilty people in Vancouver and lost control of the streets.

More second guessing by arm-chair law enforcement 'experts' and a police-hating media.

The only criticism against "you guys" in Vancouver is that they weren't expecting a riot and so weren't prepared and took too long to move in. Maybe the riot could have been prevented or very much reduced if police were prepared. That's a failure of command, not the cops on the street. In fact the suggestion has been made that the Vancouver cops held off because of the black eye the Toronto cops gave themselves.

In G20 there also seemed to be a curious lack of cops when the blocheads ran riot, even tho there were huge numbers of cops available (what did you say, 17,000?) tasked just with preventing riots. Riots were expected. I can see how the idea that this was done on purpose took hold - better to be able to beat down peaceful protesters the next day. In G20 the rot seemed to run from the top (bullshit exclusion zone) right to individual cops on the street getting their licks in. And of course like many people on this forum, the hope was the public can't tell the diff between legitimate protesters and rioters, so the police had free reign on Sunday.

[BartSimpson]

A simple Act of Parliament would resolve future 'G20-ish' events:

"The penalty upon a Citizen for assaulting Individuals found to be wearing facial coverings of any nature while participating in acts of vandalism, looting, or other acts of anti-social brigandry shall not exceed $1.00 per incident."

That'll put an end to the Black Bloc right there.

[andyt]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

A simple Act of Parliament would resolve future 'G20-ish' events:

"The penalty upon a Citizen for assaulting Individuals found to be wearing facial coverings of any nature while participating in acts of vandalism, looting, or other acts of anti-social brigandry shall not exceed $1.00 per incident."

That'll put an end to the Black Bloc right there.

Huh? I don't know where you're going with this, but there's actually the seeds of a good idea here. Finding a way to make face coverings illegal and making people subject to arrest just for that.

What I'd really like to see is the protest organizers form their own teams that stop the blockheads. Sorta in the way of Brock's "we're all policemen." It's only in their own interests. Doubt it would ever happen tho.

[andyt]

oops

[BartSimpson]

Banning face coverings in public would be pretty effective especially given that the public is now taking pictures of the rioters and following up on these people.

But it'd also be nice to make the maximum penalty for pulverizing a senselessly destructive anarchist to be no more than $1.00

When the US Supreme Court said that people have a right to burn the US flag the City of Boston passed a law that made the fine for beating up a flag burner to be a maximum of $1.00 - thus you don't hear of anyone burning flags in Boston all that much.

[andyt]

I don't get that $1 thing.

Banning face coverings won't be that effective, because those guys are already planning to cause mayhem - they don't care about the legality of it. It's like banning face covering for bank robbers. But if it helps the cops arrest them without needing other reasons, that might be helpful.

[Tricks]

The $1 part makes it so that if someone is rioting, another individual can kick the living shit out of them and only get a penalty of a one dollar fine.

[Curtman]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

You guys arrested too many 'innocent' people at the G20 to gain control of the streets.

You guys didn't arrest enough guilty people in Vancouver and lost control of the streets.

More second guessing by arm-chair law enforcement 'experts' and a police-hating media.

They didn't even try to arrest any of the black block. The stayed out of their way while they rioted and started arresting people the next day at a different event.

[andyt]

Curtman Curtman:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

You guys arrested too many 'innocent' people at the G20 to gain control of the streets.

You guys didn't arrest enough guilty people in Vancouver and lost control of the streets.

More second guessing by arm-chair law enforcement 'experts' and a police-hating media.

They didn't even try to arrest any of the black block. The stayed out of their way while they rioted and started arresting people the next day at a different event.

Troll