Ipperwash
Steve C. has some posts on this topic and I was starting to post a comment and then I realized that with the amount I was typing, I might as post on it. So here goes.
In
In many ways I believe their restrictions are a good thing. They should not be able to listen in on my phone calls unless they prove to a judge that there's a good chance I'm breaking the law. They should be required to advise me of my rights if they are going to deprive me of my freedom (i.e. put me in the clink). And as I have seen first hand, they respond with only the force needed to keep the peace and resolve violence (exceptions happen, but are rare). While it's true I don't expect our police to go about looking for a fight, it is equally true that if they have to fight, I don't expect them to lose.
With this being said, in that
I don't profess to know everything about what happened at Ipperwash. But I know cops. To get such a strong police presence meant that the natives were either armed, threatening violence or both. They were breaking laws whether they believe themselves justified or not.
Were mistakes made? Probably. Only by law enforcement? Not likely. If the protesters made peaceful demonstrations and called their elected representatives persistently for action would Mr. George still be alive? Who knows.
Kierkegaard once said that "Life can only be understood backward, but it must be lived forward."
'Nuff said.
<< Home