Do you support Bill C-51, which expands local police and intelligence agencies’ authority to prevent terrorism?

Yes, but they should be monitored carefully so they don't step over the line.

There is no doubt we are presently living in a dystopian world, but in western countries tend to see this through "rose colored glasses". I personally believe, we are in a global crisis. This emerging terrorism, is a symptom of these corporation wars for the control of foreign resources i.e., oil. These Middle Eastern countries have a feudal age mindset and are acting much like Europeans did a thousand years ago. Some radicals are, in fact envious of the progressive nature of democratic countries, and seek to destroy what they could never achieve through peace and prosperity.

No, the complete disregard which Bill C-51 displays for civil rights in the interest of averting 'terrorism' is an egregious example of self-fulfilling prophecy.

I do not support racial profiling and such (which is where many people would develop suspicion). As terrorism is increasing, I find it more important to support defence and preventive measures. The less fault we have is safest. Education is more important to support, and I am opposed to control at this chaotic time. Premature detaining would not stop extremist plans anyway, as I have noticed.

Make something like the CIA.

I like the idea of the bill and what its trying to do, but without proper execution, this bill could start more problems

Yea but there needs to be policies in place that protect a persons right to privacy. The government cannot have complete freedom to spy on their citizens without probable cause.

i think we should protect our country from terrorism, but get rid of immagrints who want to build a new life

Don’t have enough information on Bill C-51 to comment (and this kind of question sets it up as a “pro/con police” or “pro/con anti-terrorism” situation without context).

This should fall under the military. Certain elements of the Canadian forces should or could operate within the country

I would support it more if it was watered down. I support the safety of citizens but I don't support the government spying on citizens.

yes, I agree that expanding local police and intelligence agencies' authority to prevent terrorism is important, but there should be more regulations on what that would involve and that the power is balanced.

Needs more clarification. Given the recent developments, I'm all for strengthening police and intelligence capabilities.

Yes but this policiy made a lot of people way more racist towards muslims and middle eastern communities

Yes for intelligence agencies but if we allowed polices there might be police violence and power abuse

No unless sufficient evidence is presented to say otherwise (actual proof of them being a terrorist) spying on someone you think might be a terrorist is not ever OK

Yes, if a House of Commons committee is tasked with reviewing the decisions made by intelligence agencies in enforcing this act.

It’s a difficult question because I don’t want my privacy to be invaded but I don’t want any terrorism to happen

Policing is not the job of the government

I don’t have knowledge on this

Yes, As long as they are not arresting with out reason

I need to read more on this subject

Yes but increase screening and training to get rid of individuals that use or will use their power for malicious purposes.

cannot decide yet

Don’t know enough to have an opinion

No, and abolish the Police

I need more information about this bill

Yes if privacy guidelines are created and unforced to protect any information not considered to be illegal

Not entirely, police powers should be limited in how much they can interfere with citizens right to privacy.

police should be smarter and more nice to others no matter what they like or dislike and support the community of the lesbian and gay and other types i'm not one of them i just support them.

Possibly but it’d need to be more specific and have more requirements and stuff so there’s no abuse of power or whatever.

I teeenk that if hwe just geeve them urr loucky chermmmss everywone while leeve happeeely every after

it should be less vague, like what the last sentence of the 'learn more' says. I am strongly against terrorism, however

This bill should only be implemented in case of extreme periods of tensions and risk, and the government should be totally transparent towards civilians on the extend of the surveillance they are under

Yes, but not to a certain point. There just still be a point for arrests. It goes against Canada's values and our rights.

no not at all this is violent and taken away someones right to feeling safe this is a violation of someones life they cant be ditained for a suspition this is not right

The bill is too vague, although the intent behind it is to prevent terrorism, which is something the country should invest in.

unless there in a warranted reason to suspect one of being a threat to a nations national security or people, I see no need.

This bill could be good as long as it is Practice lightly. It is important to me that the average citizen is not monitored 24/7

Yes, I would support it, but it is a little too vague in some aspects, limit it to just intelligence agencies fighting terrorism, the local police shouldn't get involved with that. Provide more accountability. The bill needs more work

They should only do it when there's evidence about a terrorist attack is the only time they should expand local police and intelligence agencies' authority to prevent terrorism.

No, because it would make a way to accuse a certain group of people for terrorism when it is always done by others.

Sure but thus requires officers to undergo more education on the true meaning of terrorism and what it looks like as people tend to associate terrorism with one specific group of individuals when it is predominantly done by others.

It would be a conditional yes for me but I would have to read the bill on how they define terrorism and if there are other things I object to that’s included in the bill like having a police state and the corruption that could ensue. So yes, but with conditions.

The definition of terrorism seems to get lost in translation and people tend to stick it to a certain group of people. Further education and knowledge is needed for this bill.

Yes, but ONLY if police take a college or university course in Law. The majority of Police officers have no idea what the laws actually mean they are arresting people for! If you are a public servant you should be held to a high standard.

Yes, but the bill should be amended so that claims of terrorist activity are fully proven and that csis has absolute reasonable grounds and provable grounds to suspect someone of terrorism, and only with a permit or court order. Disrupting protests should also not be allowed.

Depends on whose being highered and how they are planning to control terroism but yes for the most part.

even if it is good to prevent terrorism i still feel the sense of not being in my own private space when I'm alone

I agree and disagree because I agree that preventing terrorism is important so giving a little more authority to the police and intelligence agencies may help but I also disagree because giving them too much authority may restrict certain freedoms and push boundaries that people in society have so there's a fine balance between giving enough authority to them, but not enough to cause trouble.

"I firmly believe in the importance of our local police and intelligence agencies taking the required steps to safeguard our national security. It is their duty to protect citizens from potential threats while respecting individual privacy.

As for Bill C-51, which seeks to enhance the powers of these agencies to combat terrorism, it's crucial to strike a balance between security and personal freedoms. Finding this equilibrium is a complex challenge, but we must ensure that any expansion of authority is subject to stringent checks and balances. The safety of our nation is paramount, but so is the preservation of our civil liberties. It is essential that we scrutinize this legislation with a keen eye to ensure it maintains this equilibrium."

no because it bans certain firearms and they are not the problem the problem are the people using them and it also gives the government permission to censor stuff from us

I think that police shouldn't have their funding cut, but I don't think they should put all their resources into preventing terrorism when there are more pressing local issues.

This initially seems like a good idea but that being said i think a system like this could just as easily invade the privacy of a number of well meaning citizens

Yes, as long it used only for searching suspects. With permission from individuals, but not when crime is committed, just in general, if they want to. Private information usage only for police to help, no selling it.

Further intell is always helpful. Giving police too much power is not usually beneficial.

I believe that the bill has a great cause but it should have been more exact and if it risks the security of the people of Canada then it should not be done.

I don't think terrorism is a big problem in Canada

yes, but only to a certian extent because if they have to much power it will be abused for the lesser.

i don't stand on either side. i prefer not to get involved with politics but have to do this for my History 30 class

Not well informed enough on this

Out of my area of expertise.

not all foreigners are terrorists

this is not imported to me

Yes, but with limits, don't go overboard.

no, it just has too many flaws.

It should depend on the city

defraud the police! :( (BLM)

Dangerous to give to much power to local police.

no, police shouldnt be given that much power at all

Terrorism is essential for growth

It gives them too much power, racism would be big.

Don't have enough information to decide.

the question is vague and does not speak fully of what Bill c-51 really is

Yes as long as they don't take advantage of the right and use it properly

Only proven terrorists should be deported and monitored. Monitoring suspected terrorists and deporting them can lead to minorities being falsely targeted.

Don’t know enough about it

Δεν είμαι σιγουρος

Abolish the police

I feel like instead of assuming every muslim is a terriost look at people who accually look like teriost or do a crimnal background check

I am currently unsure of the specifics of what Bill C-51 allows so I cannot say at this time what my stance is.

No, unless there is sufficient evidence to suspect a threat to public safety

It's not an issue in Canada I think so they can put money into it but not that much

yes but their bus be limits

It isn't even anti-terrorist it is used to monitor people

whos bill?

Yes, but with limits so people are not discriminated against.

I dont really trust the police force I feel like they could wrongly convict someone they should only detain if they have solid proof the suspect is a terrorist

im 14 i dont pay attenon to half the stuff your asking me

i don't understand this

Yes, but the bill isn’t specific on the accountability of the officers

it depends; there should be a certain set of rules before it becomes too much of a police enforced state. boundaries must be clearly established and must be adjusted according to abnormal situations to avoid major damages.

only for dangerous and suspicious people who might be threats

Somewhat. But I dont like the idea of them looking into our personal info

no cause it will lead to more racial profiling, get better security and treat everyone the same

I don’t understand

I dont understand.

I don;t know

As long as they have an eye kept on them.