Bill C-30 Surveillance without a Warrant

[ulixestrojan 3757]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/video/tech-22186835/warrant-less-snooping-28294881.html

 

Legislation from the federal government would give police the power to look over your shoulder when you're online, without a warrant

[Aspen Wilde 31370]

This is really important but I don't know what to do about it. I care very much about the way our country is run, but when I examine it too closely, I'm filled with rage, despair, and not much else.

 

A lot of people are angry, but I'm not sure angry will cut it with this government.

 

Thank you for bringing this up, though. People need to know what's happening right under their noses!

[Chanel Reign 28097]

Lets just see how this plays out.

 

There has been some back-pedalling from the Opposition regarding some things that were said.

 

It's the "without a warrant" that will fail this I'm pretty sure. I'm almost positive Cdns are not willing to give up that right to privacy without reason and will stand up against this.

 

Talk about Occupy the Internet!

[curmudgeon 10469]

It's the "without a warrant" that will fail this I'm pretty sure. I'm almost positive Cdns are not willing to give up that right to privacy without reason and will stand up against this.

 

Too late. They already gave free rein to this Government which doesn't brook dissent (won't even talk to journalists who ask difficult questions) and doesn't care about privacy or citizen's rights.

[Chanel Reign 28097]

Its already started.

 

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/14/bill-c-30-protecting-children-from-internet-predators-act/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NP_Top_Stories+%28National+Post+-+Top+Stories%29&utm_content=Google+International

[Old Dog 179138]

[Jabba 18389]

This sort of reminds me of GW Bush's rant after 9/11. Thumbs firmly hooked through the belt loops, Bush announced to the world "You're either with us or against us". A more temperate Laura Bush told him to tone it down.

 

Toews is just towing the Harper "we know what is best for you" line. The government line is to brand all those in favour of personal liberty from government intrusion as a pedophile. oy.

 

 

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02...+International

From the vitriol shown in the various articles, the battle has taken a personal turn against Vic Toews. If Toew's past personal life becomes a larger liability to the government, Harper will just do a minor adjustment and rotate a minister or two and insert a different flunky.

 

It is still Harper driving the Homeland Security bus. You bet! So, if this bill passes, who's going to police the Police if personal information is up for grabs? No - you should now all assume you are a potential pedophile if you believe in personal freedoms or privacy.

 

What to do?

Write/e-mail your local MPP and demand a response to the indignity proposed by this bill.

Argue this bill infringes on the Canadian charter of rights and freedoms:

 

* Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

 

 

* Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure

 

Make clear in no uncertain terms you will publish the MPP's response in all forums available at your disposal. Make clear that you are willing to shine the clear light of disclosure on all of the private political linen. Assure them that you are only interested in the larger public interests and hunting down pedophiles that may be lurking in the House of Commons.

 

Grrrrr!

 

I therefore propose the following form letter you could address to your local MPP:

 

Dear Mr/Mrs/Ms:

 

I'm writing to you as a constituent to express concern about the proposed on-line surveillance bill.

 

I believe this bill exceeds the following articles of the Canadian charter of rights and freedoms:

 

"Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice."

" Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure."

 

This bill seeks to deprive ordinary citizens of the right of security against unreasonable search. I believe this bill mainly serves to undermine the spirit of the 1st article, but more concretely, the 2nd article of the charter. The bill is therefore unconstitutional in essence. Furthermore, as a member of your constituency, I will vigorously stand against any unilateral movement by your government to impose such measures.

 

I suggest Mr. Toews distance himself from using an inflammatory approach to winning public opinion: "With us or with the child pornographers..."

I strongly object to any kind of characterization which compares conscientious objection to this bill to moral depravity.

 

As your constituent, I ask you to stand to oppose this bill on my behalf.

 

Kind regards,

xxxxxx

[whatsup 11893]

I will say that it must be made clear to the government that search warrants must be provided. To have unscrupulous police prying into every day peoples lives is unacceptable. It could be likened to a form of voyerism by the law enforcement that do not have their morals intact. I am sure we have met a number of them in our personal lives and heard of many more through the media. They are not all above the law, nor do they all abide by the laws.

[loopie 15358]

I never understand why Canadians continually try to justify initiatives by citing that they "working" in other countries with lower standards of living, higher crime, and worse economies. Just becomes somebody else does something, doesn't mean it's working. I'm seriously waiting for some politician to say "We should try famine, it works in Somalia."

 

The UK has worst disregard for privacy of any Western nation I can think of, yet it hasn't lowered their crime rate. The British government spends millions of dollars of cameras and surveillance everywhere to no real effect. What's worse than high cost of this big brother approach is that there are endless cases in the UK of officials abusing this authority to stalk and blackmail normal citizens.

[backrubman 64800]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/video/tech-22186835/warrant-less-snooping-28294881.html

 

Legislation from the federal government would give police the power to look over your shoulder when you're online, without a warrant

 

And if it gets through Parliament and comes into full force and effect, I can't see how it will survive the inevitable court challenge (a Charter violation) but then stranger things have happened.

 

After all the Patriot Act is completely incompatible with the Constitution of the United States yet it survives (and is routinely abused) with even the President of the United States admits they arbitrarily eavesdrop on telephone calls without a warrant. And then there is Guantánamo Bay, Obama promised to close it within a year of taking office (nope, not done it yet). In fact, I don't understand why Obama hasn't been charged with the murder of Bin Laden. They admit he was unarmed and offered no resistance and on his orders he was murdered. While I admit the world is a better place without him, I don't think any thing justifies murder and we all know there are hundreds willing to and that have already taken his place.

 

So many have given their lives to protect our freedoms, surely they will turn over in their graves if this comes into effect.

 

I'm all for getting rid of kiddie porn but unfortunately only the stupid ones get caught and this Bill C-30 won't change that. Will our MPs be fooled into thinking this kind of thing is a good idea like the American politicians were? Likely.

[JoyfulC 132299]

I doubt this has a damned thing to do with child pornography, and to suggest it does is an insult to all our intelligence.

 

I think it's more likely that this government wants to keep tabs on anyone organizing to oppose any of the elite interests they serve (because they're sure in the hell not serving OUR interests). Only recently, this govt has been heard to brand those with environmental concerns and who oppose tar sands development and pipelines as "eco-extremists," "enemies of Canada" and potential terrorists.

 

They insist we'll all be better off for gouging a chunk the size of France and Germany combined out of our boreal forest, and shipping off the filthy sludge to China (via Gulf of Mexico or Northern BC), but I'm betting that while the GDP may nudge up, little prosperity will trickle down to most of us. I'm betting that we'll soon be handed extra heaping helpings of austerity.

[Jabba 18389]

Minister Toews is getting a taste of what privacy violation actually means.

His extra-marital exploits are now making national news. I guess he should have expected this type of "gutter politics" (as he calls it). Sorry Sen. MacCarthy...err, I mean Min. Toews...I feel your pain. Are you now going to label Twitter contributors as internet stalkers? What is next on your fear mongering list?

 

If our political leader's private lives' cannot stand up under scrutiny, we have to question the validity and purpose of the state. In fact, a politician's private life is good gossip fodder. Always was. They, and quite profoundly, Min. Toews, do not understand the true nature of the information/internet beast.

 

So be it - the gloves are off fellas - you had better be prepared to play the game on an even ground. Word has it, Conservative backbenchers and Opposition members are feeling the heat from their constituents and are worried. Very worried. They bloody well should be! What kind of secrets are they hiding?

 

But, MPPs are now politically hamstrung by Toews' own words: "With us or with the child pornographers..." Hmmm How many uncomfortable MPPs are now happy to be labeled as Child Pornographers?

[playtoe 201]

I had this horrible thought/feeling the other day. I was reading an article in the ottawa citizen about child pornography. Then I saw the article about this new bill. I thought to myself what if they scanned the net and saw my name next to a trigger "child porn". And now I'm labelled as a pedophile.

 

I fully appreciate that we want to get rid of criminals such as pedophiles, and protect children. In a perfect world this could be done and no one would abuse the system. All too often though it is being abused and that's why it shouldn't be allowed.

[backrubman 64800]

I doubt this has a damned thing to do with child pornography, and to suggest it does is an insult to all our intelligence.

 

If it becomes law there is no question with untethered access to all internet traffic without the need for a warrant you can't help but catch a few dumb people exchanging child pornography and then when they inevitably do they will pat themselves on the back and tell us how necessary this was saying, "see, we told you we needed this and would only use it to do good".

 

And it's also true that when you cast such a very big net you are going to catch anything, even people that are in reality innocent. But no worries there, they are all innocent until proven guilty, right? Oh, wait that's US thing, this is Canada, yeah it's the other way around, guilty until proven innocent here.

 

Here is something for everyone to keep in mind: Protect your wireless networks (with or without this law). In my neighborhood I can connect to 10 or 15 unprotected wireless networks around me. It might be wireless but all traffic is going to "look" like it came from your house :) So if I was up to no good, it's my neighbor that gets his door kicked in, his computer confiscated and gets arrested. And of course it's not just me but that guy sitting in his car a little ways down the street... what's he up to? Or with the right antenna, someone a mile or more away.

[ostirch 1668]

And while we are at it... On the subject of privacy....

 

Any traveling Canadian knows how invasive searches from Customs Canada can be. They have the right to look at your e-mails in your Blackberry/iPhone or on your labtop

 

http://www.bccla.org/privacy/privacy6-8.html

 

This is common, everyday practice and nobody raises a peep.

[backrubman 64800]

And while we are at it... On the subject of privacy....

Anybody traveling Canadian knows how invasive searches from Customs Canada can be. They have the right to look at your e-mails in your Blackberry/iPhone or on your labtop

http://www.bccla.org/privacy/privacy6-8.html

This is common, everyday practice and nobody raises peep.

 

You are so right! Having been over seas many times in the last year (and obviously having to come home, back to Canada at some point), I know they are really unwelcoming to say the least (quite an understatement actually). Surely it doesn't make citizens of other Counties feel welcome or want to come back. I always dread this even though there is nothing for them to find.

 

Many years ago (circa 1984), I did have a run in with them as they wanted to do a cavity search and I lawyer-ed up, missed my connecting flight but made them eat humble pie in the end. While I was young, daring and foolish back then, I doubt the eventual outcome would be the same today, post 9/11. In fact any hint of resistance probably gets you zapped with a tazer these days.

[Jabba 18389]

Kind of a funny news item on the CBC. There's a Twitter campaign called: "Tell Vic Toews". You may have heard of it by now... basically, people are sending Vic Twitters of their daily lives. Stuff like: Vic, my dog's gas problem has disappeared, or my fav: "Vic, I'm ovulating".

 

I don't know if he get's an email for every Twitter, but if the entire country sent him Twitter's I betcha' that would get someone's attention. :icon_lol:

[Cato 160314]

Petty, punitive, and paranoid. That's the kind of government we've got.

Dirty oil, unregistered guns, 'warning shots', loads of prisons and surveillance....

 

As a recent Globe article pointed out, the gov't gets all worked up about the alleged violation of privacy in the long-form census and the gun registry, but internet? Open season....

And who needs the census, and facts, when policy is driven by right-wing ideology?

 

Yeah, we can afford new prisons, but not pensions.

[backrubman 64800]

Petty, punitive, and paranoid. That's the kind of government we've got.

Dirty oil, unregistered guns, 'warning shots', loads of prisons and surveillance....

 

As a recent Globe article pointed out, the gov't gets all worked up about the alleged violation of privacy in the long-form census and the gun registry, but internet? Open season....

And who needs the census, and facts, when policy is driven by right-wing ideology?

 

Yeah, we can afford new prisons, but not pensions.

 

Well I feel a lot better about this since it turned in to such a fiasco and has gone viral. I was more worried at first because Canadians tend to be much more pacifist than their American cousins, so if you can sneak something like the Patriot Act into law in the US (by fear mongering) I perhaps wrongly worried that Canadians might be vulnerable to this as well. But now Public Safety Minister Vic Toews has been given a taste of his own medicine with all the gory details of his divorce having been made public (Yeah, Vic this is what it's like to have no privacy :) and of course the #TellVicEverything twitter fiasco is, well, just simply hilarious. This twitter feed is worth watching, many of the tweets have me RAFLMAO.

 

This just gets stranger by the minute; now the Honourable Minister Vic Toews has admitted to not being familiar with some portions of C-30 (hasn't read it), wow.

[Chanel Reign 28097]

I have been watching this play out like I said earlier. It has amused me to no end.

 

But right now, I am more amused with American politics. Between my news sources and social media I feel like Im viewing a medieval sitcom of religion vs state.

 

Honestly, I was never worried about C-30.

[JoyfulC 132299]

I saw an interview with Minister Toews a couple days back, and he said that currently this information is given to the police without a warrant on a voluntary basis. This law would make it mandatory. But I can't imagine any Canadian ISP not voluntarily turning over this info if they were told it was part of an investigation into child pornography.

 

However, I can see some insisting on a warrant if it appeared the police were targeting environmentalists, dissenters, or political opposition for the party currently in power.

 

He also mentioned nothing about the requirement for ISPs and cell phone providers and such to provide "backdoor" access so the police can listen in, read people's email, and see where they're going online.

 

I have been in Canada for thirty years. It was difficult at first for me to adapt to Canadian values, but these days, I'm an ardent supporter of them. (You won't catch me shopping on a Sunday. ;) ) The Harper Government's agenda seems devoid of the Canadian values I came to know and embraced. Is this the Canada we want?

[xmy556 6095]

"The legislation requires telecommunications companies to hand over customers' personal information, called basic subscriber information, to police without a court order.

 

In addition to name, address, phone number, email address and name of service provider identifier, the bill requires companies to hand over the Internet protocol address. The opposition parties and Canada's privacy commissioners say this will allow police to build detailed profiles of people, including law-abiding citizens, using their digital footprints -- without any judicial oversight.

 

The proposed bill also requires Internet service providers and cellphone companies to install equipment for real-time surveillance and creates new police powers designed to access the surveillance data. This means police can order a telecom company to preserve data for a specified period, but they must obtain a warrant to read the content."

 

 

 

Vic, did you get the idea from Person of Interest? Why not hire Mr. Finch?!!

 

[Loki318 1631]

"The legislation requires telecommunications companies to hand over customers' personal information, called basic subscriber information, to police without a court order.

 

In addition to name, address, phone number, email address and name of service provider identifier, the bill requires companies to hand over the Internet protocol address. The opposition parties and Canada's privacy commissioners say this will allow police to build detailed profiles of people, including law-abiding citizens, using their digital footprints -- without any judicial oversight.

 

The proposed bill also requires Internet service providers and cellphone companies to install equipment for real-time surveillance and creates new police powers designed to access the surveillance data. This means police can order a telecom company to preserve data for a specified period, but they must obtain a warrant to read the content."

 

 

 

Vic, did you get the idea from Person of Interest? Why not hire Mr. Finch?!!

 

 

This will not only put the price of internet access way up, it will force a LOT of small ISP's out of business that now serve smaller nich markets that the big Tell co's want nothing to do with !

 

I'm with JABBA send the letter

 

Loki318

 

Additional Comments:

Im not as legally astute as some but a small bit of reading on this bill the term communication come up right away ....

 

Will this bill make sites like this equal to the street laws "communicating for the purpose of Prostituting" ?

 

Loki318

[Chanel Reign 28097]

"The legislation requires telecommunications companies to hand over customers' personal information, called basic subscriber information, to police without a court order....

 

What gets me about this, is that even "I" have a problem getting that information from companies and it's mine! Having dealt with Bell for a rather nasty period of time, I went to the top. Mr George Cope (President and CEO of BCE) and his office did a wonderful job of cleaning up the mess. :icon_wink:

[Jabba 18389]

Cost of implementing this bill:

 

80 Million!

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/02/22/pol-lawful-access-costs.html

 

So guess what taxpayers...not only do you get it up the ass....you also get to pay for it to get it up the ass!