Try the political quiz

700 Replies

@ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...9yrs

No, and enact legislation preventing government surveillance of citizen communications

@ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...9yrs

@97WSTMLfrom Ontario  answered…2wks

No as it is our conversations unless national matter or an attack

@97LZCQNfrom Ontario  answered…3wks

yes BUT only to try and prevent terrorism and people who have a criminal background's and in court

@96JJRBTfrom Ontario  answered…2mos

No, unless you are suspected of any wrongdoing, and it is needed for an investigation.

@948L3W4New Democraticfrom Alberta  answered…4mos

No, except under extreme circumstances & permission from the Attorney General.

@8ZX3GXZConservativefrom Ontario  answered…8mos

Enact legislation preventing government surveillance of citizen communications, unless a court order is acquired.

@8Y85WN9from Alberta  answered…11mos

Grey area. If it is relevant to court proceedings, then tentatively yes.

@8XXXYKSfrom Ontario  answered…12mos

@8X8B6QXfrom Manitoba  answered…1yr

Yes but only if they are trying to catch a criminal and have proof of their actions

@8W4BGQ5New Democraticfrom British Columbia  answered…1yr

Yes but regardless of if they were justified or not the individual or individuals must be made aware of the breach of privacy within 1 year of the violation and be allowed to seek
Damages from the government should they have overreached and be granted immunity for other non related infractions.

@8VWXDZSfrom British Columbia  answered…1yr

Yes for protection only from terrorism use court orders and watch if involved in criminal activity

@8VW824MGreenfrom British Columbia  answered…1yr

Yes, but only if we can monitor their emails and phone calls as well.

@8VF8YNLfrom Alberta  answered…1yr

No, Not without testamony it will prove a serious crime, Sexual Assault

@8VDCCCBfrom Alberta  answered…1yr

In obvious circumstances of national security, or where criminal organizations are concerned I support this. In situations involving petty criminals or the general law-abiding public I do not support this.

@8V5CFHLfrom Ontario  answered…1yr

 @buday4vancouverLibertarian from Washington answered…1yr

@8TWYK3Lfrom New Brunswick  answered…1yr

Key words only. But taking people's concerns seriously would be better

@8TWTTZVfrom Alberta  answered…1yr

@8TD3S5Vfrom Alberta  answered…1yr

Only for those suspected with strong evidence of terrorist activity

@8TBKBH4from Alberta  answered…1yr

@8T87PBZfrom Alberta  answered…1yr

@8SRCS7Jfrom Alberta  answered…2yrs

Yes, but only to combat terrorism and for those with criminal backgrounds.

@8RWBJNQfrom Alberta  answered…2yrs

Yes, but only if approved by a group of randomly selected lawyers, civil right advocates, and other people.

@8RM3874from Ontario  answered…2yrs

They should only be allowed to monitor calls and emails made by non-residents/ people living overseas.

@8R854XRfrom Ontario  answered…2yrs

yes,but only if they use key words that would trigger it to record the call

@8R6DTY6from Ontario  answered…2yrs

@8QZ3H95People’s Partyfrom Ontario  answered…2yrs

Not unless there is someone breaking the law. Must prevent government surveillance of citizen communications.

@8QS3Z3Bfrom Alberta  answered…2yrs

Yes but only if the person is involved in a criminal case and by court order

@8QCHD32Conservativefrom Ontario  answered…2yrs

@8QBY2Q5from Alberta  answered…2yrs

@8Q7NQF9from Ontario  answered…2yrs

Yes, but only by court order on a case by case basis (one court order per individual)

@8Q63HB2from Ontario  answered…2yrs

@8PZND2Gfrom Alberta  answered…2yrs

yes but only in extreme circumstances. the government should not be allowed to survey private citizens conversations and interactions

@8PNGTCVfrom Ontario  answered…2yrs

Yes, to combat terrorism and criminal backgrounds and court order.

 @8P6PWZP from Louisiana answered…2yrs

@8P9CY8Qfrom Ontario  answered…2yrs

The government can track all calls and e-mails, but they cannot access the content unless given permission by a court order.

@tofutofufrom Ontario  answered…2yrs

For most cases, no, this is a violation of one's personal right to privacy. It reminds me of the way the police will use anything you say against you, which makes staying silent and hiring a lawyer immediate so crucial when defending yourself in the justice system. I believe violating the privacy of the people is a slipper slope to tyranny. People need to be protected and have the freedom to their personal, private lives. They have a right to defend themselves also. The exception would be for extreme cases when it's determined a serious threat exist and this is absolutely necessary to protect the country and people- in which case, a court order should be required and the person involved should already have a criminal history/involvement in a serious crime.


The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 


Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...