This article was last updated on April 16, 2022
Canada: 
Oye! Times readers Get FREE $30 to spend on Amazon, Walmart…
USA: Oye! Times readers Get FREE $30 to spend on Amazon, Walmart…
If the Conservatives “lawful access” legislation passes, we will live in a world wherein your cell phone becomes an ankle bracelet. What a study in contradictions these Conservatives, pounding the table about “intrusive” SURVEYS, filling out a form to hold a gun, but having no issue with tracking the citizenry without any CHECKS, big brother at its worst. This legislation is one scary proposition, it dismisses the legal tenets that exist in the larger society. Apparently, when it comes to online activity, law enforcement can act with complete impunity, worse still, nobody outside of that organ has any knowledge of activity. The Conservative bill will sanction a regime which just begs for abuse, at the expense of freedom and privacy.
Everyone wants to catch pedophiles, everyone wants police to have all available tools to assist them in pursuit of criminals. However, law enforcement must also demonstrate a rationale for said pursuits, they must present a reason for a search warrant, they can’t just break into your home for example without basis. Interesting that our national embarrassment that is Vic Toews argues the need for this legislation to catch child pornographers when just two weeks ago, law enforcement were highlighting advanced techniques in carrying out one of the biggest busts in Canadian history. In other words, law enforcement can already access IP’s, locations, HONE in on criminals using technology and the LAWS already ON THE BOOKS, the system works. That the government is left to nonsensical hyperbole a testament to the shallow logic behind their bill, when confronted with reasonable questions, we receive outlandish accusation.
Whatever this legislation attempts to confront or accomplish, it fails miserably as it stamps all over individual rights and ignores the well established legal precedents in the “real world”. To set this debate up as “with law enforcement or against” does a disservice to genuine concerns, thoughtful extensions, it doesn’t incorporate the primary notion that checks and balances are the cornerstone of our entire system. Law enforcement must provide evidence or inclinations or tips or some logic to a independent arbitrator who can decide if surveillance is warranted, we can’t live in a world where people operate without “monitoring” themselves. The current state just didn’t materialize, it is a learned system, because people do abuse, people do act unethically, without a balance, the inevitable always happens, history is unequivocal in this regard.
Click HERE to read more from Steve Val.
Article viewed on Oye! Times @ www.oyetimes.com
Be the first to comment