Letters, Dec. 6

Don’t snitch

Re: Snitch photos eyed by city for parking tickets (Dec. 4)

I think it’s one of the dumbest ideas I’ve ever heard from a city council or Winnipeg Parking Authority. It sounds like they want the public to do their dirty work by taking pictures of cars if parked illegally.

I guess they don’t want any of their employees getting hurt, so now they want the public to step up and get beat up. The city’s revenue is high enough with parking tickets, radar cameras, and other mobile moving incidents.

It’s just ludicrous they’re asking for the public’s help to take pictures of cars parked too far from the curb, or in front of expired meters.

Willy Martens

Winnipeg

I had to double check the date of this story to make sure it wasn’t April 1st! As the road safety expert in the story says “this is a terrible idea.”

This is Winnipeg, not East Germany — we don’t rat out our neighbors to the local Stasi! Also, perhaps when the Winnipeg Parking Authority is “exploring” this idea they might want to look into this new thing that everyone is talking about — AI. This technology could (obviously) be used by some, to falsely report people they dont like. Absolute cash grab. Please WPA, end your exploration.

Derek Rolstone

Winnipeg

All I can say to the city administration for considering this move is “shame on you.”

Theresa Shaw

Winnipeg

When it’s right to report

Re: Snitch photos eyed by City for parking tickets (Dec. 4)

I must confess that I’m proud of having “ratted” on fellow citizens who obstructed bicycle traffic by parking in a bicycle path.

Oh, and I “snitched” on someone who drove through a red light when they got tired of waiting for it to turn green. I was told by the police officer that called me back that they would send the car a ticket because I was willing to be a witness in court.

And I even had the audacity of reporting a car that was driving very fast in a residential area. I was later thanked by the police who had matched the

license plate to the description of a car that was suspected in multiple robberies.

I think these were all good deeds.

Stuart Williams

Winnipeg

Don’t remove rights

Re: Charter prevents proper protection for Canadians (Think Tank, Dec. 4)

While former police officer Stan Tataryn presents an argument for reducing the rights of Canadians in order to enhance safety in public spaces, there are too many chilling problems with this presentation.

The Charter was written and exists for our protection. There have been so many documented cases of systemic abuses by authorities over many years that there was, and continues to be, a need for limits on intrusion by those wielding power.

Some of the shortcomings in criminal justice are being addressed because they are obvious and Canadians are complaining.

It is up to politicians, with the pressure and approval of citizens, to adjust laws and direct enforcement so that public spaces are safer and crime contained.

Reducing rights for the majority of law-biding citizens to pursue the lawbreaking minority seems to focus on the wrong solution.

Holly Bertram

Winnipeg

Well, as a law-abiding citizen of Canada, at times a victim of crime, I read with interest what a retired cop, Stan Tataryn had to say about our civil rights and freedoms, and I couldn’t disagree more.

Our rights as citizens were developed over time, and evolved slowly as our societies grew, and our interactions with others changed, not always for the better. Laws were designed to provide a degree of protection from each other, and police tasked with maintaining those laws and order. But, that does not mean police should be allowed to take shortcuts over our rights. Tataryn’s hypothetical example of a person carrying a backpack, entering a dark alley at night, is meant to describe a potential criminal, lurking in shadows as he prepares to commit a crime.

It also describes an innocent student from U of W, taking a shortcut to his downtown apartment, after an evening of study. Under Tataryn’s ideals, a cop should be justified to stop, question and search each of those individuals, based solely on the cop’s interpretation of the individual’s motive for entering the alley, and possessing a knapsack. He would argue that the law-abiding student should be happy to be treated with the same suspicion as the criminal. Heaven help the student should he decide that’s not the way to respond to the cop’s demands, but insist on his rights. That’s a sure way to convince the cop he must be guilty of something, and reinforcing the cop’s suspicions.

Stopping and questioning a person based on description is a situation which occurs often, but not always without negative results, (J.J. Harper springs to mind). One description can often fit many, given the time of day and location, and like it or not, in an imperfect world, it can at times open the door to reactions rooted in stereotypes.

Police work, unless the crime is happening in front of the cops, is time-consuming and complex, it requires investigation and determination. Infringing on the rights of citizens is a lazy man’s shortcut to, at times, a preformed conclusion.

Cops have a dangerous job, it’s not getting easier, but just as citizens have rules and norms set out for them to keep society safe and functional, so too do those enforcing those rules, to keep society from devolving into a police state. Democracy is under attack in many parts of the world, and empowerment of the police to be part of that attack, under the guise of law and order, is the first step in eroding the rights of law abiding citizens.

That Tataryn is portraying that law-abiding citizens (libertarians) are willing to cede some of those rights for their own good, is just feeding the narrative of those seeking to dismantle the roots of democracy for their own interests and gains.

Ian Campbell

Winnipeg

Deal with Alberta has positives

Relax all you naysayers, the sky is not falling on the coast of B.C.

The agreement with Alberta lays out the prerequisites for moving their resources, carbon capture — yes it’s a real thing — and it works, a carbon tax, etc. Nothing is getting built until Alberta can produce a 90 per cent carbon-free product. It will be the cleanest oil in the world. That will help us achieve our climate 2030 goals.

The use of fossil fuels is not going away, but we have the ability to reduce their effect on the climate. We have to move away from the American domination of our economy and the expansion to Eastern markets can help.

The U.S. is going to make their cars at home, I am waiting for our auto industry to pivot to a Canadian alternative, hydrogen-fuel-cell autos.

Yes, they work fine, the problem for automakers is they last too long! A hydrogen fuel cell will still be running when the body rusts off the frame, hence fewer cars are made.

More than 20 years ago, then-California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said he would build a hydrogen fuel station through California if the automakers would make the cars. The Big Three refused — not enough money in it.

Let’s jump on that bandwagon, start producing our own fuel-cell autos, converting gas stations to gas/hydrogen stations and get on with life.

Bill Allan

Winnipeg