G-20 Summit in Toronto

[poppajojo]

what a lovely group... and this one in front with a flower in his pocket. Clealry they had a message pf peace!

I know when I was a restaurant manager that many of the female staff would refuse to wear name tags a it just gave male customers a more direct way to harrass them. I'm guessing that something along the same lines may have been one of the reasons for the police removing their name tags. When standing in confrontation with a rowdy gang that is hurling insults its only human nature that you wouldnt want to be hearing your name insulted. And also as Admirlal Beez points out - it saves them from being tracked down and harrassed at their homes.

Are you trying to be funny and sarcastic or serious? Chief Blair advocates it and it's against the law.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Are you trying to be funny and sarcastic or serious? Chief Blair advocates it and it's against the law.

This is where I stand with the "Anti-cop" crowd. If there is a standing law that police must were identification tags with their names (last name?) on them as we are led to believe, and there were police during the G20 who violated this law than yes they should be investigated as to why and under what orders they did this. They should be punished if they did so on their own accord as it is in violation of the law.

 

[Coltaine79]

If I was facing an angry, violent mob, I wouldn't want my name known either. Badge # should be all anyone gets to see. The cops don't need people looking them up on Google and harrassing their families.

what a lovely group... and this one in front with a flower in his pocket. Clealry they had a message pf peace!

I know when I was a restaurant manager that many of the female staff would refuse to wear name tags a it just gave male customers a more direct way to harrass them. I'm guessing that something along the same lines may have been one of the reasons for the police removing their name tags. When standing in confrontation with a rowdy gang that is hurling insults its only human nature that you wouldnt want to be hearing your name insulted. And also as Admirlal Beez points out - it saves them from being tracked down and harrassed at their homes.

more lame justification for overly heavy-handed LEO tactics, if not outright brutality.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Are you trying to be funny and sarcastic or serious? Chief Blair advocates it and it's against the law.

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=2ce35b0b-0c2e-41ee-bda4-fa26285fba51

Well, it seems since 2006 that it's Toronto Police Services Board policy that the police wear name tags. That's not 'against the law' (I'll be happy to be proven wrong if someone can cite a statute), but unless they had received dispensation due to the anticipation G20 protestors would target them by name (not an unreasonable assumption), the TPSB may very well bring this up in their inquiry. I expect it'll be a very minor issue.

 

[poppajojo]

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=2ce35b0b-0c2e-41ee-bda4-fa26285fba51

Well, it seems since 2006 that it's Toronto Police Services Board policy that the police wear name tags. That's not 'against the law' (I'll be happy to be proven wrong if someone can cite a statute), but unless they had received dispensation due to the anticipation G20 protestors would target them by name (not an unreasonable assumption), the TPSB may very well bring this up in their inquiry. I expect it'll be a very minor issue.

Okay, it's against the Toronto Police rules. It's mandatory issued by the civilian board, and possibly punishable via misconduct. Who knows, maybe they don't actually care if their officers wear the name tags or not.

but unless they had received dispensation due to the anticipation G20 protestors would target them by name (not an unreasonable assumption),

really? Any indication from any source that it could've been optional?

 

[Admiral Beez]

Okay, it's against the Toronto Police rules. It's mandatory issued by the civilian board, and possibly punishable via misconduct. Who knows, maybe they don't actually care if their officers wear the name tags or not.



really? Any indication from any source that it could've been optional?

You said it was against the law, and was caught out making a dishonest or ignorant claim, and yet you brush it off and keep on pushing ahead. Now you say it's mandatory issued by the civilian board. Based on your track record, I don't believe you. Prove it is mandatory within the Toronto Police rules.

 

[nfitz]

Prove it is mandatory within the Toronto Police rules.

The Star reported a couple of weeks ago that "Officers have been required to wear name tags since the police services board demanded them in 2005 in a bid to make policing more transparent and accountable.".

Given all the debate in the media a few years ago about the issue, I'm surprised you'd suggest that there is no rule. I'm not sure what your ulterior motive is, but you seem to be consistently trying to white-wash the rule-breaking and beatings done by some rogue officers.

 

[Peepers]

The Star reported a couple of weeks ago that "Officers have been required to wear name tags since the police services board demanded them in 2005 in a bid to make policing more transparent and accountable.".

Given all the debate in the media a few years ago about the issue, I'm surprised you'd suggest that there is no rule. I'm not sure what your ulterior motive is, but you seem to be consistently trying to white-wash the rule-breaking and beatings done by some rogue officers.

Here is a link to the Toronto Star article referenced above : http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/834461

According to this article the rules are very clear. Officers MUST wear their name badges - this applies even for those in full riot gear. The Police Services are investigating for misconduct the G20 officers who removed their name badges. This suggests that no special dispensation was received for the G20 summit granting the officers the option to remove their name badges.

 

[nfitz]

Perhaps one of those rabid activist groups (who generally I don't agree with ... but still have the right to peacefully protest) should start releasing a weekly top 10 wanted list of photos of police officers doing wrong. The press would eat it up!

 

[Peepers]

Perhaps one of those rabid activist groups (who generally I don't agree with ... but still have the right to peacefully protest) should start releasing a weekly top 10 wanted list of photos of police officers doing wrong. The press would eat it up!

Actually the website G20justice.com is compiling a "police line-up" that can be seen here: http://www.g20justice.com/lineup.asp

So far their efforts have been all but ignored by the press which does not surprise me. Every media organization just like every political group in this country are afraid to be seen as not "supporting" the police.

 

[Peepers]

Here is a video that everyone must see. It shows a large group of Riot Police RETREATING eastward along Queen street just ahead of the advancing group of vandals as the sound of breaking glass can be heard in the background! This is further proof that an order was given to stand-down. The Police deliberately allowed the vandalism to take place on that Saturday. They allowed the lives and property of hundreds of innocent people to be put at risk!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kKg2jtjt0Y

 

[nfitz]

Here is a video that everyone must see. It shows a large group of Riot Police RETREATING eastward along Queen street just ahead of the advancing group of vandals as the sound of breaking glass can be heard in the background! This is further proof that an order was given to stand-down. The Police deliberately allowed the vandalism to take place on that Saturday. They allowed the lives and property of hundreds of innocent people to be put at risk!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kKg2jtjt0Y

Ah, you've just managed to report what the news media was reporting live almost a month ago!

 

[tkip]

Prove it is mandatory within the Toronto Police rules.

That's what I would like to know. At my work we're suppose to wear ID tags but no one including security, really follows this rule. Certainly not all the time. Could be the same for the cops.

 

[Peepers]

Ah, you've just managed to report what the news media was reporting live almost a month ago!

The media was not showing THIS video of police fleeing from the vandals a month ago or even now which is why I posted this link because people need to see how the police abandoned the city and their duties on that Saturday. What exactly is the point that you are trying to make with your dismissive remark? Is it OK with you that the police were given an order not to engage the vandals?

 

[tkip]

This post is just rife with a lack of rationality, filled with nothing but misinformation, exaggerations, assumptions and wrong stereotypes. It's hilarious that something like this could get any bit of credibility.

Actually I undertand what Fresh Start is trying to say.

It was well know in advance that the summit would attract trouble and that people were being cautioned on being downtown unless they were part of the protest and even then, it was a given that something was probably going to happen considering the history of these summits. So I and all my friends knew that it was probably better to stay away.

I actually went downtown but kept a considerable distance (several blocks) and watched for any signs of trouble so that I could get the hell out of there fast. I was aware however of the risks involved.

As for the protestors complaining about harsh treatment? Once again, allegations. And it's a detainment centre. Not a hotel room. It's not suppose to be comfortable or pleasant. Someone I know works with cops and they commented that the detainment centre and people being processed was nothing out of the ordinary. Unless you'v never been arrested and then your world comes crumbling down apparently.

Too many of those arrested and detained went down there thinking they were either untouchable or completely naive about the seriousness of the situation and there was a great deal of antagonizing towards the cops.