The Shotgun Blog
« The police are losing the PR battle | Main | A Summer Wine For Stampede? Check Out "The Show" »
Thursday, July 08, 2010
"Canada back cops" over G20
From Lorrie Goldstein:
76% of Canadians and 81% of GTA residents agreed “all things considered, the police did a good job during the summit”, compared with only 24% of Canadians and 19% of GTA residents who disagreed.
71% of Canadians and 70% of GTA residents agreed “police were prepared to handle the violent hooligans on Toronto streets”, compared with only 29% and 30%, respectively, who disagreed.
71% of Canadians and 74% of GTA residents agreed “the police properly balanced appropriate force and restraint, given the circumstances as they arose” compared to only 29% and 26%, respectively, who disagreed.
66% of Canadians and 71% of GTA residents agreed “the police found a good balance between protecting Summit Leaders and allowing people to voice their views on the streets” compared to only 34% and 29%, respectively, who disagreed.
Note that the survey is of "GTA residents." The Greater Toronto Area holds a population of about 5.6 million, stretching from Burlington in the west to Oshawa in the East. The City of Toronto comprises less than half the total population, and less than one-tenth of the total land area. The summit, protests and general mayhem occurred in the downtown core, itself a small area of the City of Toronto. In the lands north of Bloor, west of Bathurst and East of the Don River, the summit meant traffic delays, not riot cops.
Travelling on the 400 series highways that weekend entailed some delays - much of the Gardiner Expressway was closed - and the most notable police presence was at highway interchanges and on / off ramps. Even for those who live in the City of Toronto itself, the vast majority saw the violence of the summit weekend on television. A large number of Torontonians had simply evacuated the City altogether, either to the suburbs to stay with relatives, or to cottage country. As a result, the images fixed in most Torontonians minds are of police cruisers burning - played again and again - and not of officers dragging middle aged men with prosthetic legs across city streets. As the stories of that weekend seep out, expect those poll numbers to change.
Posted by Richard Anderson on July 8, 2010 in G20 | Permalink
Comments
Well, this news is going to
break some people's hearts..
Especially those who felt supporting
revolution would transform this world
into a more caring world with them on top
the flat black fashion set
are now marked as goofs forever
except in the GTA where black on black
is the ethnic uniform of the tragically angry
There are few things more pathetic
than a failed riot
Posted by: 419 | 2010-07-08 7:48:41 AM
But I thought the police were losing the PR battle...
Posted by: Alain | 2010-07-08 10:22:04 AM
What a sad day for all of us - especially those of us who support the rule of law!
Because when we permit any segment of the population to break the laws without consequences, we are asking for serious trouble. Even if (perhaps especially if) those permitted to break our laws without personal consequences are the very people we place our trust into to uphold the rule of law...
Posted by: Xanthippa | 2010-07-08 4:31:57 PM
Xanthippa, if only I could believe you would have been equally outraged had the cops been the picture of diplomacy and the only lawbreaking was by the protesters. But I don't think anyone here would believe that.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2010-07-08 5:32:23 PM
I do. You don't want to so you don't. That's why your words are meaningless.
Posted by: Cytotoxic | 2010-07-08 6:51:38 PM
Xanthippa/Cytotoxic, let's get one thing straight. It has yet to be proved that the cops broke the law. It cost nothing to throw out this opinion, but until or unless the courts decide it happened it remains an unproved opinion.
Posted by: Alain | 2010-07-08 7:17:10 PM
I do. You don't want to so you don't. That's why your words are meaningless.
It's not a question of want. If she is equally angry at the protesters, why no criticism for them? You seem to know her better than I; you tell me.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2010-07-08 7:18:50 PM
Having stated in the various threads that I am very much a pro rule-of-law supporter, I rather thought that this implied that I condemn the actions of all law-breakers: protesters included.
That you perceive that I need to state this explicitly is sad.
I will go further: I condemn all the actions which break the law, both by the small percentage of protesters who were actually violent as well as those individual police officers who broke the law. And, indications are, both occurred.
I will go futher yet: I also condemn the condoning of law-breaking, both by those who aided the violent thugs during the protests or who excused their actions or minimized it afterwards AND I condemn the condoning of law-breaking by those who are excusing the behaviour of police officers who also broke the law.
Sounds convoluted - my apologies. But the sentiment is genuine.
The reason I did not criticize the lawbreakers among the protesters is simple: they are thugs and their behaviour is obviously wrong - but that was not the focus of the discussions.
The reason I criticized the lawbreakers among the police officers is also simple: I WANT to be able to trust the police!
The police occupy a unique position in our society: in order to do their job, they MUST have the TRUST of ordinary citizens like we are. That is why I am so angry when I see the police behaving in ways which will undermine the ability of the public to trust them.
And that is why I think it is wrong to excuse their actions, simply because they are wearing a uniform, instead of holding them to a standard high enough to earn our trust.
Posted by: Xanthippa | 2010-07-08 8:00:29 PM
A large majority of Canadians support the actions of the police. Is this a surprise? Look at recent polling! These polls show that Canadians are increasingly moving to a right-wing tough law and order position on crime. Angus Reid has a poll showing 81% support for Harper's bill on pardons. A 2009 Angus Reid poll showed 61%-22% support for mandatory minimum sentencing. A third Angus Reid poll tested support for the death penalty in Canada, Britain, and the U.S. The poll showed that Canadians supported the death penalty for murder by 62%-29%(this was actually lower support than the levels seen in the other two countries though still a clear majority. Also interestingly, the United States where majorities supported the death penalty for rapists(62%) and kidnappers(53%)). In addition, the latest 2010 Canadian Gallup poll on the morally acceptability of certain social issues showed that Canadians find the death penalty morally acceptable by a 53%-34% margin(up several points over the previous year). These polls seem to show that Canadians want a tougher line taken with criminals. A successful libertarian party must understand this and prove that it can crackdown on violent criminals.
Posted by: Randy | 2010-07-08 8:12:12 PM
Xanthippa show us the judicial ruling that the police broke the law. You may not like how they behaved or what they did but bandying about the opinion that they broke the law is just an unproved opinion. I have read enough comments from legal experts that state no laws were broken by the police that I prefer to await a court ruling on the subject.
Posted by: Alain | 2010-07-08 9:26:16 PM
Having stated in the various threads that I am very much a pro rule-of-law supporter, I rather thought that this implied that I condemn the actions of all law-breakers: protesters included.
It is not enough to imply. Implications make sense to others only if they know everything you do. Since I’ve seen you on only a couple of threads, I don’t know you very well.
That you perceive that I need to state this explicitly is sad.
That you waited until you were backed into a corner to say it is sad. It makes it look like you said it under duress.
I will go further: I condemn all the actions which break the law, both by the small percentage of protesters who were actually violent as well as those individual police officers who broke the law. And, indications are, both occurred. I will go further yet...
And the courts will sort that out, which is what I’ve been trying to tell you. The point is, we are still far from the complete picture, which is why I will not commit to a stronger denunciation of the police at this time. You, on the other hand, leaped upon the police with imperfect and incomplete information, while remaining almost totally silent about the protesters until the point was pressed.
Sounds convoluted - my apologies. But the sentiment is genuine.
Good, I’m glad that’s clear. However, sentiment unmitigated by reflection is what led to your hasty remarks. Legal professionals don’t enjoy the luxury of such presumptions. If you’re wrong, nothing happens. If they’re wrong, lives get wrecked. So bear with them while they separate fact from fable. They won’t get it perfect, but they’ll almost certainly get it better than you just did.
The reason I did not criticize the lawbreakers among the protesters is simple: they are thugs and their behaviour is obviously wrong - but that was not the focus of the discussions.
The police actions were intended to round up those same lawbreakers. To attempt to separate the two is disingenuous.
The reason I criticized the lawbreakers among the police officers is also simple: I WANT to be able to trust the police!
YOU DO NOT YET HAVE PROOF THAT THEY BROKE THE LAW. YOU THEREFORE HAVE NOTHING YET TO CRITICIZE. Mike Brock’s detailed account of a pejorative-laden dressing-down, while unsettling, does not detail definitively illegal action by the police. Most of the rest of the allegations are coming from protesters who were detained. Even the media is largely sympathetic to the police, despite the fact that several of their members spent a night in jail. WE HAVE NO DEFINITE PROOF OF POLICE MALFEASANCE, ONLY POLICE UNPLEASANTNESS.
The police occupy a unique position in our society: in order to do their job, they MUST have the TRUST of ordinary citizens like we are. That is why I am so angry when I see the police behaving in ways which will undermine the ability of the public to trust them.
The ability of the public, or the ability of you? Because most of the public so far appears to approve of the police actions, even though half think a review is still in order, and you may count me among them. There is always room for improvement.
And that is why I think it is wrong to excuse their actions, simply because they are wearing a uniform, instead of holding them to a standard high enough to earn our trust.
You hold them to a standard higher than that to which you hold others. That’s not a workable system on a number of levels.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2010-07-08 10:51:21 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.