Canadian Town Outlaws Online Insults To Police and Officials 152
Pig Hogger writes: The Canadian town of Granby, Québec, just strengthened its municipal bylaw that prohibits insulting police officers and town officials by extending its "jurisdiction" to online postings. Fines range from $100 to $1,000. The town's mayor said, "In my opinion, if I threaten you via my keyboard, it's as though I am making that threat right in front of you. For me, it's the same thing." Critics worry about the implications for freedom of speech, and wonder why police and officials should get protection an average citizen does not.
Sorry (Score:2, Funny)
eh.
Re: (Score:2)
No no no .. this is Quebec ... it's oui.
Re: (Score:1)
No, no, no... this is Québec.... Fuck you, mayor of Granby.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Non non non .. this is Quebec ... it's oui.
FTFY
Not the same thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Threats and insults aren't the same thing. What a bunch of idiots, someone should nuke them.
Makes sense (Score:2, Interesting)
By nature, police officers should have a thicker skin than normal citizens when it comes to insults, and they should be trained to deal with them.
However, police officers do need extra protection against real threats.They're more likely to be a target, and they're be more vulnerable than others. And it shouldn't matter which medium is used to threaten a police officer.
Re: (Score:3)
It requires a lot of courage, and an equal amount of stupidity to insult an officer. It's like poking the bear with a stick.
I didn't need a law to know it's a bad idea to be disrespectful to an officer outside a courtroom. They already have enough power to cause you grief if you do.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Police can't normally walk away from the scene, and they are compelled to attend in the first place. That does not mean I support this law, but police injury rates are _much_ higher than most work. According to http://www.governing.com/gov-d... [governing.com], they're only surpassed by nursing care, and I can easily believe that.
Re:Makes sense (Score:4, Insightful)
police injury rates are _much_ higher than most work. According to Governing Magazine [governing.com] they're only surpassed by nursing care, and I can easily believe that.
That is not what your citation says:
Occupations recording the highest injury and illness rates include nursing and residential care facilities, police and fire personnel.
Note the weasel word "including" - there is no inherent ranking there, not even to say that the listed occupations are even at the top. The fact that they don't mention construction, which accounts for 20% of all workplace fatalities, more than any other occupation, [osha.gov] suggests that site is being sneaky to promote their own agenda.
I don't really care about the numbers, but if you do, I recommend putting in the effort to analyze the BLS data yourself. I couldn't find an easy summary with less than 2 minutes of googling so I gave up.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
police generally are NOT the most risky professions. talk to roofers and window cleaners; they have much more danger in their lives.
cops are coddled these days. the poor babies! maybe they just need MORE military gear, hmm??
Re: (Score:2)
In my suburb a lot of the homes are of the age that the roofs need replacement and I've seen many different companies installing them. You can tell a lot about the various companies by how they work. They cheap companies take every shortcut and are about doing the most number of roofs during the season. You can see the guys up on the roof as the sun is going down. I'm talking the last part of the sun is visible against the horizon. Plus none of their workers are tied up against falls. No wonder they g
Re:Makes sense (Score:4, Informative)
"Police can't normally walk away from the scene, and they are compelled to attend in the first place."
Uhhhhh - no. The police are not obligated to come to your aid. Never have been, never will be. When you call the police, they only come if it is convenient, and when they feel like it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06... [nytimes.com]
As for walking away from the scene - I'm not aware of anything that binds any individual officer to the scene. He may walk away from a confrontation at any time.
There are some pretty good discussions going on right now about such things.
http://www.policemag.com/chann... [policemag.com]
In short, a cop can decide to defuse a situation by just backing off, at any time he chooses to do so. And, in fact, some of the wiser heads in the various police forces say that they should do just that. Not always, but often.
How many stories have we read of, where some mentally deficient person was shot to death, simply because he wasn't cooperating? And - the cop feels "threatened". One of the most recent stories I remember involved a nut case who was on his own porch, and happened to have a screw driver in his hand. There was no indication that he intended to use that screwdriver as a weapon - the cop just "felt threatened" because of that dumbass 21 foot rule. Yet another dead nutcase - and no one answers for the killing.
Re: (Score:2)
Err, uhhh - - - you're right, my citations have just about nothing to do with Canada. But - we are on a mostly American site, and the conversation has done as it usually does. It eventually turns US-centric. And, I wandered down that path. I thought that I was replying to another US-centric post.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Makes sense (Score:5, Interesting)
police injury rates are _much_ higher than most work
Welp...sort of. The U.S. BLP recently published their 2013 census of fatal occupational injuries [bls.gov]. The overall fatality rate for the workforce was 3.3 fatal injuries for every 100,000 full-time-equivalent workers per year. Management employees averaged 2.4; sales 1.6--no surprises there, really.
For employees in the "protective service occupations" - police, firefighters, correctional services, animal control, security guards, and so forth - the rate was 6.9 fatalities per 100,000 FTE. (I haven't been able to find data broken out by occupation within the category. If someone can find that, that would be great.) So that's what we expect--police, firefighters, and others do have a riskier job than the average, and riskier than the typical office worker. Somewhat surprisingly, the relative risk is only a factor of three or four different when comparing a police officer to, say, an IT manager.
But...there's the rest of the table. "Intallation, maintenance, and repair" occupations? 7.2 fatalities per 100,000. "Construction and extraction"? 12.2. "Transportation and material moving"? 14.9. "Farming, fishing, and forestry"? 23.9.
The real manly men, in real danger on the job, are apparently out there working with tools, building stuff, drilling for oil, driving big rigs, and cutting down trees.
And let's be honest--a lot of the injuries and fatalities sustained by police officers aren't directly attributable to violent suspects. A big chunk of them come from the fact that the typical frontline officer spends a lot of time moving around--in a patrol car, on a motorcycle, on foot, or on a bicycle. Special laws protecting police officers from insults don't actually reduce their likelihood of being in a vehicular accident, or getting clipped by a passing car during a traffic stop, or slipping on an icy sidewalk in the winter. Looking at the last ten years' police fatalities for the United States [nleomf.org], the total number of officers killed in motor vehicle incidents (car and motorcycle crashes; hit by car) is 605. The total number of officers fatally shot, strangled, or stabbed is 553. (And I suspect that the proportion who get shot is even lower in Canada.)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps where you live, but where I live (and in most of the United States) Police have no obligation to even show up and have sovereign immunity if they don't.
Re: (Score:1)
Most on-duty police fatalities occur in single vehicle collisions (ie. the cop crashes their car into a stationary object).
Re: (Score:2)
How are police more vulnerable than others? They are issued weapons, ...
They are more "vulnerable" because they are attacked more often. Wearing a shield is like wearing a target. The likelihood of being attacked is increased.
Re: (Score:1)
What a bunch of idiots, someone should nuke them.
That will be $1000 please Monsieur. Make the cheque payable to the Granby Policemen's Benevolent Fund.
Here we go again (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Here we go again (Score:5, Interesting)
Mod parent up
One right that should be absolute is to criticise a politician for their public actions. We elect them and if we don't like what they do we must be able to say so in clear terms. This includes saying that if think they are being stupid or duplicitous.
As regards personal insults: they should have the same protections and rights of redress for ad hominem attacks as the rest of us have - no more, no less.
Re: (Score:2)
Would voting against an incumbent public official be an "insult"?
This law is a croc of shit!
Re: (Score:2)
Well there is more than that.
Complaints towards an organization are often based on a Generalization. Yes they are good cops, however there may be enough Bad Cops to make a generalization that Cops are bad, and should be avoided.
Sure if you are a good cop, this seems like an insult. But it is a generalization.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you think you're a Good Cop but don't do anything about the Bad Cops then you're a Bad Cop.
Re:Here we go again (Score:4, Informative)
Pretty much. There's a long history of Lèse-majesté [wikipedia.org] laws. It's good to be the King, at least until the peasants revolt.
Re: (Score:2)
Try this: " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L... [wikipedia.org] "
Re: (Score:2)
Suck it (Score:5, Funny)
Let me be the first to say, the officials in Granby, Québec, suck.
Re: (Score:2)
Let me be the first to say, the officials in Granby, Québec, suck.
SInce the town is in Quebec shouldn't we be insulting them in French?
Re:Suck it (Score:5, Funny)
he did insult them; he used english!
Re: (Score:2)
In that case, I shall use my outrageous [French] accent when I say to Robert Riel, deputy mayor* of Granby, Québec, "You empty-headed animal food trough wiper! I fart in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!"
* Incorrectly attributed as mayor of Granby by the submitter.
Re:Suck it (Score:4, Funny)
What a bunch of ciboired osties de tabernacs!
Re: (Score:2)
You can insult them in English but must include a French translation which has to be in a visibly larger font.
Re: (Score:2)
Some people used to think that some of them were idiots., on occasion.
With this bylaw we know for sure that all of them are assholes and idiots, all the time.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it an insult if it's true? And I doubt that you're the first to say that.
Re: (Score:2)
Regrettably, my French is not good, so I couldn't glean an appropriate email address from the town's web site:
http://www.ville.granby.qc.ca/ [granby.qc.ca]
But if I could, I would. And then the insulting emails would begin. I have no plans to visit Quebec, so screw them very much.
Plus, I don't think this stupid idea will fly. Canadian citizens are not that ignorant. They may not have a First Amendment of their own, but they get the idea.
Re: (Score:1)
They may not have a First Amendment of their own, but they get the idea.
Actually, we do have a First Amendment of our own. It's called the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms [justice.gc.ca] and mentions freedom of expression.
This municipal law is mostly gonna get challenged in court.
Why? Because police and officials are royalty. (Score:2, Insightful)
They see their existing privileges and understandably conclude that they are above the plebs.
Re:That why there are elections (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is that you're usually offered another lot of idiots to choose from...
Re: (Score:2)
Never take what is offered. If there are no good choices then write one in.
Re: (Score:2)
No one counts spoiled ballot papers, which is what altering does. If the choices are Idiot A (no) or Idiot B (also no) then spoiling the ballot paper just wasted your time so you may as well have not bothered to travel to the polling station in the first place.
This is what those "if you don't vote how can you expect to have a say" retards don't understand. There's no "None of the above" box that you can choose. Being forced to pick from undesirable choices isn't having your say. It's "you have a choice of t
Re: That why there are elections (Score:1)
That's nice for you (Score:4, Insightful)
"For me, it's the same thing". For the rest of us, it's obviously very different. Now shut up and go run your little moon.
Are politicians actually incapable of thinking? (Score:5, Insightful)
*Threats* are already crimes. Opinions are protected by freedom of speech.
Let me be the first to say that the mayor of Granby is an idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"if you don't start following the law, I'm going to report you"
there, I just made a threat and its actually quite legal.
Re: (Score:1)
What made that illegal is that you are not reporting it immediately, but give a pass this time, again. So you are aiding in breaking the law.
Re: (Score:2)
Let me be the first to say that the mayor of Granby is an idiot.
I think you missed that opportunity. Get in line and take a number.
Insults? HA! (Score:3)
Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries, eh!!!
Now go away or I shall insult you a second time... next to the picture of my cat swatting at the mail slot.
Re: (Score:1)
I have insulted your police department. Pray I do not insult it further.
So, Illegal to Insult a Council Official (Score:1)
Robert Riel, Granby Deputy Mayor, you're a waste of good oxygen and I suggest that you resign so that somebody with more brain power can take over your job. Obviously you're not fit to do the job as you don't possess the intelligence.
Now, as I'm in Germany, what are you going to do about it? Your call asshat.
Re: (Score:1)
WTF (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:WTF (Score:5, Funny)
This is muslim-like mentality - ban saying something we don't like because our feelings are more important than free speech. I wonder if this Canadian town will take this to Muslim extremes where pointing out any moral issues with the officials, or that they are ineffective in their jobs will be seen as a reason to arrest someone.
Whatever you do don't draw a cartoon of the mayor.
Re:WTF (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Honestly, it's stupidity, and trying very hard to "protect" their culture and language.
This is a province where they've tried to get companies like "Canadian Tire" and "Home Depot" to rename their companies to French because they've outlawed English signage. It's a place where they keep trying to make it illegal to have your kids educated in English.
Ironically, French speakers from almost anywhere else in the world typically can't understand WTF Quebec people are saying.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah ouin? Pour kessé tu penses qui sont pas capable de comprendre quand t-on leur parle? Parce qui parlent pas français, sti! /Sarcasm
The Office Québécois de la langue française is one of the most annoying organisation over here.
Re:WTF (Score:4, Informative)
I assume this is an honest question so here's an honest answer.
The relevant bit is:
Section 33.
(1) Parliament or the legislature of a province may expressly declare in an Act of Parliament or of the legislature, as the case may be, that the Act or a provision thereof shall operate notwithstanding a provision included in section 2 or sections 7 to 15.
(2) An Act or a provision of an Act in respect of which a declaration made under this section is in effect shall have such operation as it would have but for the provision of this Charter referred to in the declaration.
(3) A declaration made under subsection (1) shall cease to have effect five years after it comes into force or on such earlier date as may be specified in the declaration.
(4) Parliament or the legislature of a province may re-enact a declaration made under subsection (1).
(5) Subsection (3) applies in respect of a re-enactment made under subsection (4).
Contrary to popular belief it's not specific to Quebec, it can be undertaken by either the federal or provincial/territorial level by a simple majority of the applicable governing body. (note that it doesn't apply to municipalities, so is irrelevant in the particulars of this article)
It allows temporary suspension of some Charter rights for a period of time (again country to popular belief it's not a blank check, and can't be used to suspend, e.g. mobility rights, or democratic rights, and the Supreme Court has ruled its use invalid in the past.).
It was first used by the Yukon Territory in 1982, but was never brought into force.
It's also been used in Alberta (in an ill fated attempt to ban same sex marriages), Saskatchewan (to attempt to force through back to work legislation, and avoid a Charter challenge based on freedom of association), and Quebec (in the most famous instance, to allow the provinces french only sign law). There are not currently as far as I know any in-use cases of Section Thirty Three.
Min
Re: (Score:3)
Imagine if 50% of voting British citizens were proponents of Sharia law, it would not matter what laws where in place to restrict the governments power. When you have a highly organised majority of a democracy, there are not really any working legal restrictions on their p
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Quebec is a chunky voting block, so the Federal gov't won't dare poke them too vigorously.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Simple solution (Score:2)
Fuck the police. (Score:2)
Specifically, the police from Granby, Québec in Canada.
Dear Town of Granby (Score:2)
Town of Granby: you SUCK! That insulting enough for you? OK, you're all probably a bunch of pedophiles and suck your mothers' dicks! Stop trying to emulate Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, and Mao Tse Tung! Oh, and come and get me, YA TURDS! Do I sound cowed to you?
P.S. - there is no threat implied or expressed in my speech, but an insult, maybe. Earth to Granby. Nobody has a right not to be insulted. Nobody even has a right not to FEEL threatened. For all I know, the boogie man is going to get you. Or me.
Not part of Canada (Score:1)
Many in this town would claim they are not part of Canada, I'm sure the rest of the country wishes they were not (right now anyway).
Good News Everybody (Score:1)
Re: Good News Everybody (Score:2, Informative)
That's the page for the public pool dumbass.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well then...
Hey! You Granby public pool managers suck at your jobs! You wouldn't know chlorine from liquid nitrogen if you stuck your hand in it! You can't clean hard water scale worth beans!
And your cooking probably sucks, too.
Town ran by hosers.... (Score:2)
Ya hey dere, Dem hosers sure like their Hitler policies eh?
How did I know this was Quebec? (Score:2)
How did I know this was Quebec without even reading the summary?
I must be psychic!!
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry, you were insulted by that? (Score:2, Insightful)
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;
I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.
The evil that men do lives after them;
The good is oft interred with their bones;
So let it be with Caesar. The noble Brutus
Hath told you Caesar was ambitious:
If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And grievously hath Caesar answer'd it.
Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest--
For Brutus is an honourable man;
So are they all, all honourable men--
Come I to speak in Caesar's funeral.
He was my friend, faithful and just to me:
This is a reaction (Score:1)
This is a reaction to the artist whose street art put will likely put her in prison.
http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/jennifer-pawluck-convicted-of-criminal-harassment-for-image-of-montreal-cop-shot-in-head
In Canada, negative views on minorities, the government, or the police tend to be dealt with harshly. In fact, in Quebec, negative views on the French language itself are dealt with harshly (they went so far as to circumvent Canada's obviously weak free speech laws to prevent any other language
Re: (Score:1)
French and English (Score:2)
I thought it was okay as long as I posted the insult in both French and English.
Québec n'est pas la Canada (Score:2)
The culture is not "French" in the modern sense, either. Think of pre-revolutionary France, even down to the language.
logical. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I guess we know now (Score:2)
This is how you know you live in a police state.
Insulting or threatening? (Score:2)
Hey, Officials of Granby, Québec!!! (Score:2)
You guys area all a bunch of idiots!!!
Re: (Score:2)
Damn... I need to use preview...
You ARE all a bunch of idiots!!!
Now come and get me, jerkwads!
Did they outline irony and innuendo? (Score:2)
This could be fun, actually.
Selon le Loi 101 (Score:2)
Tous les insultes doivent Ãtre affichés en franÃais seulement.
All trade agreement kill a sacred cow (Score:2)
Text of the Bylaw (Score:2)
Here's the actual text of the bylaw:
And my attempt at a translation:
Re: (Score:2)
Like Jerry's kids?
Re: (Score:2)
You're obviously nucking phutts, but if I understand you correctly, then I agree with you.
Re: (Score:2)
+1 it's funny because its true