32% Yes |
68% No |
13% Yes |
66% No |
13% Yes, but only by court order |
2% No, and enact legislation preventing government surveillance of citizen communications |
3% Yes, but only for those with criminal backgrounds |
|
2% Yes, this is necessary to combat terrorism |
See how support for each position on “Government Surveillance” has changed over time for 1.3m Canada voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
See how importance of “Government Surveillance” has changed over time for 1.3m Canada voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from Canada users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.
@9QZCYDN2wks2W
Only if they have reasonable cause to believe somebody needs to be monitored, like if they're a criminal or there's police evidence. In addition there needs to be a court order to give permission.
@9LTNCX43mos3MO
No, unless the person is a registered offender or someone else that must be kept tabs on for safety reasons.
@9L2P5YG4mos4MO
Depends. If the person is under government radar for illegal activities, then yes. But if the person is off radar or reformed and is completely fine, even with criminal background, then should be occasionally monitored but not strictly.
@9JC6BKV6mos6MO
Yes, and all communications for any elected official should be public record before ANY private citizens are subjected to monitoring excepted by court order.
@9GNXSP79mos9MO
No, only in cases where a warrant is needed and deemed necessary for extreme crime and terrorist activities.
@9F98QST11mos11MO
Only if there is a confirmed threat in the country
Join in on the most popular conversations.
