Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
Province/Territory:
@9QZCYDN9mos9MO
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.
@9JC6BKV1yr1Y
Yes, and all communications for any elected official should be public record before ANY private citizens are subjected to monitoring excepted by court order.
@9GNXSP7Conservative1yr1Y
No, only in cases where a warrant is needed and deemed necessary for extreme crime and terrorist activities.
@9F9MWMM2yrs2Y
yes but only depending on the person
@9LTNCX412mos12MO
No, unless the person is a registered offender or someone else that must be kept tabs on for safety reasons.
@9L2P5YG1yr1Y
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.
@8ZX3GXZConservative3yrs3Y
Enact legislation preventing government surveillance of citizen communications, unless a court order is acquired.
@8XXXYKS3yrs3Y
No, privacy should be a right to all Canadians
@8S3NTLN4yrs4Y
@8R854XR4yrs4Y
yes,but only if they use key words that would trigger it to record the call
Not unless there is someone breaking the law. Must prevent government surveillance of citizen communications.
@8QCHD32Conservative4yrs4Y
If its for a criminal investigation then yes. Otherwise no.
@8Q7NQF94yrs4Y
Yes, but only by court order on a case by case basis (one court order per individual)
@8Q63HB24yrs4Y
Yes but Only with Warrant and reasonable cause
@8P9CY8Q4yrs4Y
The government can track all calls and e-mails, but they cannot access the content unless given permission by a court order.
@tofutofu4yrs4Y
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.
@8DTTLFQ5yrs5Y
No, unless they have a good reason to
@8CRV6LZ5yrs5Y
If its absolutely necessary but it should be transparent about how much information is being collected, why, and who is collecting it.
@98PQTLX2yrs2Y
Yea only if it is an issue with warrant and probable cause
@97WSTML2yrs2Y
No as it is our conversations unless national matter or an attack
@97LZCQN2yrs2Y
yes BUT only to try and prevent terrorism and people who have a criminal background's and in court
@kuyugomodiLiberal5yrs5Y
No, but they do anyways aha
Can listen if the person is accused of murder or a manger crime. If they listen to people just at home talking on their phone with their mom no! If people were to find that out then the people who are listening to others people conversations besides the police for investigation purposes, should go to jail!
@9BZ2SK62yrs2Y
Yes, but only by court order in the case of criminal issues or in the interest of national security
@8V5CFHL4yrs4Y
Only if there is a suspected threat to the country.
@99G9S5L2yrs2Y
Yes, but only for those with serious criminal offences.
@96JJRBT3yrs3Y
No, unless you are suspected of any wrongdoing, and it is needed for an investigation.
@8LBMXPF4yrs4Y
Yes, if there is probable cause.
@8FMTSV55yrs5Y
No, that creepy, i need my privacy
@7NN387N4yrs4Y
Yes but only for proven terrorists
@3BGPRHR4yrs4Y
Yes, but only under the scrutiny of the courts where necessary to protect citizens either collectively or individually
@3BGP2KN4yrs4Y
No, not at all. I think phone calls and emails should be private. It is not other peoples business and they don't need to know what we are talking about.
@3BGLWPV4yrs4Y
They should only be able to monitor people who have been identified as a threat, and only by court order
@3BC2FSD4yrs4Y
No, and enact legislation preventing government surveillance of citizen communications, It is the citizens responsibility to protect the country in this case since the government cannot possibly handle everything and proper education provided on the subject in schools on a side note they are taught in a way that does not create future paranoia. Once a threat is flagged by citizens only then should authority intervene. Immigrants will have to be under surveillance for as long their education into citizenship is provided, and Immigrants with a history of violence or fraud will not be allowed into the country.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
