Vancouver Olympics stripping residents of their rights

[spartanhelmet]

So, I worry quite a bit about the state of modern politics. No matter the country, the government seems so willing and eager to impose an iron fist on its' citizens. I'd sure like to hear from the locals if this is wrong/blown out of proportions, but it appear to be. I've seen the same thing happen in APEC and the WYD in Sydney, so it doesn't seem so far-fetched personally.

If I'm to believe this article in its entirety, I'd be rather worried. It seems the BC Libs are trying to suspend Section 2 of the charter of rights for the cities of Vancouver, Richmond and up in Whistler - all the Olympic cities. With these changes you have no right to freedom of speech and assembly which are otherwise unquestionable. To top it off, fines of $10k and/or 6 months jail are possible, private residences can be entered with 24 hours notice from 'officials'.

Don't want to be alarmist, but this sure doesn't seem pretty. There's also the fact I haven't seen larger Canadian media outlets mention anything. Your thoughts and input, people?

[Matt]

There has actually been pretty extensive coverage of this in the media.

Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly are being suspended temporarily in certain high-profile places in BC during the olymipc games - supplementary to that, areas are being defined and made public where people can gather and protest.

So it's not like people are being told they can't protest at all, they're simply being told to protest in a place where it won't actively disrupt that games.

As far as the signs go, the mandate given to police was to remove illegal advertizing materials, not signs of protest. vancouver's Police comissioner himself has gone on record stating that they have no intention of entering people's homes to remove protest signs.

As far as my opinion in all of this, I'm not overly concerned about it. There has been a large, constant, and very loud voice of opposition sounding ever since BC got the games, and at this point any protests being waged are being held specifically with the intent of disrupting them. (for instance, in victoria last week, where no2010 protesters held gatherings in intersections along the route of the torch relay, forcing the relay to divert).

I don't see it as particularly out of line for the government to tell people that if they have to protest they should do so out of the way, and I'm confident full speech rights will be returned upon the end of the games, becase if they weren't, that WOULD be unpretty.

-m

[zfubarz]

Happens all the time sadly, it sucks but I Get it.

[Fuzzyfreaker]

More importantly, the Vancouver Olympics are stripping Fuzzyfreakers of their LOST. After two episodes, the Winter Olympics start, and the show goes on hiatus again.

Thanks a lot, bobsledders.

[Matt]

They're doing you a favour.

-m

[CommanderKeen]

Pretty much what Matt said. Any protests now are specifically bent on disrupting the games, which just feels like sour grapes to me. The Minority was pissed off because the Majority got what it wanted. Go figure. It's not like we didn't know this would be happening, BC has a very active protest community (Greenpeace was founded in Vancouver). It's just that our protestors don't quite understand that property damage is a crime, or that the time to protest getting the games was about eight to ten years ago and that they aren't protesting the correct people or cause.

The biggest thing the protesters need to do is get their message straight. Are you protesting because it's money diverted from social programs? Is it because you don't believe in mass transit? Whatever that cause, when protesting your message needs to be clear. A film about three years was produced called Five Ring Circus. It started off fine, saying all the negative bits about the Olympics, but then rambled into things that while help the Olympics but aren't specifically under the Olympics budget like the Sea-to-Sky highway.

I do have a problem with the Paramedics being legislated back to work. Not that they weren't working already but they now have to accept a really stupid deal that doesn't fix any of the problems they have. *grumble grumble*

TL;DR
Olympic protests now are solely to piss off the government and the people who want to watch sport.
Protesters need to get their facts straight and speak with one voice.

Edit: I'm more worried about the parking restrictions that are being put in place near my parent's house. It's three blocks from the new Curling rink.

[Kara]

It's just that our protestors don't quite understand that property damage is a crime, or that the time to protest getting the games was about eight to ten years ago and that they aren't protesting the correct people or cause.

This.

[Alja-Markir]

You know what? I call bullshit.

Yes, sometimes protestors are destructive or disruptive. But that is their crime, not the crime of entire cities full of innocent citizens. A blanket measure like this is a travesty. It punishes everyone, simply because there is fear of the actions of a vast minority.

Canadians, do you not remember when, during the October Crisis, Trudeau was driven to invoke the War Measures Act? He himself admits this was a recipe for disaster, because the act gave sweeping powers to the government allowing it to throw people's rights out the window. People were in a panic, and rightly so. Trudeau himself hated the idea, but had to go along with it because it was the only option available. In fact, it was only afterwards that the Trudeau government was able to push through new legislation that made it possible to grant partial powers of the measure without invoking the entirety.

But this isn't the October Crisis. There are other options. Instead of the extreme measures planned, the government should simply field a larger response force in expectance of possible trouble. Hopefully, these forces would not have to be used, but if people started disrupting the games they could be dealt with swiftly, and without affecting the average, ordinary citizen.

Do I think the measures invoked are likely to be abused? No, not really. I think most Canadians are reasonable people, and that the Canadian government is actually fairly reasonable as well. Do I think that the potential for abuse exists? Absolutely. Powers are being granted which I see no use for other than silencing dissent and trampling citizen's rights. Can a balance be struck? I certainly hope so, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

More and more, I think of the Olympics as nothing but bad news.

~Alja~

[CommanderKeen]

Instead of the extreme measures planned, the government should simply field a larger response force in expectance of possible trouble.

Security for the games is already at 900 million dollars, and renting two cruise ships for the security of the games. Fielding a larger response force isn't feasible.

Powers are being granted which I see no use for other than silencing dissent and trampling citizen's rights. Can a balance be struck? I certainly hope so, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

So far the Vancouver Olympics and associated projects have been pretty open to citizen participation and feedback. Far more then any other games.

I'm just sad that'll they're shutting down Cypress Mountain for most of the winter. Oh well there are two other mountains on the shore that will gladly take my business.

[Matt]

There are simply no more people for the government to field as a response force, without looking to the military.

THAT would be a recipe for disaster.

The goal with these measures is to limit the ability of protesters, who've shown repeatedly that they have no unified message and no goal other than to cause problems for the proceedings, to actually CAUSE problems without straining budgets and manpower requirements more than they already are.

Vancouver is going to be absolute fucking chaos, even without a bunch of poorly organized flashmobs making life hell for event co-ordinators, police, and security forces.

Additionally, the areas being controled are largely business and commercial centres, and less residential areas with large populations having their rights trampled.

this is an expressly time-limited deferral of citizen rights, not a full-blown removal of them, and while I'm not totally in favor of the idea, I can see the neccessity, and accept the fact that the options are limited.

The real killer in all this is that the major basis of the protests are based on the economics of running the games, and an objection to taxpayer money being spent to run them - well, if we neen to spend tens of millions more to keep protestors in line and the games running smoothly, arent they just contributing to the problem? At this point I want the protestors to just suck it up for a couple weeks, let the games go off without a hitch and move on with their lives, they're accomplising nothing.

All in all, I guess I'm willing to admit that the protestors have worn out their welcome with me, and that's why I'm as accepting of this rule as I am. My annoyance at the protests outweighs my outrage at having rights suspended.

For a facepalm moment: Last week during the torch relay were seen a white family(including 2 small children, too young to really know what they were protesting) protesting the torch relay with signs reading "no olympic games on stolen native land!" accross the street from a first nations family cheering on the runners in their 2010 Olympics hats and coats.

/facepalm

-m

[Master Gunner]

There are simply no more people for the government to field as a response force, without looking to the military.

THAT would be a recipe for disaster.

The military is already out there to provide security. My brother will be stationed out your way for the two months around the Olympics. Unless the protesters try to break into the Olympic Stadium or something, I doubt much attention will be paid to them though.

[Matt]

There are simply no more people for the government to field as a response force, without looking to the military.

THAT would be a recipe for disaster.

The military is already out there to provide security. My brother will be stationed out your way for the two months around the Olympics. Unless the protesters try to break into the Olympic Stadium or something, I doubt much attention will be paid to them though.

My meaning was more of a "large-scale military presence" but yeah, I should have figured they'd be there, we simply don't have that many cops.

-m

[Metcarfre]

Yeah, my soon-to-be-brother-in-law is coming too. They're mostly staff/surveillance and organising jobs, because military officers are, at heart, really good managers.

And I totally agree with you, Matt, regarding the protesters ect. I have a good friend who participated in the protests at the torch relay. She posted it on her Facebook wall, and MAN did she get a rage backlash.

Ah, UVic. I miss it. But not that much.

[spartanhelmet]

It's good to see varying viewpoints. I live far enough away that I have no sense of how it is myself, so every little bit gives me an idea on the atmosphere.

I've got to side with Alja on blanket policy, to be honest, and seeing as all sorts of government funding cuts happened I'm thinking some of the protestors (ie. not the loud group of kids) have reasons to be frustrated.

The same thing happened in Sydney, with small protests here and there for nature reasons - seemingly the villiage was build near a marsh or something like that. But Vancouver is different, with plenty of no2010 stuff going on.

I'm an outsider to the whole thing, so I guess there's no real reason I should have immediate interest. I do prefer peoples' rights to be retained at all times though, rather than taken for 'the greater good' or whatnot.

Matt's facepalm moment gave me a facepalm and a half. If you actually have something to say, I'm all Voltaire on you... those folks are obviously dumb hippies without a real cause, and that I can side with being banned I don't defend their right to say 'it' if that's just meaningless dribble.

[CommanderKeen]

Don't get me wrong, the protesters have every right to peaceful protest, which is completely allowed at the games still. The police are worried about people who firebomb offices, throw paint on the countdown clock and so on. It's too that point where there's a possible riot at any protest in Vancouver. Which means policing, to at least keep the peace.

[Bruze&Badder]

EDIT: +1 Master Gunner

I'm feeding people at work here in Victoria who are on training exercises for it.

[Arius]

I could have sworn there was a well thought out and clear argument here a minute ago. Involving protesters and an aquarium.

[Brad]

It was removed for being a little too impassioned.

Short version: stop being whiny, Vancouver. The Olympics are a festival of international togetherness through amateur sport. They aren't your personal soapbox to push forward your views on giving the homeless free housing or to protest the situation in Jerusalem and Palestine or to advertise your homemade orange cleanser in a big sign on your roof.

Disrupting that noble goal with your personal bullshit agendas means that politely being requested to remove your shit within 24 hours or protest in a specially sanctioned area is more than reasonable. It's more than I'd give you, and it's a hell of a lot more than the political agenda of the writer of that article would were his party in power.

The aquarium thing was that the Vancouver Aquarium's last orca, after some piece of shit protester brought all kinds of negative press on the place despite it having the best animal rights and care record of any facility on the continent meant that she got sold to Sea World. I dislike the whiny protesters that my city has in droves.

[Niveus Leo]

Contrary to most of my posts ill keep this short. The protesters are assholes/idiots and should shut up and go home. However, (and please note I am VERY conservative so I do see the other side of this) I think that freedom of speech and assembly are basic rights that no one should be able to regulate or stop. period. Unless they are legitimately breaking the law then they should be allowed to protest all they want. I know this will cause a lot of problems but it is a basic right NO ONE should be able to suspend it at all even with good reason (which I understand they have). But that's just my opinion.

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

-Evelyn Beatrice Hall (usually, wrongly, attributed to Voltaire)

[Arius]

I'm all for protesting, but only when people know what they're protesting. A lot of people protest based on hearsay and rumor.

It reminds me of when Penn and Teller had a woman go out to a green rally to have people sign a petition to outlaw dihydrogen oxide (h2o). Or when they had people sign a petition to outlaw protesting in front of national monuments, while in front of national monuments

A lot of people are quick to jump on bandwagons if the issue is explained a certain way.

[Niveus Leo]

Oh I completely agree with you, but I still think even the idiots should be allowed to. Just because we think they are insane dose not make then any less human or less eligible for free speech. I think they best thing to do in these situations is not give them any coverage or thought and completely ignore them, all they want is attention if you take that away they will disperse.

[elvor]

Yes, we'll just have to tell the reporters to not report on them.

Oh wait...

[Niveus Leo]

That's not what I am saying at all. They can report on them if they want but we have to make the choice to ignore the reports and protests and just let it happen. If we don't try and stop them and make a big deal out of it most of them will go away. Besides if we stop caring about the protests the media will lose interest because people wont want to hear about it. furthermore, most of the media coverage is of a "clash" between police and protesters if the police leave them alone (unless there breaking the law) they will get very little coverage.