For When You Can't Have The Real Thing
[ start | index | login ]
start > G20 Toronto (2010)

G20 Toronto (2010)

Created by dave. Last edited by dave, 8 years and 162 days ago. Viewed 2,312 times. #1
[edit] [rdf]
labels
attachments

About the G20 Meeting In Toronto, 2010

In Toronto

I believe that holding the G20 meeting in Toronto was simultaneously a huge mistake and something that had to be done.

It was a huge mistake because there was almost a certainty that certain elements of the protest community would show up with their only goal being to provoke confrontation with the authorities, using violence if necessary. Knowing this, the police had no choice but to institute security measures such as the fence, even though such measures will be seen both as validation of the violent measures, and a provocation to such measures by the violent offenders.

I think that holding it in Toronto had to be done because we can't let a violent minority dictate what the state does. That's terrorism.

Police

I think that the police on the ground were faced with an impossible scenario.

Modern police interventionist thinking is to avoid direct confrontation with dangerous situations. This is why the riots and police car burnings were only redirected, not directly confronted with violence. Such a confrontation would be seen as justifying the violent protesters' behaviors, and could easily escalate those "on the fence" into "defending themselves from police brutality", increasing the cycle of violence.

Similarly, modern police thinking is to take control of a situation before it has the opportunity to turn into a riot. If they had grounds to believe that a protest might turn violent, the time to take control and break it up is before it does.

And similarly, modern police thinking is to take physical control of people being arrested, to not give those being arrested the opportunity to resist. Arrests are frequently not civilized affairs.

I think that the police made mistakes in who should be arrested or detained. They very probably made mistakes in deciding which situations should have been subject to intervention.

I think there should be a public inquiry into police actions that weekend, if only to understand the information available to the officers making command decisions on the ground. If command decisions were made either in the absence of information, or directly against information which suggested otherwise, those officers should be held to account.

I think that holding people for a certain amount of time and then releasing them without charges should be itself a subject of an investigation. It permits the police to harass people by confining them and then releasing them. I think every individual arrest that does not lead to charges should be investigated. I think arrests should only be made with intent to file charges.

I don't think that the 5-meter-fence-rule thing merits any concern at all. The police are permitted to lie to people they are investigating; it is up to the individual to know the law as it pertains to them. Yes, this is frankly impossible, and yes it basically means the police investigators are allowed to do anything you can't prevent them from doing. But it is solid legal precedent, and it is the way the legal system works from front to back. You are responsible for what happens to you legally, no matter how incompetent or absent your legal council is.

Protest Organizers

I believe that every organizer who failed to condemn the violence ahead of the fact (and that would be >>all of them) is partially responsible for the violence and damage that occurred. In our black-and-white media world, if you are not against something, you are for it. Especially when you are a protest organizer, as that is the attitude your protests take in their own topics.

The Peaceful Protesters

I believe that anyone who attended a G20 protest thinking it would change anything is deluded, even as I applaud their courage of convictions to speak.

I believe that anyone who attended a G20 protest, knowing ahead of time there was a possibility of violence, was acting against their own interest. There's the freedom to do things, and then there's common sense. You have the freedom to walk around clutching your money in large bundles of bills in your hands; but to do so invites others to make a target of you for criminal enterprise.

no comments | post comment
This is a collection of techical information, much of it learned the hard way. Consider it a lab book or a /info directory. I doubt much of it will be of use to anyone else.

Useful:


snipsnap.org | Copyright 2000-2002 Matthias L. Jugel and Stephan J. Schmidt