3 ms·

> Drug dogs are basically a override-the-law get you into jail free card, and any system that allows them as evidence of probable cause basically does not requi

by vkou 4y ago

> Drug dogs are basically a override-the-law get you into jail free card, and any system that allows them as evidence of probable cause basically does not require probable cause. Police dogs manufacturing search warrants is more of an American problem than a Canadian problem. You might have more rights on paper in the US, but in many respects, you have more of them in practice in Canada. The letter of the law matters way less than how the law is implemented in practice. Public culture, legal culture, political culture, and policing culture all play into this. The right to bear arms is enshrined in the constitution, yet there's no shortage of people who have been executed for 'reaching for an (often imaginary) gun' during a 'routine traffic stop' that, oddly enough, predominantly targets minorities...

int_19h 4y ago
The biggest problem in Canada is that whole "notwithstanding" backdoor in the Charter. And it's not even a hypothetical concern, given how it's been used in e.g. Quebec.
jonahrd 4y ago
One of the biggest problems is Canada is the assumption of country wide immunity from systemic issues because "it's worse in the States". This prevents lots of real change from happening and allows lots of really bad laws to exist.
- sekh60 4y ago
  I am Canadian, living in Canada and I really hate this. We constantly compare ourselves to the States. Why can't we compare to a country more with aspiring to? Like one of the Nordics?
  - red-iron-pine 4y ago
    Canada is bigger, way more diverse, has way more population, and is structurally, historically, and culturally similar to the US. And speaking as someone who has lived or worked in a couple of those countries: it ain't all rainbows and cupcakes. Denmark ain't exactly crazy about foreigners, plus there was just an article here about how ruthless they are with data surveillance. There isn't a huge market, jobs are tight, and "tall poppy syndrome" is a thing -- which is a problem for the HN wannabe-tech-mogul crowd. They're not the most open people -- kind, nice, polite -- but also closed off; its not easy to make friends. They're not crazy about immigrants, and there is very much a "for us, by us" mentality; high immigration in Sweden is, like in much of Europe, not popular with large segments of the population. Outside of some cultural artifacts like Rugbrod or the Copenhagen obsession with fermenting every kind of food, there isn't much you can't get in Canada. Slightly less fat, slightly better dressed, and the English was often better.
    - seanmcdirmid 4y ago
      > Denmark ain't exactly crazy about foreigners 7.5% of people in Denmark are foreign born, which isn’t as high as Canada’s 23%, but isn’t that far from the USA’s 13%.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
908B64B197 4y ago
> You might have more rights on paper in the US, but in many respects, you have more of them in practice in Canada. The letter of the law matters way less than how the law is implemented in practice. Public culture, legal culture, political culture, and policing culture all play into this. In Canada the government unilaterally suspended the constitution (because that's a thing over there?) in the 70's for mailbox bombings. It was later revealed that the feds were behind these [0]. They did it again to shut down peaceful demonstrations against covid restrictions, where the protesters setup a bouncy castle close to the parliament. So I'm not sure about having more rights "in practice". > The right to bear arms is enshrined in the constitution, yet there's no shortage of people who have been executed for 'reaching for an (often imaginary) gun' during a 'routine traffic stop' that, oddly enough, predominantly targets minorities... Well, in Canada minorities found out the hard way what happens when only the cops (and criminals) have guns [1]. Not sure either of those are better. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involving_the_Royal_Canadian_Mounted_Police#Break-ins_and_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involvin... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saskatoon_freezing_deaths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saskatoon_freezing_deaths
- vkou 4y ago
  Just three summers ago, the government spent a bit over a month, regularly gassing, brutalizing, and beating peaceful protestors in my town. And it didn't even need to unilaterally suspend the constitution to do so. It didn't seem like anyone needed to suspend the constitution to firebomb a neighbourhood in Philadelphia in 1985, either. 250 completely uninvolved people were left homeless by that. Go back a bit further in time, and discover that both countries were perfectly fine with running internment camps. It frankly doesn't matter what the law says. What matters is how it is applied in practice. PS. The constitution was suspended not for the mailbox bombings, but during the October crisis, when a cabinet minister was kidnapped and murdered by a secessionist terrorist group. You did a sleight of hand on unaware readers by portmanteauing the two events together. Also, the CORAF (the 'constitution') was only adopted in '82, a decade after the crisis.
  - 908B64B197 4y ago
JohnFen 4y ago
> You might have more rights on paper in the US, but in many respects, you have more of them in practice in Canada. Generally speaking in the US, the rights you have in practice (as opposed to on paper) are determined by how wealthy you are. Much like how we have the best health care in the world if you're wealthy, but the worst (among wealthy nations) if you aren't.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

by vkou 4y ago

int_19h 4y ago

The biggest problem in Canada is that whole "notwithstanding" backdoor in the Charter. And it's not even a hypothetical concern, given how it's been used in e.g. Quebec.

jonahrd 4y ago

One of the biggest problems is Canada is the assumption of country wide immunity from systemic issues because "it's worse in the States". This prevents lots of real change from happening and allows lots of really bad laws to exist.

sekh60 4y ago
I am Canadian, living in Canada and I really hate this. We constantly compare ourselves to the States. Why can't we compare to a country more with aspiring to? Like one of the Nordics?
- red-iron-pine 4y ago
  Canada is bigger, way more diverse, has way more population, and is structurally, historically, and culturally similar to the US. And speaking as someone who has lived or worked in a couple of those countries: it ain't all rainbows and cupcakes. Denmark ain't exactly crazy about foreigners, plus there was just an article here about how ruthless they are with data surveillance. There isn't a huge market, jobs are tight, and "tall poppy syndrome" is a thing -- which is a problem for the HN wannabe-tech-mogul crowd. They're not the most open people -- kind, nice, polite -- but also closed off; its not easy to make friends. They're not crazy about immigrants, and there is very much a "for us, by us" mentality; high immigration in Sweden is, like in much of Europe, not popular with large segments of the population. Outside of some cultural artifacts like Rugbrod or the Copenhagen obsession with fermenting every kind of food, there isn't much you can't get in Canada. Slightly less fat, slightly better dressed, and the English was often better.
  - seanmcdirmid 4y ago
    > Denmark ain't exactly crazy about foreigners 7.5% of people in Denmark are foreign born, which isn’t as high as Canada’s 23%, but isn’t that far from the USA’s 13%.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

908B64B197 4y ago

> You might have more rights on paper in the US, but in many respects, you have more of them in practice in Canada. The letter of the law matters way less than how the law is implemented in practice. Public culture, legal culture, political culture, and policing culture all play into this. In Canada the government unilaterally suspended the constitution (because that's a thing over there?) in the 70's for mailbox bombings. It was later revealed that the feds were behind these [0]. They did it again to shut down peaceful demonstrations against covid restrictions, where the protesters setup a bouncy castle close to the parliament. So I'm not sure about having more rights "in practice". > The right to bear arms is enshrined in the constitution, yet there's no shortage of people who have been executed for 'reaching for an (often imaginary) gun' during a 'routine traffic stop' that, oddly enough, predominantly targets minorities... Well, in Canada minorities found out the hard way what happens when only the cops (and criminals) have guns [1]. Not sure either of those are better. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involving_the_Royal_Canadian_Mounted_Police#Break-ins_and_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involvin... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saskatoon_freezing_deaths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saskatoon_freezing_deaths

vkou 4y ago
Just three summers ago, the government spent a bit over a month, regularly gassing, brutalizing, and beating peaceful protestors in my town. And it didn't even need to unilaterally suspend the constitution to do so. It didn't seem like anyone needed to suspend the constitution to firebomb a neighbourhood in Philadelphia in 1985, either. 250 completely uninvolved people were left homeless by that. Go back a bit further in time, and discover that both countries were perfectly fine with running internment camps. It frankly doesn't matter what the law says. What matters is how it is applied in practice. PS. The constitution was suspended not for the mailbox bombings, but during the October crisis, when a cabinet minister was kidnapped and murdered by a secessionist terrorist group. You did a sleight of hand on unaware readers by portmanteauing the two events together. Also, the CORAF (the 'constitution') was only adopted in '82, a decade after the crisis.
- 908B64B197 4y ago

JohnFen 4y ago

> You might have more rights on paper in the US, but in many respects, you have more of them in practice in Canada. Generally speaking in the US, the rights you have in practice (as opposed to on paper) are determined by how wealthy you are. Much like how we have the best health care in the world if you're wealthy, but the worst (among wealthy nations) if you aren't.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]