Dear Editor:
The government has tabled a bill in the House of Commons under the guise of border security and much else. Bill C2 has some common sense matters in it. However there are other things that lead me to question the planned intent. Talk about going after criminal organizations is fine and good but what defines a criminal organization? And what about sweeping powers and warrantless matters like opening mail, freezing bank accounts – broad powers potentially started by law enforcement alone.
Yes, some law enforcement support this. Of course they do.
The question needing to be asked is does or should law enforcement be given more power than they have already? There is no clear mention of what is widely supported: a mandatory removal of bail for criminal use of a firearm. And I don’t mean legal firearms owners, but the likes of car thieves out by lunchtime.
The use of financial measures noted above is reminiscent of the Freedom Convoy protests, during which many people had their bank accounts frozen, sometimes in error under warrantless Emergency Act orders.
I advise everyone to read carefully this law and be sure that you want your government and law enforcement to have such power, under the guise of “public safety.”
Doak McCraney,
Guelph