Canada's Changes to the Criminal Code

http://parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=5151861&File=30#2

I see nothing wrong with it. Though currently, Anon's going crazy over this.

It basically says that if you wear a mask during a riot or unlawful assembly, you can get sent to jail for up to 5 years.

Thoughts?

Again, I don't see much wrong with it, because wearing a mask during a riot IS usually used to conceal an identity and make it tougher for them to be arrested... it makes sense, really. If this law applies to peaceful protests though, then I'm stepping down.

Since you have to be doing something unlawful for the law to apply to you it's not bad.

If it was just about wearing masks in general that's would be a problem.

I could see how it could potentially be abused a little bit and it does seem a little excessive for just wearing a mask on top of things, though I'm sure the circumstances would dictate how much of the 5 years actually gets added on.

Wearing a mask during a riot IS stupid. It goes to show that you don't care enough about whatever you're rioting about to risk everything.

It's a good thing I don't riot or unlawfully assemble.

Makes sense. I seriously doubt someone wears masks on a regular basis AND stays for riots.

The only reason I can think to wear a mask during a riot is to avoid tear gas. Other than that, if you are going to commit to something, commit.

I only got one word... "Anonymous".

Wearing a mask during a riot does cause a threat since no police force can identify them and it can scare the public, but then again it could be a certain cause.

I find one thing very, very stupid... 5 years of jail??

Now come on here in Germany the jail sentences are very fair and gives the person another chance to live life because German justice system understand humans and tries be reasonable any way they can, but I guess Canada is going to a very dark and dusky road if they decide to be aggressive like the Americans.

I need to explain about that first.(up)

A mask means nothing more than concealing one's identity, or fighting for a cause under one organization as an equal. If Canada wants to change the criminal code then go ahead, it's not like they give a fuck about us people anyway.

5 years is the maxium Dollci.

This is kind of an add-on thing to someone's sentence. So it would be based on what sort of the offense they are committing that determines how severe the punishment actually is.

I think the bill is over the top. You can't just assume that wearing a mask during a protest or assembly implies that they are intending criminal activity.

There's also the issue of transparency on what the RCMP does with the photographs and footage they take of you during a protest ( yes they do that ). You don't know what they'd do with it.

On the plus side, you can only be indicted if you commit an offense while wearing a mask. But I wouldn't be surprised if the HOC rams another bill in redefining what a criminal offense is.

Reasons made for both sides of the argument are good. Personally, I'm against this law since people should be able to wear whatever they want during a protest.

[font=verdana][color=green]There's a big difference between a "protest" and a "riot". A protest is lawful and peaceful, whereas a riot is... well... a riot. During a protest, then it would be fine, as you intend no harm and are spreading a message, whereas during a riot, you are clearly concealing your identity on purpose.

5 years is heavy-handed, but again, it's the maximum. You'd probably get like 6 months to a year for a first offence, but if you have a track-record of violence and criminal activity, then that can probably go up to 3-4 years. Only serious cases would ever get the 5 year maximum. It's mainly there to deter people from doing it in the first place.

That all sounds well and good, but in the US, all forms of civil disobedience have been outlawed. Democratic means are eroded slowly, but at the end of the line, you have countries with laws like the "Patriot Act" intrusions and the new indefinite detention clause in the latest defence bill.

Fun Fact: The US Army has a regulation for mass detention of civilians, and labour drawn from said prisoners. The regulation makes intentionally vague reference to the intended prisoners. (Some say illegal immigrants, some say social activists, others use the blanket term "terrorists")

I think it's a little reasonable, but could use a tweak.
People should have the right to face coverings, such as a hijab or a transparent mask at the least.

I can see their frustration, but this is a rather silly law...