Your thoughts on the shooting on Parliament hill

warmemorial.jpg

Our society is based on fundamental legal principles. One of those principles is that a victim can not make justice for itself.

We, MPs in the House of Commons, have been the victim of an attempted murder by what appears increasingly to be an isolated act of someone with psychological distress. We as MPs have the power to change laws. I firmly believe that in the case before us, we must make an extra effort to keep a cool head and have the interests of citizens at the center of our concerns. We must not upset the delicate balance between security and individual rights without a real social debate. We need to reflect on the tragedy that has occurred and avoid the temptation to drift to a paranoid security obsession.

We must not give in to fear. We should not act on the heat of the moment without a thorough reflexion and debate.

Tell me what you think about the events and what should come next:


Showing 256 reactions

  • Before you write me off as anti french know that my maternal grandparents came to Canada from France just prior to the first World war and that makes me more true French than anything coming out of Quebec! Four generations of my family have served in the defense of this great country and you have the gall to insult every man and woman to have ever worn a uniform! But it is no shock since you come from a province of Cowards who rioted in the streets rather than do their duty, as well as the only province to be openly racist! You have proven by your statements to be a traitor and a parasite who lives off the tax dollars of hard working Canadians. In any other country in the world you and your “non-Canadian” Leader would have been charged with and arrested for Treason!
  • I am surprised that it has not happened before this. Politicians stopped working for the people and the people can only take so much.
  • Sorry for the late response.

    The recent tragic and terrible events are extremely disturbing and sad to say the very least, but I believe that having a fear-based, knee-jerk reaction guide the law-making process is always folly – in some ways as dangerous as the reason for the reaction. It’s the kind of approach that can contribute to an escalation in the insanity that seems to be so prevalent in the world today – an insanity on both sides, with the extremists and in the policies of the public and private leaders of the “free world”. Anything that gets us, globally and at home, to true communication, understanding and cooperation gets my vote.

    That said, my disheartened belief that the history of bad action, general misinformation and misunderstanding which has continually divided humanity everywhere may well be past the point of repair – I hope not.
  • It’s made by the security and the PM top security do know it
  • Thanks, Mr. Alexandre Boulerice, for reaching out to hear the various opinions on the subject. I think that what happened here in Ottawa was a criminal act, and not an act of terrorism. I think that one of the causes of the two terrible acts – one in Quebec, the other here in Ottawa – are the increasing military involvement of Canada abroad. Canada should not escalate the military intervention for economic interests. Instead, it should ‘re-double its efforts’ of dialogue, cooperation and conflict resolution within the existing diplomatic channels – most notably, the UN. Unfortunately, the current party has been painting a rosy picture of militarism with its spin on the War of 1812 and WWI. Canada has to invest in balanced views of its own military History. We need to look again at how Canadian History is taught in High School, for instance. Going back to the response of Parliament, I applaud Mr. Mulcair’s recent statement saying that what happened was not an act of terrorism. Also, I think that public debates on the role of religion in the public sphere is necessary. I would invite the NDP and other parties to invest time and money thinking how can they support inter-religious organizations in their existing efforts for peace.
  • Syria, Ukraine, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Serbia,(should I keep going? OK) Panama, Grenada, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia etc.. Hundreds of thousands of civilians killed. Our closest ally, the USA has been terrorizing the entire planet and we not only fail to condemn them, but now we are joining them. If you want to stop terrorism, stop participating in it. Harper will use these heinous attacks, by two mentally ill individuals, not to increase security, but to consolidate his power and quell dissent. Get ready Canadians he may be coming for you.
  • 1 CRIMINALS DON;T HAVE LEGAL RIGHTS THEY GAVE THEM UP WHEN THEY TOOK OUR RIGHTS AWAY.

    THE SOONER YOU POLITICIANS, FEDERAL & PROVINCIAL COURTS POLICE & CITIZENS WAKE UP TO THIS FACT

    OUR CITIES WILL NEVER BE SAFE . THE POLICE SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO SHOOT FIRST THEN ASK QUESTIONS LATER. AS FOR THE MENTAL RETARDS WHO SO WILLINGY COMMIT ALL THESE HORRENDOUS

    CRIMES AGAINST CITIZENS WHO HAVE NEVER DONE THEM ANY WRONG KILL THEM ALL OFF. REMEMBER

    BULLITS ARE CHEAPER THAN TRIALS A WASTE OF HEALTHCARE DOLLARS ON THESE CRIMINALS WHICH ARE THE

    BIGGEST WASTE OF NONHUMAN SKIN THERE EVER WAS.
  • I a agree with you on this issue. I also think that if we had a comprehensive national program that dealt with mental health we wouldn’t have so many of these kinds of tragic situations where distressed individuals turn to violent activities or take up with extremist groups.
  • The fact that the government in place is rushing into passing a bill suggest that it is trying to take advantage of the fear that this tragic event has created to increase its power and reduce our freedom. We should not let our fear dictate our actions. Any law needs a debate, without it, there is no democracy.
  • The Ottawa event was more than likely not a terrorist act. More than likely it was not connected to the events in Quebec days earlier. For Mr. Harper to suggest such so soon after the shooting is troubling and clearly a political PR move to bolster support for Canada’s involvement in this fight against ISIS. A fight framed as a “war”. A “war” which is unwinnable, cyclical, and ultimately more damaging to the regions where the conflict is centered than helpful.


    Canada should not be fighting this unwinnable war because of the actions of one mentally-disturbed man in Ottawa.


    The US Invasion of Iraq in 2003 fertilized the ground in Iraq from which ISIS has grown. As the events following World War I set the conditions from which World War II began.


    Fighting this fire with fire will only cause it to grow.


    To help the civilians effected, to treat the wounded, evacuate the innocent, like the White Helmets in Syria are doing now, is the honourable choice. To join in the bombings is a blunt and simplistic non-solution, dressed up to appear as if it is the only answer. I don’t personally buy into such a view.


    I am not so naive to believe that armed conflicts can always be avoided. They happen. They always have and likely always will in some capacity. And ISIS is not good: they are frustrated brutes and mass murderers. But in this instance, Canada need not jump into the fray simple because its leader seems to enjoy idealizing this out-dated notion of honour through war, adding to this chorus of rhetoric that the “war on terror” must be fought, and must be won. But the end is an illusion. Like Mr Harper’s time commitment in Syria, it might seem concrete, but is more than likely open-ended, which is dangerous.


    From my perspective, the only results of this deepening involvement in military action against ISIS is more dead civilians, and further unrest and destabilization in Iraq and Syria.


    We must help the people effected by this conflict, as Canada has done in the past. Pour our resources not into bombs, but into treating the wounded, sheltering the displaced, and rebuilding what has been destroyed. Slowly, steadily. Peaceful co-operation has always advanced the human race further than violence. Canada should continue to hold this ideal close, rather than violently intervene in this conflict for flimsy reasons.
  • I agree that this reaction is too early. The only thing that should be dealt with immediately is an assessment of Parliament Hill security, with appropriate adjustments. From what I have heard – the law enforcement folks were in fact doing what was necessary and expected, up to the point of ‘attack’. Let’s not over-react; we are a cool and calm people.
  • Exactly agree with your perspective. Lawyer Paul Copeland was interviewed on CBC’s The Current with a sober approach: http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/episode/2014/10/29/anti-terror-bill-will-create-new-age-of-surveillance-in-canada-public-safety-minister-sa/#
  • this is not a terrist attack—it is a mentally challenged-addict being angry at a Government spying on him and refusing him his constitutional right to a passport and saying I’m angry—do not let this occurrence be a tool to promote Harper’s agenda for police powers
  • Minister of Justice LIES to Parliament, Canadians to move forward with agenda to disarm all Canadians – I think it is called “fraud.”


    “1997 RCMP Commissioner J.P.R. Murray’s Letter –

    On July 21, 1997, RCMP Commissioner J.P.R. Murray – Alan Rock was not honest with parliament or the Canadian people, and change actual figures provided by RCMP, by increasing them 9 fold to create fear in Canada to force the Gun Registry and Firearms Act C-68. What Rock did was make all gun owners in Canada criminal and deny them their rights under the Charter of Individuals Rights and Freedoms.
  • The two recent killing of Canadian soldiers were heinous, cowardly and abhorrent acts, but they are not terrorist acts. Since both killers are now dead, there is absolutely no way of knowing the motivation or intent of their acts. Therefore it is not valid to portray them as terrorist acts, which have a political or religious agenda.

    My view is that Harper will try to use them in order to accomplish two things. The first is to expand the powers of CSIS, CSEC and the RCMP. The other it ti instill a fear factor into the psyche of Canadians.

    Looking back at the George Bush years and the Netanyahu period, he realizes that a fearful population is easier to manipulate or control. He also realizes (from those two examples and perhaps others) that a fearful society will tend to rally around the current leader. So the more fearful Canadians are the more benefits he will attain.

    I hope that you, other concerned MP’s and Canadians in general will see Harper’s agenda and protest against it.
  • I personally believe that it is a terrible idea to rush legislation through at this time. It is the worst possible type of politics to use such tragedy to further an agenda. This was an unfortunate series of events which may not have happened had it not become a requirement to “qualify” for foreign travel (I believe that Russia and East Germany used to play such cards) should a citizen support an unpopular social ideal.


    I have no time for men or women that would kill for what they believe is right, but that does not negate the fact that in a free society, one can support the army of their choice. Take the conflict in Vietnam for instance, where Canadians volunteered for duty with the US, who were an invading force.


    This is not to support the terrible crimes of these men, but to point out that we have a very real danger of the Political Right creating a form of “McCarthism” out of Islam here in Canada, as has been done by our neighbours to the south.


    The illusion of safety is simply not worth the loss of personal freedom.
  • Gun Control Failed – Australia and Great Briton did have its citizens register themselves and their firearms under the guise of public safety, then government seized firearms. The citizens of both nations are very upset, and some police officers have been speaking out on what governments did. Canadian police officers off the record in a recent study are also against gun control and the now closed registry, it does not work, but 13% of officers were in favor. Officers in Canada are given gag orders on the subject. Since gun control was put into place, and confiscation and disarmament, in Australia and Great Britain, crime and violent crime has increased, not decreased. Great Britain is now the worst EU nation for crime, and it ranks ahead of Russia (tough gun controls) and South Africa (tough controls) and people can not defend themselves. Australia and GB have warned the US to not give up their guns (the protests are on you tube). Following the disarming of Austrians, crime against senior citizens increased by more than 60% in the year that followed, seniors became easy target to criminals. When people think about violent crime and guns they think about the US .. but they do not look at the region in the US – major crime areas like Chicago, New York, Washington, have high crime rates but they also have the toughest gun controls in place. When Chicago on Jan 1, 2014 repealed hang gun bans, allowing citizens to carry handguns, drastic drops in crime and violent crime followed. Former Police Chief of Toronto spoke out against gun control and banning and still does – Fantilo I think his name is, says it does not work. Chief of Police in Edmonton also speaks out against gun control. Tougher government actions will not end violent crime, but they will make it so Canadians, seniors and other, are not able to protect themselves. Police typically arrive after crimes occur, this is the reality, they do the best they can do. The responsibility of protecting oneself rests first with the citizen, and to deny this fact, or to have any political party or the crown deny this reality, is questionable. Do proper objective research on the matter concerning gun control, and gun bans, without emotion. You can also purchase the book “The New Jim Crow Laws” bu Michelle Alexander a law professor who spoke at the University of Chicago – she is also on youtube with a red background and she deals with the real causes of crime and openly states guns do not cause crime – the system does ( although her focus is on black, she points out that there is no difference between what black and white experience but focus on her comments as they apply to all).
  • We need to fully use the laws we have not make new laws that inflict on the rights of law abidding citicens.
  • The amount of attention the government made all across Canada from one crazy person pulling out a gun, yes the soldier that died is horrible, but it makes it feel like Harper is using this to make it sound like a bigger issue so he can use fear to make law changes to his benefit.
  • Australia collected up its long guns after ONE incident…. when will we follow suite? (too brief but look it up)
  • We should take time to reflect and perhaps debate these issues. This, however, does not fit this governments agenda. It’s ironic that on Nov. 11th we will honor veterans for protecting our freedoms when we are so willing to give them up the first time we are tested.
  • PTSD: Given recent outbursts by MPs, I think before any laws are brought before the House, discussed and passed, that these MPs should all be seen by a psychiatrist to determine if they are suffering from PTSD. It is obvious with what is being proposed, and passed, that there are definitely some psychological problems, pre shooting and post? There are too many nuts sitting in the House of Commons, psychological screening/testing should be mandatory for all politicians before they run for office to insure those with issues don’t get elected to office.
  • The incidents that occurred last week involving Cpl. Nathan Cirillo and W.O. Patrice Vincent were to say the least tragic events and my heart felt sympathies go out to their families and friends. In the light of the events happening around the world I feel we need to “Stand on Guard” but NOT give into revamping our laws at the risk of giving up our civil liberty. My Father fought in WWII for Canada and freedom here and in Europe as did my Grandfather in WWI. Perhaps what we need to do is provide a higher level of security AROUND the buildings and people that may be most susceptible to harm and provide at least a holstered weapon for self defence to the soldiers standing a ceremonial guard.
  • I, LIKE MOST CANADIANS FEEL VERY SAD FOR THE EVENTS OF LAST WEEK. I ALSO FEEL THAT MY RIGHTS AS A CANADIAN SHOULD NOT BE RIPPED AWAY B/C OF FEAR AND TWO UNSTABLE PEOPLE. STOP HARPER AND THE CONSERVATIVE GOV’T MAKING THESE CHANGES TO THE LAWS. HARPER WAS JUST WAITING FOR AN EXCUSE TO GIVE MORE POWER TO THE RCMP AND THE SECURITY FORCES OVER THE AVERAGE CANADIAN.
  • Pols drone on about Canadian multiculturalism…until they start racial profiling! This incident was a simple criminal act which had nothing to do with religion.


    However, if govt is keen on Canuck participation in America’s wars without end, all Canadians should expect blowback and retaliation. While I can never condone violence, whether corporate and organised or individual, it’s not a stretch to see how the victims of the US wars against faceless, brown-skinned, violent religious fanatics, could want their pound of flesh—in pieces—from us.


    Instead of learning from America’s mistakes in creating a vengeful nation—more prisons, militarised police, surveillance—the current cdn govt seeks to copy them! Frankly, I think on both sides of the border, it’s just about money.


    Wars and police and prisons are good business. Pols don’t care about the everyman just the porkbarrel.
  • if the Harper Government looked after the Canadian population, stopped kissing up to other countries, and changed His attitude for governing in Canada, we would return to the respected country we once were.

    I believe if we stayed in Canada and did not bow down to other countries, we would not be in danger from the likes of the terrorists, extremists and the Harper dictatorship form of government.
  • Share your thoughts on the shooting on Parliament hill to Alexandre Boulerice #NDP #CDNpoli
  • Sad, unfortunate circumstance by a characteristic marginalized young man. Yes, we need focus and perhaps legislation to help people who are marginalized for whatever reason.