Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
Province/Territory:
@9F5KMPV2yrs2Y
No, this is a severe violation of privacy. Emails, messages and phone calls should be private. Privacy is a fundamental right and it is not the government's business what Canadians are talking about on call, email or messages. National security is an excuse the government shouldn't be allowed to monitor it's citizens regardless.
@948L3W4New Democratic3yrs3Y
No, except under extreme circumstances & permission from the Attorney General.
@92YKHH63yrs3Y
Yes, to block hate mail or calls
@8Y85WN93yrs3Y
Grey area. If it is relevant to court proceedings, then tentatively yes.
@8VF8YNL4yrs4Y
No, Not without testamony it will prove a serious crime, Sexual Assault
@8VDCCCB4yrs4Y
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.
@8TD3S5V4yrs4Y
Only for those suspected with strong evidence of terrorist activity
@8TBKBH44yrs4Y
Yes, only once known criminal activity is going on
@8T87PBZ4yrs4Y
yes, but only if their is suspesion of violent crime
@8SRCS7J4yrs4Y
Yes, but only to combat terrorism and for those with criminal backgrounds.
@8RWBJNQ4yrs4Y
Yes, but only if approved by a group of randomly selected lawyers, civil right advocates, and other people.
@8QS3Z3B4yrs4Y
Yes but only if the person is involved in a criminal case and by court order
@8QBY2Q54yrs4Y
Only f that person pause a threat to our nation!
@8PZND2G4yrs4Y
yes but only in extreme circumstances. the government should not be allowed to survey private citizens conversations and interactions
@8DYSL8H5yrs5Y
Yes, but only when it concerns national security.
@8C4S2BF5yrs5Y
Yes but it should have to be approved by a commission made up by MPs senators, judicatory officials, executive branch offices, and representatives of the ideas of small government, human rights, open government, and civil rights groups.
@98TLB6M2yrs2Y
No, unless it's permitted by the Supreme Court.
@9C8YBHH2yrs2Y
Yes, but only during times when there is reason to suspect a threat to public safety (ex. terrorism, war), and even then only if there is reason to suspect someone
@8TWTTZV4yrs4Y
No, only law enforcement with proper court approval.
@98WW25PNew Democratic2yrs2Y
Only to prevent serious criminal activity and terrorism
@3BBWFYN4yrs4Y
I'm torn...I am concerned with the federal government having cart blanche access to private information, yet I am for being able to prevent acts that negatively harm groups of innocent people.
@3BC5V7K4yrs4Y
I find this to be a ridiculous notion. Under certain circumstances it would be permissible but its a blatant intrusion of privacy and completely unnecessary. A acceptable situation is someone suspected for crimes, but just monitoring people for the sake of doing so is completely illogical.
@3BD78GZConservative4yrs4Y
if this was an ironclad method to reduce terrorism, then yes. otherwise, this is an invasion of privacy
@3BCM9WC4yrs4Y
I feel like the federal government should be allowed to monitor emails and phone calls that are flagged with key words that insinuate a possible terrorist or illegal act.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.