reply to post by DimensionalDetective
I can see both sides of this rgument. Hear me out before you light me on fire on the front lawn.
The G-20 is a summit that deals with world leaders, and as such, you will have tight security. In the video, which is in Canada, I can only offer
opinions because I am not Canadian Law Enforcement. Here in the States, any type of function that deals with the President or Vice President, or where
Federal Agencies are involved with foriegn dignataries (DSS) the site they are at becomes Federal for jurisdictional reasons (as we saw in
A security cordon is set up, and anyone who wants to get close is required to go through that cordon. If you dont wish to be searched, then you have
that right, but it means you won't be getting anymore closer than you are now. Even though sidewalks and public streets are public right of ways,
those same areas can be shut down depending on whats going on.
We have had this type of conversation with 3rd parties recording with video (and as you see they were allowed to record that encounter in Canada) who
either get to close, or somehow interfere with the situation.
There is no difference in shutting down an area for a G-20 summit and shutting down a road because of an injury accident, closing down a highway, both
sides, for 6 hours because of a fatality accident, evacuating people form their houses because of a gas main break, bomb threat, escaped gunmen /
criminal etc etc.
When you go to a public event, football game, soccer game etc at a major stadium, you as well as any bags, purses etc are subject to search as a
condition to gain entrance to that venue. Again, you can refuse the search, but you wont be getting inside either.
Here in the states your right to protest is guranteed by the 1st amendment. Where you protest is not, so long as you are in a public area and not
prohibiting the free travel by others, you are fine. The moment your actions interfere with others in a public right of way (road) then its
problematic because even yhtough your rights allow you to protest, the constitution does not allow your right to protest override another person right
to freedom of movement etc.
An event like this is an active call or function, for law enforcement participating in it. As such, they can take actions authorized under law for
them to do their jobs. The other thing to keep in mind, and this covers some of the video I have seen with G-10 / 20 summits and use of force.
Its one thing to have a one on one encounter with a cop, it go downhill, and the person runs from the cop. You would most likely have a foot pursuit,
At an event with high profile dignataries, a mass of people who are there to legitimately protest for whatever reason, you will have people who are
there to cause problems. Those people we have issues with, but they are not our concern. At an event like this, a person or group of people who
attempt to penetrate a security cordon, can be viewed as a deadly force encounter. They are refusing to abide by security cordons, lawful commands and
are doing what they can to penetrate for whatever reason.
Even if they are attempting to make a benign statement, we have to assume its intended to potentially kill people. If theyhave bags with them, we
would have to assume they are armed, have weapoins in the bag, or maybe a bomb. We dont get the ability since the people are refusing to comply, to
talk and find out if they are a threat or not.
Those groups of people are the ones who screw it up for the rest of us who are their to legitimately protest. The moment you have a challenge at a
security perimeter, the response is going to be regain control of that situation as quickly as possible. You will see the crowds be dispersed, and a
push back to create room inbetween the perimeter on out to resecure.
My question for those who have issues with what they perceive as a loss of civil liberties, please explain if you dont mind who your liberties are
taken away from you.
And I mean that question with all due respect. I am answering this from a Law Enforcement viewpoint, and am curious about your viewpoint and
edit on 21-1-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)