🚀 go-pugleaf

Darrell A. Larose wrote:
> 
> >
> >>IGS should have waited for a court order to remove the page.
> >
> > That would have been the non-cowardly way to handle it, but a lot of
> > people are scared shitless of the big bad po-lice. The po-lice can't
> > do a damn thing to you. It's up to the courts.
> >
> Well they can do something, they can get a warrant and seize equipment used
> in the commission of a crime. IGS may get their equipment back a year or two
> down the road after the case went through the Court, the appeals etc.

Despite Darrell's assertion, police do not exercise their powers
whimsically.


> In Canada we don't have the First Ammendment, there is no freedom of speech as
> much as you and the EFC like to believe.

Canada has the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees the
fundamental principle of freedom of expression.  This is an individual
right, and it is up to individuals to protect those rights.  If Darrell
chooses not to assert his rights, or asserts he has no rights,
then "saying it makes it so".

> [IGS] did check with their lawyers and decided it would
> be the prudient thing to do.

I would observe that it probably wasn't "prudent" for IGS to label
an innocent man a criminal.

IGS may well have been within its rights to remove the page, but
it may have been more prudent to simply state they didn't agree
with its content.

djones@efc.ca