G20 Roundup

Last weekend in Toronto, G20 summiteers agreed to cut deficits in half by 2013 and "reduce government debt-to-GDP ratios by 2016." And it only cost them a billion dollars and a few breaches of civil liberties to achieve this result.

Here's your G20 wrap-up, with bonus late-breaking news of violence against journalists:

The big story from the event was not what the leaders did, but the police state that downtown Toronto was turned into.

The government had prepared for the event by spending an exorbitant amount of money on security. Police were given additional powers inside the security zone by a secret law passed by the Ontario government, which allowed them to arrest people for failing to produce identification. Police also told the public they had these powers around the perimeter of the zone, but later admitted they made this up.

All these measures did not stop a roving band of lefty anarchists from destroying private property and lighting a police car on fire. As one journalist noted, the protesters did not seem to have a coherent message.

Police responded with what appears to be excessive force and serious violations of the constitutional protections that Canadians usually enjoy. In total, police arrested 900 people—the largest mass arrest in Canadian history—many of whom were held overnight in temporary jails and released without charge.

Police had an equal disdain for the media. Today J-Source has a roundup of journalists who were harassed, beaten, and arrested for trying to bring the story to the world. Although not reporting at the time—or even within the security zone—the Western Standard's Mike Brock tells about how he was tormented and illegally searched, apparently for wearing a black shirt and talking on the phone.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Old Mexican||

    All these measures did not stop a roving band of lefty anarchists from destroying private property and lighting a police car on fire. As one journalist noted, the protesters did not seem to have a coherent message.

    At least they were not angry white elderly racists like the tea partiers . . . right, MSM???

  • Left Libertarian||

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu5o5891JS8

  • Left Libertarian||

    Protecting Capitalism is hard work, and expensive.

  • RandomGermanDude||

    As if capitalism needed these statist clowns.

  • ||

  • ||

    Yup, that about sums it up.

  • GILMORE||

    I am never sure who I loathe more: the Pigs or the Hippies.

    Frankly, I think they deserve each other. I mean, the Hippies go there IN ORDER to start shit. Its almost like an annual sporting event: police forces all over the world compete to host the event, to see who will kick the most anarchist/hippy ass. Hippies comply by ensuring not to wash for a week prior to the event, and labor to produce the most non-sensical banners to appropriately enrage the Police Team.

    I think the festivities kick off as soon with a symbolic brick through a starbucks window (in memory of the first event in Seattle).

    Sponsored by SpitFire Pepper Spray and Rage Against The Machine, who yearly compose the theme music for the event.

  • AT||

    I hear'ya. To bad someone else has to pay for the festivities. They should pick a date and an empty field and have at it until there's only one left standing.

  • ||

    Hippies??

  • GILMORE||

    Generic term for ignorant anti-capitalist idealists

  • SIV||

    constitutional protections that Canadians usually enjoy

    Canadians have rights?

  • GILMORE||

    They have something to do with Hockey I think.

  • ||

    Rights? Not exactly.

    I think they enjoy grants of protection by the state, from the state. But what the state grants it can take away.

  • ||

    Our Charter of Rights and Freedoms (equivalent to the US Bill of Rights) states in Section 1:

    "1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."

    In summary, you can enjoy these rights until we pass a law that says you can't anymore.

  • Astrid||

    So why don't we do these summits through teleconference again?

  • MWG||

    Photo op and free food... not necessarily in that order...

  • Astrid||

    Photoshop and we could ship food to all the leaders.

  • Amateur Sociologist||

    Kathy Shaidle had this quote on her blog: "Sounds like the cops are breaking taboos flustered by the experience of a mob breaking all the taboos on which we and the cops ordinarily depend, the taboos rooted in the history where our ancestors agreed to all step back from the knife edge risk of some unstoppable violence of all against all. It seems the cops are trying to scare us back into recognizing the most basic taboos.

    But in not actually targetting a black hat who has lost the taboo - i.e. someone who doesn't deserve the rights he would deny to others whose property he destroys - and in seeking a scapegoat from among the innocent, the cops are only further eroding the trust on which the shared taboo depends.

    It all goes to show that in our PC paradise, there is very little residual trust, and that once the established order gets knocked down there is not a lot of shared common sense about how to renew it through makeshift channels."

    The vandals were using the legitimate protest march for cover, the march organizers have to take some responsibility for not policing themselves and preventing the mayhem.

  • Jeffersonian||

    As someone who is contemplating opening a business in the near future, I can say with certainty that if some bandana'ed thug with a pickaxe was coming for my window, he'd be doing so through a hail of jacketed .357 slugs.

    The Toronto Police should be ashamed of themselves for, first, failing to protect the property of those who pay their salaries and second, abusing those who were of no threat to same.

  • Don't squeeze the Charmin||

    I hope you are contemplating protecting your future business with a comprehensive insurance policy, and not a .357.

  • Brett L||

    Bullets are cheaper. Putting up replica heads on pikes would be a little much, but acceptable as long as they were earned.

  • ||

    If you wanted to protect your business in Canada with a .357, there are a number of steps you'd have to take.

    1. Complete a Firearms Safety Course and pass the examination.

    2. Apply for and receive a Possession and Acquisition License.

    3. Assuming your .357 has a barrel length greater than 105mm, it is classified as a restricted weapon and you will need to register it when you acquire it. (Less than 105mm and it's a prohibited weapon, and you're not allowed to have it unless you're a law enforcement officer or in the military.)

    4. As a restricted weapon, you will need to request and receive and Authorization to Transport, in order to bring your newly acquired handgun from the dealer to your residence (and a separate ATT for any subsequent movements outside your residence).

    5. While at your residence, the restricted weapon must be secured in a locked container separate from its ammunition.

    6. If you do not own the property on which your business operates, you must apply for an Authorization to Carry certificate for your handgun (ATCs are typically only given to armed security guards when recommended by their employer, and not to individuals for self-defence).

    Basically, you're going to have a very difficult time using a handgun in self-defence while still abiding by all of Canada's gun laws.

  • ||

    I was wondering if I was supposed to be feeling bad for the protestors. It sucks that their normal search and seizure rights were violated, and that some of them were beat up, but for Odin's sake didn't they know they were walking into a shit storm? Every time they have one of these global trade summits they get tons of looting, broken windows, and protestors maced.

    In a riot situation, the police are generally outnumbered and scared. That is a good recipe for police abuse. If you have any common sense, you would avoid being in that area.

  • ||

    I don't feel bad for them because I don't see how their rights were violated.

    Referring to the hundreds who were arrested on Sunday at Queen & Spadina, yes, the VAST majority were not acting violently, many were journalists covering the event, and a few just happened to be bystanders in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    What is true of all of them is that they were a mob blocking a busy downtown intersection without authority to do so, and were instructed repeatedly by police to leave or they would be subject to arrest for breach of the peace.

    They made their choice to stay and they got to bear the consequences. (It didn't help that Sunday night featured one of the biggest downpours I can recall in the city, which only compounded their misfortune).

    That said, being handcuffed, searched, transported to a detention facility, searched again, locked up, booked, locked up again, possibly searched again, and fed bread, water and cheese until being eventually released the next morning, isn't exactly anyone's idea of a pleasant Sunday evening, it's nowhere near what any unbiased person would reasonably call a human rights violation.

  • Dello||

    "...a secret law passed by the Ontario government, which allowed them to arrest people for failing to produce identification."

    Secret Laws. But only when we really, really need to. Really.

  • Tim||

    Turns out there never was any new law, secret or otherwise:

    http://www.thestar.com/news/gt.....-says?bn=1

  • Bradley||

    "It's OK guys! We just lied to you!"

  • Jesse Kline||

    From your own link:

    As first revealed by the Star last Friday, the Public Works Protection Act was amended by Premier Dalton McGuinty’s cabinet on June 2 to allow police to arrest people who refused to supply ID or agree to a search at the G20 summit site.

    There was a "secret" law, but it did not apply outside the security zone, as was mentioned in the post.

  • Hockey Guy||

    If these world leaders continue forcing these meetings on us then do what the Koreans did out here during the 92 riots. If the anarchist scum want a fight give it to them. We all know the protect and serve types can't handle it.

  • Tman||

    Two commentaries.

    1.) Iowahawk gets the award for best headline- http://twitter.com/iowahawkblog/status/17351528239

    “Rage Against My Allowance.”

    2.) In this video you see the protestors singing the national anthem before getting a beatdown by the jackboots. As horrible as the video was, all I can think of was this: Do you think in a MILLION years the US version of the anarchist/hippie protestors in Toronto would even DREAM of singing our national anthem? For ANYTHING?

    O Canada indeed.

  • ||

    Actually, what you don't hear is that the crowd received three orders to disperse. They did not comply, so fuck 'em

  • Les||

    They did not respect the wishes of State, as Milo would. Had they received orders to lick the boots of the police, Milo would set the example by being first in line.

  • Brett L||

    As a former member of the UK, the Riot Act may be the law of the land still.

  • ||

    The concept of the Riot Act is still on the books in Canada. A peace officer can order a crowd to disperse by addressing them as follows:

    "Her Majesty the Queen charges and commands all persons being assembled immediately to disperse and peaceably to depart to their habitations or their lawful business, on pain of being guilty of an offence for which, on conviction, they may be sentenced to an imprisonment for life. God Save the Queen!"

    The first time I ever heard this was when I was recruit in the Army doing basic infantry training. One of our sergeants read our platoon this passage verbatim (and from memory, no less) on a Friday afternoon, before dismissing us for a weekend's liberty.

    It was good for some chuckles and earned him some additional respect in my eyes.

  • ||

    I'm just amazed at how frequent these meetings are. They just had the G20 in Pittsburgh last October.

    And of course Mayor Lego-Head urged businesses in some of the higher-risk neighborhoods not to close and board up during the summit because it would look bad for the city. Then when rioters smashed their windows and defaced their walls inside and out, the city refused to pay for the damage.

  • ||

    First things first. Is the hot girl in the pic working with the protestors or the cops, or neither?

  • ||

    Probably neither... half the people out on the streets had nothing to do with the protests. They were either media covering the action or "tourists" out to gawk and take picture for their myspace pages. Example.

  • wackyjack||

    You know, if the "protesters" really wanted to be subversive, they'd all wear burkhas.

    Think about it. You still get to hide your shame in your own message, while ensuring no cop would lay a hand on you.

  • Rudan||

    About a 100 sociology or poli sci majors smash a few windows and torch one police car. Well the billion sure was proportionate to the threat.

  • ||

    I cannot bring myself to feel any sympathy toward "peaceful" protesters of the G20 summit. They are scum, not just useful idiots.

    In their own words.


    MONTREAL—Organizers of a large mass of G20 protesters from Montreal say Quebecers were targeted by police.

    They also make no apologies for the broken windows and other mayhem that all but overshadowed the meeting of world leaders, describing it as a form of expression.

    “For us it’s not violence,” said Mathieu Francoeur, a spokesperson for the Anti-Capitalist Convergence, a group of Montreal social activists and anarchists that organized buses for about 450 to Toronto. “It’s a means of expression and doesn’t compare to the economic and state violence we’re subjected to.”

    The “smashing that happened in Toronto,” he explained, was against symbols of capitalism.

    “I think the message is clear,” added Danie Royer, another spokesperson. “If people take back the streets, if people attack symbols of capitalism, I think this is the message.”
  • Jeffersonian||

    So when will the symbols of capitalism return fire, fercrissakes?

  • Don't squeeze the Charmin||

    What these "protesters" did to "private property", is nothing compared to what fiat currency, perpetual creeping inflation, and fractional reserve banking have done in the past 100 years.

    As far as I'm concerned, this was far less than celebratory destruction after a Superbowl victory.

    People don't give a shit about economics. All they care about is sports. I was listening to the BBC hour on NPR yesterday. I generally listen because they good field reporting on foreign affairs. I expected that they would lead off with the G20. But guess what? They led with the questionable officiating at the World Cup. Not one mention of G20 at all. Bunch of fucking cry babies. Face it England, your futbol team sucks, now report the fucking news, cocksuckers. I'm surprised there weren't riots in downtown London because of the bad calls.

  • Brett L||

    On the plus side, maybe they'll consider turning the Hooligans loose for 2014. That'll show FIFA.

  • Don't squeeze the Charmin||

    Last weekend in Toronto, G20 summiteers agreed to cut deficits in half by 2013 and "reduce government debt-to-GDP ratios by 2016."

    Yeah, great. They can all pat themselves on the back, get drunk, and hope they pull Sarkozy's name at the wife swap party.

    So, does this fit into Bernanke's "exit strategy"? I guess we'll find out during the worldwide fiat currency collapse.

  • Willis||

    I wanna fuck that girl in the picture, but I feel like I can't develop a relationship with her because there's no alt text to give me an in.

  • AlmightyJB||

    "but I feel like I can't develop a relationship with her "

    How exactly is that a problem? This is not essential to the first part of your plan.

  • juris imprudent||

    As one journalist noted, the protesters did not seem to have a coherent message.

    Now THAT is some crack reporting.

  • Frankyb||

    From what I've been reading, it seems like the cops have been mostly arresting reporters and pacifists. Not really surprising if you've followed canadian police wussyfication over the last few years. (Think the recent Ann Coulter visit in Ottawa, were they basicly did, well, nothing).

    So, as a libertarian, I was wondering, when is it morally ok to go vigilante on these people and throw their anti-capitalist bricks back in their faces ?

  • Hockey Guy||

    I would warm my arm first using the frozen pop cans these losers toss. Once warmed up I would go for the bricks.

  • ||

    On average, I'm pretty okay with the police response this past weekend.

    Yes, they could have been more active in dealing with vandals in the financial district on Saturday, and yes, they probably could have been less indiscriminate in arresting crowds at Queen & Spadina on Sunday (many of whom were either peacefully protesting, journalists or passersby who were entirely unconnected to the events).

    But overall, I'm generally satisfied, because while I would have been seriously tempted to lay a beating on whatever black-clad hooligan I could get my hands on, the police officers on the streets (mostly from Toronto, but also staffed from other municipal squads, OPP and RCMP) were a model of restraint in the face of protesters who were doing everything they could to instigate a response and capture it on video.

    It's probably worth reminding protesters that the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly as guaranteed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, does not include any right to trespass, obstruct traffic, vandalize property, or threaten violence.

  • AlmightyJB||

    "lefty anarchist" WTF

    Listening to the Sex Pistols does not make you an anarchist. Neither does protesting governments because their not communist enough. I understand they call themselves anarchist either because their buffoons who don't know what it means but think it sounds cool, or their members of the Communist party who hide behind the term to protest for their lefty solutions with violence without the negative pub. I also see why the statist media allow them to use that term, because they want people to think that anarchy means everyone just naturally acts like a total a**holes. But I expect Reason to not use that term to describe them, especially since I know they've done articles in the past on these clueless morons. Their no more anarchist then the White House.

  • Smarmy Marmot||

    they're

  • AlmightyJB||

    Thank You for correcting me

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement