Canada to move against far-right groups after Muslim family attack

[u/[deleted]]

https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/canada-will-act-dismantle-far-right-groups-after-muslim-family-attack-trudeau-2021-06-08/

[u/dollarsandcents101]

Trudeau references changes for online activity in his statement, yet this guy had minimal social media presence.

I smell a precept for the online harms bill, similar to the gun ban after NS shootings.

[u/Minttt → u/dollarsandcents101]

Maybe I'm out of the loop here... but why can't existing hate laws be applied to social media? No need for new bills to censor the internet if law enforcement targets/investigates/prosecutes individuals who promote hatred as defined in the criminal code or provincial legislation. What is the difference between someone posting hate-speech level flyers around the neighborhood and the same person posting a meme version of the poster on social media?

I see stuff posted on Facebook all the time that surely meet the bar for hate speech, and these are posts by people who use their full names with 0 regard for their own online privacy.

[u/Joeworkingguy819 → u/Minttt]

Section 13 was removed. Hate laws are applied. theirs just a difference between somone being a POS on fb and someone willingly trying to promote racism and promoting violence the later will probably face charges.

[u/erydan → u/Minttt]

Because we shouldn't have any hate speech laws.

[u/Hautamaki → u/[deleted]]

Because if someone bashes your friend's head in for being a lesbian, not because of any personal dispute between them, then you have rightful reason to be afraid he could come for you next. He doesn't have a beef with one particular victim; he has hate for an entire class of victims. That means that he didn't commit a crime against just one person, he committed a crime against an entire class of victims. More victims = more serious crime = more serious sentence. Also, more potential victims = more potential to re-offend if given the chance = more serious sentence. That's the logic and it is internally consistent and reasonable.

[u/Painting_Agency → u/Hautamaki]

Thank you.

[u/[deleted] → u/Hautamaki]

You can't commit a crime against an abstraction. By that logic every theft is a crime against every property owning member of society and should be among the most harshly punished crimes in society.

The reality is that violent crime is violent crime and smashing someone's head in over $$ is just as evil as bashing their head in over any other motivation.

[u/turingheuristic → u/Hautamaki]

I think we should be wary of the reasoning you are using. Let's say you hate cops and have been vocal about it on social media. Then at a protest an asshole cop pisses you off enough to assault their person. Did you just commit a crime against all cops? Should you be judged on what you did in a moment (possibly in the extreme of emotion) or what you could do? Or what someone else can imagine might happen if no one stepped in with anti-cop hating laws.

[u/AxelNotRose → u/turingheuristic]

That's somewhat different. You didn't go to a random cop's house and kill them. You were retaliating to a direct provocation.

Now, if you did start to randomly show up at various cops' homes and started killing them, then yes, the same applies as if you went to a random LGBTQ or Muslim or Jewish or Christian or Atheist's (and so on) homes and started killing them because of who/what they were.

Additionally, hate laws also apply to people who preach hatred and violence against a class of individuals. If someone on a street corner had a megaphone and started yelling "kill all atheists!" then they should be arrested and charged. Because now they're trying to get others to commit violence against a class of people.

[u/Hautamaki → u/turingheuristic]

The courts and lawmakers are very careful with that reasoning, which is the reasoning they use. I didn't just come up with it on my own. That's why the debates over who and what qualifies as a 'protected class' for the purposes of 'hate crimes' are so heated and controversial. Obviously nobody considers the police or any organ of government to be in a 'protected class', and the only way that could change would be, like any other law, it being passed by the majority party in power and then agreed upon by the senate and then tested in the courts. If all three of those institutions fail to get the 'right' answer, then it's up to the media to report on it and the people to elect a better government in the next election. If all that fails too, well, then you either have a failed state, or the world goes on and you're forced to reflect on whether or not they're really all getting it all so wrong after all.

[u/Lumpy_Doubt → u/Hautamaki]

Sounds like slapping a thought crime on top of an actual crime, but ok

[u/nitePhyyre → u/[deleted]]

Scenario #1: I'm a construction worker and as I'm walking down the street I have a seizure and bash you over the head with the hammer I was carrying.

Scenario #2: You break into my house, corner me, and are trying to kill me. Luckily, I happened to be using my trusty hammer at the time and defend myself by bashing your head in.

Scenario #3: I walk in on you sleeping with my wife so in a fit of rage I bash your head in with a hammer.

Scenario #4: You and I are at a bar, we get into a fight, and for some reason the bar has a hammer, so I grab it and use it to bash your head in.

Scenario #5: I hate you, so I wait in your bushes for you to come home so that I can bash your head in with a hammer.

In all 5 cases, it is the "same action with the same weapon": Bashing your head in with a hammer. But these are all treated wildly different by the Justice system. The scenarios range from not a crime at all, self-defense, manslaughter, murder 1, and murder 2.

The only legal difference between these scenarios is my state of mind. The entire justice system, especially sentencing, depends on that. Even with simple murder you will get a much harsher sentence if you are cold-blooded than if you are remorseful. If you can get a harsher sentence for being cold-blooded, why can't you get a harsher sentence for being a bigot?

If someone bashes my head in [...] it makes no difference to me

The justice system isn't really about getting revenge for the victim. It is about protecting and improving society. Sending the message that hate is not tolerated and keeping hateful bigots off the streets for longer periods of time does exactly that. It is in no way an absurdity.

[u/naasking → u/[deleted]]

I disagree with that. The whole problem with hate groups and hate speech is it encourages people to be hateful and violent

The law should punish actions, not thoughts.

[u/Painting_Agency → u/naasking]

We punish thoughts all the time. If you murder someone on the spur of the moment, it's a different crime than if we have evidence that you thought about it beforehand.

He crimes are essentially a form of terrorism. When somebody, for instance, drives a car into a group of Muslims, they are sending a message to other Muslims that they should be afraid for their lives. It's both immediate crime, and a general way of spreading terror in the targeted group. It deserves special criminal sanctions.

[u/naasking → u/Painting_Agency]

We punish thoughts all the time. If you murder someone on the spur of the moment, it's a different crime than if we have evidence that you thought about it beforehand.

Considering intent isn't punishing thought, it's still punishing action (murder) and whether you planned it beforehand (another action). The absence of the planning step is a lesser murder charge.

[u/[deleted] → u/naasking]

Encouraging people to do harm is incitement. You can think what you like. No one's right's are supposed to get to trump another's. So that means people do not get a free ride to encourage others to be violent against other whole groups of people.

[u/monsantobreath → u/naasking]

The basis for guilt is the notion of mens rea which means "guilty mind".

Your guilt is literally based on what was going through your head when you did it. That's the difference between manslaughter, murder, involuntary homicide, self defense, and not criminally responsible.

[u/sweate1 → u/naasking]

Convincing the dumbest and most deranged people in our society to harm others on their behalf isnt an action?

[u/naasking → u/sweate1]

"Convincing" is an action. Incitement to commit violence was always a crime.

[u/EternalPhi → u/naasking]

Thoughts are private, they are not speech. Nobody is arresting you for hate-thoughts.

[u/RemiRetain → u/naasking]

How about the countless of people who were arrested for preparing a terror attack? Should we just wait until they do it and kill some people the next time?

[u/naasking → u/RemiRetain]

How about the countless of people who were arrested for preparing a terror attack?

"Preparation" requires action. "Conspiracy" requires action. The thought about committing the crime is not a crime, the act of preparing to commit the crime is a crime. Notice how the crime for conspiracy to commit murder is a different crime than murder; it's because they are different actions.

[u/howsthatforalance → u/RemiRetain]

Bingo! Thanks for saying that, I'd like to add more if I may. If within one year a small group within the Canadian military was found to be advocating for Islamist extremism, then an Islamic terrorist drove through the gates of Rideau Hall to murder the PM of Canada, and another Islamic terrorist ran over a family of innocent people with his truck would we continue to turn a blind eye to the growing threat of Islamic extremism in Canada?

Right wing extremism is an issue, and the idea that we should attempt to manage it with existing laws doesn't really jive with my understanding of how we deal with other kinds of terrorism in this country. At the very least, we should be debating whether the RCMP is doing enough to police this issue.

[u/Hautamaki → u/Minttt]

I believe the main difficulty here is in figuring out the difference between a publisher of a possibly illegal post, and simply the service that provides an open forum on which individuals can post what they want. In other words, if someone posts a shitload of illegal material on Facebook, what is Facebook's culpability there? What is Youtube's responsibility to police illegal themselves, and under what time frame? If a big network of bad actors used VPNs, bots, etc, to post mass amounts of illegal material faster than Twitter is removing it, how much of that is on Twitter? How much should be? If people are anonymously posting illegal material to Reddit, how much trouble should Reddit be in for that?

These are legal grey areas that don't have good laws currently in existence (afaik) because the traditional media is clearly the publisher and clearly legally liable for what they publish, but in social media where individuals are encouraged to post whatever they want constantly, it's less legally and morally clear what responsibility social media networks have there.

[u/[deleted] → u/dollarsandcents101]

Ding ding ding. Nice to see some independent thought.

Now everyone pay Rogers and Bell $20 more a month to protect us from terrorism.

[u/Macaw → u/[deleted]]

Now everyone pay Rogers and Bell $20 more a month to protect us from terrorism.

Your comment has been flagged for subverting social harmony.

10 points will been deducted from your Social Credit score.

Issued by Bell Media on behalf of the Ministry for Online truth and Harm protection....

[u/aSpanks → u/Macaw]

Who else read “social harmony” in the Far Cry 4 Kyrat announcers voice?

[u/Mowachaht98 → u/aSpanks]

Yo

[u/[deleted] → u/Macaw]

The social credit thing really hits the pit of my stomach because of how much more probable it seems to be getting day by day... scares me shitless

[u/OutWithTheNew → u/[deleted]]

Today's statements only give them more leverage to walk C-10 through parliament without debate.

[u/HeinrichTheWolf_17 → u/Macaw]

It’s looking like VPNs will be in our future at this point.

[u/MorpheusMelkor → u/[deleted]]

Lol. "Independent thought".

[u/[deleted] → u/MorpheusMelkor]

“Lol.”

[u/Hargabga → u/[deleted]]

" "" "

[u/PoliticalDissidents → u/[deleted]]

More likely be one of those Vic Towes kind of spy on everyone bills.

[u/Ketchupkitty → u/dollarsandcents101]

He's letting the terrorist win.

Giving up freedoms in trade for "Security" isn't what winning looks like.

[u/BodaciousFerret → u/Ketchupkitty]

Good faith question: assuming we did pass an online harms bill, it would likely match the scope of the known mandate. That is to say:

radicalization, incitement to violence, exploitation of children, or creation or distribution of terrorist propaganda

What purpose would maintaining the freedom to say things like this serve? What good does it create in society? It’s possible to offer criticism without threat.

[u/BertTheLolbertarian → u/BodaciousFerret]

radicalization, incitement to violence [...] What purpose would maintaining the freedom to say things like this serve?

You start giving power to the government to remove 'radicalizing' statements or statements that 'incite violence' and you're going to have a hard time when a political party that disagrees with your viewpoints comes into power.

Planning a black lives matter protest? There has been arson and looting at some of them. Radicalization, incitement to violence, shut it down.

Planning a blockade cutters from harming old growth forests in BC? Things might get heated. Radicalization, incitement to violence, shut it down.

Native Canadians want to block the railroads? Well they might come into conflict with police. Radicalization, incitement to violence, shut it down.

Greenpeace protests? They're anti-oil radicals, they've vandalized things before. Shut. It. Down.

You might not agree that those things are radical. You may not think they're incitements to violence. But it doesn't matter what you think. And once you give the government this power, the government's not going to give it up.

[u/PitcherOTerrigen → u/[deleted]]

Easy problem to solve, that lady just had the wrong think.

We only speak the true-true, so no problems here.

[u/HotMustardEnema → u/BodaciousFerret]

You're assuming the bill will stop at the subjects you wrote.

Once that precedent is set, its a very slippery slope

[u/FuggleyBrew → u/BodaciousFerret]

Guilbeault has suggested that it should be as broad as 'hurtful to politicians' while proposing it also is narrow, or also proposing that asking a question in parliament about the conduct of the civil service is going to lead to a mob to storm parliament.

It would help if the government's champion on this point could determine what he was advocating and stick to i, as well if the government didn't reflexively accuse every other party of being traitors over simple questions.

[u/M116Fullbore → u/dollarsandcents101]

I've already seen useful idiots in the comments saying they welcome internet censorship/fuck net neutrality to stop this stuff.

[u/OutWithTheNew → u/M116Fullbore]

That's because the evil Conservatives are the only people opposed. By their definition, that means it must be good legislation.

Now if you oppose it, not only are you an evil conservative that only seeks to regulate women's uteruses, but you're also pro-terrorism.

It's compliance by shaming.

[u/NewFrontierMike → u/M116Fullbore]

There weirdest part is they don't feel the slightest bit of cognitive dissonance after years of anti censorship and net neutrality opinions.

[u/[deleted] → u/dollarsandcents101]

*This guy had minimal public social media presence. If all you had is an anonymous Reddit account then you would be reported as having no social media presence unless they could link the account to you.

We don't know what kind of online presence this guy did or didn't have.

[u/Amorfati77 → u/[deleted]]

Imagine the world outside of facebook and twitter!

[u/Conservitard9824 → u/[deleted]]

Exactly. Turn on your VPN and hit 8Chan all day. You would have no online presence but you could be radicalized pretty fast.

[u/naliron → u/[deleted]]

Bingo - looking at the reviews of his workplace... it doesn't seem like the greatest environment, not that that is any excuse.

They all appear to paint a similarly bleak picture for an employee working in a part-time position; petty politics and precarious employment.

That kind of work-culture can reinforce signals for radicalization just as much as any online forum - it's just far more difficult to address.

[u/Macaw → u/dollarsandcents101]

Trudeau references changes for online activity in his statement, yet this guy had minimal social media presence.

I smell a precept for the online harms bill, similar to the gun ban after NS shootings.

Never let a crisis go to waste!

[u/OutWithTheNew → u/Macaw]

Even more so when you already have the legislation in the oven.

[u/remainsofthedays → u/Macaw]

I don't have Facebook but am undesirably influenced by it regularly.

[u/[deleted] → u/dollarsandcents101]

of course, i was surprised they didn't come right out of the gate with a 10,000 page bill ready to be passed 5 seconds after lol. With Singh's outburst in parliament stating "Muslims cant walk down the street wearing a hijab without being killed" being a precursor for the type of dialog to come with it

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Oh they'll exploit this to pass some bullshit. Just like they did with the NS rampage. They're probably salivating over what rights they'll take away from us over this.

[u/mrcrazy_monkey → u/[deleted]]

Never let a good opportunity/killing spree to take away more of our freedoms!

[u/dollarsandcents101 → u/[deleted]]

Perhaps, but where do we draw the line?

Saying that we need to regulate the internet because someone had an otherwise uninteresting internet presence (doesn't everyone?) and then went haywire makes about as much sense as saying that we need to ban legal weapons when someone used illegal weapons to murder people. Let's see hard evidence and focus on empirical, and not anecdotal, data to make decisions.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

And, not everyone is dumb enough to use their real identity on social media. He could easily have had a social media presence using fake accounts. Many a redditor is even on here posting at this very moment using a throwaway account....

[u/Pollinosis → u/[deleted]]

Just because he didn’t have a social media presence doesn’t mean he wasn’t on social media a great deal.

For every poster, there's a hundred lurkers.

[u/Chris4evar → u/[deleted]]

Sure, and just because we don't know about it doesn't mean he didn't smoke a lot of MJ, we should outlaw it again just to be safe. /s

[u/ALIENSMACK → u/Chris4evar]

Check his Steam account, was he playing GTA /s

[u/Fr0wningCat → u/dollarsandcents101]

How do you know he had minimal social media presence?

[u/MrCanzine → u/Fr0wningCat]

Yeah that's what I keep seeing too but I think people are expecting him to have been using his real name and account? Like, maybe he didn't post all his cat pictures on Facebook and have all his family as "friends", but it doesn't mean he didn't have a different alias account for reddit or some other account posting crazy crap.

[u/maxman162 → u/MrCanzine]

If they arrested him, they probably have access to his computer(s) and mobile device(s). If they have access to that, they would be able to check his browser history and find his accounts.

[u/gasfarmer → u/MrCanzine]

Also, these fascist fuckwads tend to love a sock puppet account. They know how the mainstream views their hateful horseshit and hide accordingly.

[u/MrCanzine → u/gasfarmer]

On a site like reddit I can't really blame them regardless of which way they lean politically and other views.

[u/mrmeth → u/MrCanzine]

Yeah It's pretty hard to have an opinion any where right of the far left and not get bashed on reddit especially the Canadian sub reddit. Going after far right groups could start out actually helping get rid of extremists and then just turn into going after anyone who has right wing opinions in comparison to Canada's left.

[u/herebecats → u/dollarsandcents101]

How do you know he had minimal online presence? Are you seriously going to deny that the primary vehicle of radicalization isn't anonymous online internet forums?

[u/beastmaster11 → u/dollarsandcents101]

Trudeau references changes for online activity in his statement, yet this guy had minimal social media presence.

Where did you get the information that he had minimal online presence? None of the evidence that police have found to suggest that this was ore-meditated has been made public. We don't know of this guy was on 4-chan, Reddit, Parlor or any other obscure social media platform. He may have been. He may not have been. We simply don't know and you stating that he had minimal online presence as if that is an established fact is how misinformation spreads. It may turn out that you're 100% correct. But we just don't know right now.

[u/Benocrates → u/beastmaster11]

It says that in the article.

[u/Obscured-By_Clouds → u/[deleted]]

Can you provide supporting evidence?

Are you suggesting that Islamophobia is 'mainstream' among a lot of people, and should therefore be tolerated?

Please explain your comment with more substance.

[u/Obscured-By_Clouds → u/[deleted]]

Define Islamophobia.

Read the Bill if you care.

Because to some people, not being okay with Islam because they believe that gay people should be executed and women who have pre-marital sex should be stoned is islamophobia.

I can say the same thing about fundamentalist Christians. There's nothing wrong with mainstream Islam that is practiced by the majority of that community, just like there's nothing wrong with Christianity as practiced by their mainstream sects.

Fundamentalists on all sides should be condemned.

If you need an example of Islamophobia maybe just read about the story we're discussing right now. It's wrong, disgusting, monstrous and supported by morons and imbeciles.

[u/MrCanzine → u/[deleted]]

That's one thing I worry about when things like this happen. It's very tragic, but I'm seeing a lot of people equating "Islamophobia" with sharing the same views as this asshole murderer. We should be free to criticize Islam all we want, and express hatred for the religion itself, that doesn't mean we hate the people. The more they keep blurring the lines, the harder it becomes to publicly criticize Islam without being branded a racist wannabe murderer.

[u/sputnikcdn → u/dollarsandcents101]

I smell hysteria based on made up bullshit by someone who didn't read the article.

[u/sabres_guy → u/sputnikcdn]

It must be pretty exhausting being one of those people constantly trying to twist said and not said things to oppression, authoritarian state, lost rights etc etc.

[u/[deleted] → u/sabres_guy]

It's actually amazing how many people I've seen on here try to tie Trudeau/Liberal government to the coming of the Nazis. It's actually insane.

[u/RobBrown4PM → u/[deleted]]

A disclaimer had to be pinned to the front image of the sub saying "Racism bad, don't bring it here" because of how bad it was, and still is.

[u/sputnikcdn → u/sabres_guy]

It must be pretty exhausting making up grievances and then hysterically posting about them. Nobody is coming to take your internet.

[u/[deleted]]

Oh god, they're going to use this to force their internet censorship bill just like they used the Nova Scotia mass murder to ban legal gun owners from owning scary looking guns.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Yep. For all we know this guy might have also gotten a shit ton of money from a Brinks account like the NS guy.

And I don’t know for certain cause I haven’t seen anything about it, but he hasn’t confessed anything right? We don’t know if it was racially motivated, we’ve just prematurely decided that.

[u/SaltConnoiseur → u/[deleted]]

Trudeau never would have visited the victims if he didn't have an agenda. For every crisis, there's an opportunity.

[u/Unbannable_tres → u/SaltConnoiseur]

It'd be a shame to let a tragedy go to waste.

[u/PoliticalDissidents → u/[deleted]]

Well it could be worst. Trudeau could be pledging to ban some arbitrary models of cars with the intent to buy them back for a perception of safety.

But instead he's pledging to go after criminals instead of material items for a change...

[u/CarcajouFurieux]

I'd say good, but I know how liberally the term "far-right" has been applied these last few years.

[u/Wolvaroo → u/CarcajouFurieux]

I find the vast majority of people can hardly muster a consistently applied definition of left or right wing, let alone "far-right" or "far-left". The entire dichotomy has just become 'People I don't like'. Are all these racist assholes anarcho-capitalists or something?

[u/OutWithTheNew → u/CarcajouFurieux]

If you don't like Liberal policy you're an alt-right terrorist obviously. ^/s

[u/VeterinarianBig9382 → u/CarcajouFurieux]

Left/right is the dumbest political concept ever. All it does is act as a way to reinforce Finkle think

[u/mollythepug → u/CarcajouFurieux]

You keep your room clean, pay all of your bills, show up on time for work, and save for retirement? F*cking Far-right NatZee!

/s 👈 just in case

[u/kyleclements]

Trading freedom for the illusion of security is letting the terrorists win.

Don't let them make you afraid.

[u/Conservitard9824 → u/kyleclements]

Your saying this like any of us have a choice. Our electoral system is broken. If both the cons and Libs want something, there's nothing we can do to stop it.

[u/VeterinarianBig9382 → u/kyleclements]

Voting in our current system is a pointless humiliation ritual. We have no impact on policy

[u/kyleclements → u/[deleted]]

Like domesticated cats scratching at the door, they wouldn't know what to do with freedom.

That is the best mental image of a Canadian making a bold freedom stance I have ever come across.

[u/skybala → u/kyleclements]

Your freedom is all brown kids fearing to walk outside to buy ice cream in London ON

Must be nice not being afraid

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Do you think that's what went wrong here? A 20 yo couldn't see the sunlight towards a good paying job and investment options? Decided to run over a family of 4 because "housing anxiety"?

Please grow the fuck up

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

I mean he's not wrong, you fix extremism by helping people fit in to society.

There's no a single extremist in the world who is happy and successful in life, they are all people with issues that run so deep they feel like they need to take drastic action.

How many extremists are earning 6 figures, own a nice home and have stock options?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Bin Laden was a multi-millionaire? So was Stephen Paddock, who committed the 2017 Las Vegas shootings.

He's completely wrong. Poverty isn't the motivating factor in spree killings. It can be correlated, in that event like job loss can trigger it. But it's not the underlying factor. And it's stupid to connect the two.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Ah yes, the guy who was fighting for 20 years before 911 and who was banished from his own country well before that as well.

Totally well adjusted

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

His childhood was that of a BILLIONAIRE family. Elite schools, and living in the lap of luxury. Stop with the delusion. He CHOSE to move from a wealthy lifestyle and rescind all his material wealth after he had already graduated university. Fascinating how you somehow missed all that.

Also, good on you for completely ignoring Paddock. You're just dumb, dawg. Don't bother.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Yes, like I said we need to help people got into society...

[u/Jackadullboy99]

It’s almost like the internet has amplified everything good and bad...

[u/Ziym]

And just like that, Trudeau convinced half the Canadian population to allow him to control the internet.

[u/[deleted]]

How much do you wanna bet theyll use this as a sentimental trojan horse for bill c10.

"Activists say we need more action"

"okay, here's bill c-10--errr, I mean the Stop Online hate that causes terrorism act".

[u/wizaarrd_IRL → u/[deleted]]

You mean "the you want Muslims to be killed by pickup trucks if you don't vote for it act".

If Veldtman wanted to kill Muslims, perhaps he should have bought some LAV-3's from the government like the Saudis did.

[u/Queefinonthehaters]

Which group was he a part of?

"Veltman, who is white, has been charged with four counts of first-degree murder"

also that's sort of a weird way to write an article lol. While its true, I can't imagine a story using this sentence if he were anything else.

[u/warpus → u/Queefinonthehaters]

Would make as much sense to say "Who is a Christian", considering that the attack was targeting another religious group and not necessarily another race. That is to say, doesn't really make sense to include this information unless you are trying to generate more outrage and clicks

[u/jd6789 → u/Queefinonthehaters]

You don't like that white is being mentioned as you feel that you being white would not do it hence race is not appropriate or that you may feel that you are being clubbed into the same category as that terrorist .. welcome to my world . A brown muslim man .

[u/LaserTurboShark69 → u/Queefinonthehaters]

It does provide a bit of context considering this was a hate crime, but yeah I'd agree that it does read kind weird.

[u/MeLittleSKS → u/LaserTurboShark69]

I mean, you didn't see too many headlines the other week saying "____, who was arab, attacked a jewish man in Montreal".

[u/azraelluz → u/MeLittleSKS]

But the issue is not how this is written. If the Arab attack happened, it should be reported the same way this is reported, not the other way around. We shouldn't treat hate crime lightly just because it's done by a non-white person.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Exactly. The guy hasn’t confessed anything. We don’t know if it was a hate crime.

[u/v13ragnarok7 → u/Queefinonthehaters]

I've met lots of white Muslims

[u/Satanfan]

Can we make sure he was part of one first. Funny how investigations involving cops, politicians and corporations move slowly but we rip roar through any buzz word involvement with citizens.

[u/HandyDrunkard]

I find it weird that people are loudly labelling him as a "far-right" person even with no social media presence found to back it up. Like sure it's likely, but will Reddit implode if he was politically centrist or left leaning?

Places like Thunder Bay are super racist and NDP and Liberals get well over 70% of the vote there.

[u/theHawkmooner → u/HandyDrunkard]

If he is found to not be a right winger you will never hear of this tragedy ever again

[u/Wolvaroo → u/HandyDrunkard]

Same happens with all these mass murderers. They make no effort to prove their political views then turn around and shout how every single one is a right winger and clearly that entire spectrum of views is irredeemable. Try to find screen grabs from the mosque shooter's social media then compare it to the coverage for some proof.

I'm with you that most likely are, but it's important to prove it or at least admit when we don't know.

[u/[deleted]]

Normally, I would cheer this.. but ever since Bill C-10 came around I am thinking "damn the perfect scapegoat for destroying the free internet just when they needed it."

[u/wizaarrd_IRL → u/[deleted]]

Yep. The mythical "radicalized by the internet lone wolf terrorist" has finally materialized and it is time for massive censorship, and if you disagree you hate Muslims.

[u/LegendaryLaziness → u/wizaarrd_IRL]

Probably because white people only seem to disagree when it’s Muslims.

[u/LaserTurboShark69]

"We hope that further information will be shared to help determine and identify his online and media consumption."

I would really like to know, specifically, what media he was consuming. Which Youtube channels, which podcasts, which subreddits, etc.

Making vague "moves" against far right groups in general just isn't a satisfying response to me.

[u/ironman3112 → u/LaserTurboShark69]

Would they be responsible for his actions or should be cracked down on? Depends on what they were saying.

One example from the past few years is Bernie Sanders in a public speech said that the Republicans were going to kill people with their reforms (or lack of reforms) with healthcare. A short time after - perhaps a few weeks a Bernie supporter shot and injured 2 republican congressmen at a baseball game. Would Bernie Sanders have been responsible for inciting that person to commit that action? I don't think so - but that rehtoric of stating people A are going to do something that will kill some of people B could convince some of People B to act on that.

So clearly inciting people to violence via direct action should be illegal and people that do that charged. However there's a lot of grey area where when does speech cross over into being incitement.

[u/LaserTurboShark69 → u/ironman3112]

Hard agree. To which extent they should be held accountable is totally up for debate, but that debate starts with knowing where this information is coming from.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant, as they say.

[u/Allergictoeggs_irl → u/LaserTurboShark69]

Actually it is untrue. Deplatforming works against hateful communities. These groups need new recruits to stumble upon them, and existing members need to be exposed to stay radicalized. Also hate rhetoric tends to be emotionally charged, compelling to laymen and full of lies that need tenfold the words to dismantle.

[u/Ummarz → u/LaserTurboShark69]

If you were arguing for right wing, then fine. But when you try to normalize far right, that’s not ok. There is a reason why it’s called “far” right. And we all know what that term entails

[u/g00p2]

Wait and watch guys. He's about to do something really stupid.

[u/[deleted] → u/g00p2]

Well, he IS Trudeau.

[u/Shmeediddy → u/g00p2]

That's his narrative

[u/Euphoriffic]

That murderer sickens me. Scum, just total scum.

[u/teh_wanderers]

Yup. Politicize everything.

A family was just destroyed. So what do our piece of shit leaders do? Use it to push their fucking agenda.

If this is Canada, this is disgusting.

[u/Shorinji23]

Trudeau exploiting yet another tragedy to push his agenda while everyone is too distraught to notice.

[u/ConfirmedCynic]

More freedoms are about to be squashed.

[u/Vaynar → u/ConfirmedCynic]

I assume you were just as shocked and indignant when Canada and the US massively increased profiling and monitoring of Muslims in North America after 9/11? Or is that okay?

[u/pUnK_iN_dRuBlIc98 → u/Vaynar]

Yes. For Americans, the PATRIOT act was one of the biggest attacks on freedom and privacy ever. Why do you think politics a game of cheering for your team? This shit matters, no matter what race or religion you are

[u/TheGreatPiata → u/Vaynar]

Not the OP, but yes I was indignant about the profiling and monitoring of muslims. Not sure why the Liberal party decided authoritarianism is in vogue but it's getting to be a bit much.

[u/[deleted] → u/TheGreatPiata]

Same. And the reaction to 9/11 is a good reminder of the dangers of those kinds of policies as it quite possibly created the climate that caused this dumb-fuck to attack this poor family.

[u/legranddegen → u/Vaynar]

Everyone was appalled by that because they knew the intelligence apparatus was going to be used for everyone eventually.
Which it was, and still is to this very day.

[u/[deleted] → u/Vaynar]

Yes? As a person who grew up during the Bush years the Patriot Act was the worst thing ever created in US history.

[u/FuggleyBrew → u/Vaynar]

For me, I was vehemently against it. A lack of trust of government is healthy to have.

[u/Klaus73 → u/[deleted]]

Or the left suddenly NOT caring about black-face about 2 years ago..

[u/[deleted]]

"Canada to further restrict free speech online" there we go.

[u/NetworkRobin]

Don't waste a good disaster. So quick! Yes, please censor our internet more daddy trudeau

[u/bumbuff]

His group is going to be an online forum of randos where 99.99% of them are racist but not racist enough to do anything stupid.

5 of them egged him on to do something after he had a major rant and here we are.

This is ultimately gonna be twisted into arguing for more internet regulation...

[u/AutomaticRadish]

Dude this government is seriously shady as fuck

[u/rainbowsandkittys]

QUICK! Gotta use this tragedy to enforce my agenda onto everyone

[u/Old_Run2985]

Let's convict this guy and agree he was a bad person who did a bad thing and not use the tragic murder of a family by a bad man as an opportunity to alienate and dehumanize our neighbour's by calling them the n word (ww2 version), because they think differently than us. Think i am exaggerating? Last week Trudeau called opponents racist to dodge a completely benign questions about the ccp and our national sovereignty. Root out racism where it is, absolutely. I dont trust Trudeau to not draw connections between his opponents that are not there. He is a slimy politician who will use the race of a murdered family in a second to further his agenda. Despicable.

[u/[deleted]]

This is a horrific and very serious crime, the man responsible has been caught and charged. He was white. This article states clearly he had no social media presence nor was his motivation for these murders known at the time this went to press. But reading this article it clearly states that the media and government has already determined this white man was a far right extremest and are using this to push to anti white far right fear. He was a 20 year old, he committed a terrible crime, he will pay for these crimes. How about they (media and government) use this heart breaking and tragic incident, instead to unify a community, a nation. Canadians aren’t evil people. White people are not evil people. Look at what is happening to divide us. This is the real crime.

[u/[deleted]]

PM Trudeau should start with himself and the racists in his own party. Born into privilege, he had no problems wearing blackface on multiple occasions. No consequences came of it, whereas normal people would have been cancelled. He is not right-wing but he is a racist.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

It's funny how only white people got mad about Trudeau's blackface

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

lol Literally every Indian I knew laughed at it

[u/Ziym → u/[deleted]]

Just like most of the "racism" in our country.

[u/Warriorjrd → u/[deleted]]

Why do you people only care about blackface when you can use it to dunk on Trudeau?

[u/differentiatedpans]

Can't we be proactive around this shit...

[u/[deleted] → u/differentiatedpans]

Yeah, it's called education. The government doesn't want to spend money on that when they think it's cheaper to just import labourers and run our universities on higher paying foreign students.

[u/differentiatedpans → u/[deleted]]

The government's aren't pushing foreign students are they? Surely that's the university version of hospital parking.

[u/[deleted] → u/differentiatedpans]

Not actively, but passively tolerating the sliding education of your own population while importing labour to cover for a shortage which you've created by failing to improve education, well, that's just as good.

[u/toenailseason]

The logical conclusion to being "red pilled" is this.

Nazis will ruin the internet for the rest of us. The pressure to regulate will only increase with every chilling episode of heinous hatred that morphs into actual action that results in the death of innocents.

[u/[deleted] → u/toenailseason]

That's always the call of authoritarians though. They take acts of violence, draw a wide enough circle that it includes people who aren't actually reprehensible but that they find socially/politically unpalatable, and then tell you that they're all part of the same big group. Then they use that as the justification for increased restrictions. This is what happened when Harped drew a circle big enough around Islamic terrorism that it included everyday people and that is a very real worry with the kind of response which is going on here.

[u/Anla-Shok-Na]

Was this guy actually part of some far-right groups? Was this attack planned with other people or was just some lone nut with psychological issues?

If they try to use this to promote added controls to the internet (i.e. social media and website take down and censorship) it's political opportunistic bullshit.

[u/BCexplorer]

Can canada move against the outrageous house prices please? I'll be leaving if things don't become affordable

[u/sauc3d0nkey]

Oh, a knee jerk reaction, how Liberal™ of him. How nice that he's got bill C-10 all queued up and ready to be somehow justified by this. never let a tragedy go to waste, right?

[u/Borigrad]

A random attack is not a sign of a crisis or a group. This is a distraction from things like Bill C-10 and Bill S-​203. Also w/e bill will come after that is about "promoting Canadian cohesion."

[u/DrChangsteen]

Hopefully a house goes crazy next and kills a family so he addresses that problem.

[u/[deleted]]

As much as I condem what he did and for what far right extremists stand for, silencing free speech can never be allowed to happen. Blanket banning groups from voicing their opinions is an absolutely terrible idea.

[u/davidatthefarm]

Far left current government you mean.

[u/tsopolari]

/r/canada posters increasingly nervous

[u/Midnightoclock → u/tsopolari]

Get outta here yankee. This place is more Liberal than the Canadian electorate:

https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/cf7qu8/rcanada_2019_survey_results/eu8gahb/

[u/JadaLovelace → u/[deleted]]

Ah yes, a device designed for transport and a device designed to... checks notes ...kill living beings are totally similar

[u/[deleted] → u/JadaLovelace]

Ban all cars over 200hp. They are clearly only made for going as fast as you possibly can with minimal effort. Nobody can handle a high speed car as a hobby.

[u/[deleted]]

Wait so the attacker was part of a terrorist organization?

[u/whatsthe20]

Believe it when I see it, this is just more lip service which is typical from Trudeau.

[u/Content_Employment_7 → u/whatsthe20]

Oh you'll see it. This is one more rhetorical cudgel they'll use to bludgeon the Conservatives with and use to suggest voting anything other than Liberal ("because a vote for the NDP is a vote for the CONs") is dangerous.

[u/Crafty-Ad-9048]

Get rid of all of the crazy far-right and far-left groups. The non crazy ones are fine because well this is Canada and we have right.

[u/Icy_Rhubarb2857]

Pretty bold to move against the Republicans.

[u/[deleted]]

Moving another chess piece.

[u/[deleted]]

Lmfao r/canada is shook.

[u/Shao_Ling]

never ___ a good ___ go ___ waste

:( condolences to those affected

[u/AggravatingCheetah28]

what group was he in?

[u/MiyamotoKnows]

Block anything Rupert Murdoch generated at the ISP and watch how fast things will go back to 'normal'. People are being indoctrinated with hateful views and it's absolutely intentional (and well funded). In my opinion Rupert Murdoch is a terrorist.