Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Canadian ambassador tackles protestor, eh

  • 26-05-2016 07:53PM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,947 ✭✭✭


    See the video going around where the Canadian ambassador tackles a protestor at a commemoration for British troops killed in 1916. Bet nothing happens to him yet the protestor will be in trouble.

    http://www.thejournal.ie/kevin-vickers-rising-ceremony-2790197-May2016/

    How would you characterise the Canadian Ambassador? 86 votes

    Legend
    0% 0 votes
    Arsehole
    100% 86 votes


«13456789

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭keith16


    Hahahahaha


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    Putting a protester in his place is far from assault.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,967 ✭✭✭Hande hoche!


    Sure the protester is lucky he didn't get shot.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,060 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    Mod: Edited thread title because that was not assault


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,947 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Not to question modding in a thread but it's definitely assault running over and grabbing someone then dragging them off.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,450 ✭✭✭✭Birneybau


    What's that all aboot, eh?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,060 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    20Cent wrote: »
    Not to question modding in a thread but it's definitely assault running over and grabbing someone then dragging them off.

    Your definition of assault must be different to my definition of assault.

    Regardless, the article doesn't have any use of the word 'assault', not including the comments section.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,196 ✭✭✭testicles


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    That video made me smile.

    Not trying to debate against the individuals right to protest or the possible over reaction at the end with the handcuffs.

    Just, so much made me laugh in this particularly the security guy at the end of the video with the earpiece in just standing there and the Garda strolling over to have an auld look at things. Also funny was the guy at 15 seconds with the gun on his shoulder deliberately ignoring what was going on.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,450 ✭✭✭✭Birneybau


    testicles wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    He also shot an Islamic terrorist in Canada.

    With these interventions, he's really spoiling us.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,487 ✭✭✭✭For Forks Sake




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,947 ✭✭✭20Cent


    2.—(1) A person shall be guilty of the offence of assault who, without lawful excuse, intentionally or recklessly—

    (a) directly or indirectly applies force to or causes an impact on the body of another, or

    (b) causes another to believe on reasonable grounds that he or she is likely immediately to be subjected to any such force or impact,

    without the consent of the other.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭keith16


    Birneybau wrote: »
    He also shot an Islamic terrorist in Canada.

    No, he murdered a freedom fighter dead.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,947 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Birneybau wrote: »
    He also shot an Islamic terrorist in Canada.

    And well done to him for that. Still doesn't mean he can go all diehard with members of the public here.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,711 ✭✭✭stimpson


    20Cent wrote: »
    2.—(1) A person shall be guilty of the offence of assault who, without lawful excuse, intentionally or recklessly—

    (a) directly or indirectly applies force to or causes an impact on the body of another, or

    (b) causes another to believe on reasonable grounds that he or she is likely immediately to be subjected to any such force or impact,

    without the consent of the other.

    A. He probably had lawful excuse
    B. He would have diplomatic immunity
    C. He's my hero. We should ask him to police water protests
    D. Canada is awesome.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,013 ✭✭✭davycc


    20Cent wrote: »
    2.—(1) A person shall be guilty of the offence of assault who, without lawful excuse, intentionally or recklessly—

    (a) directly or indirectly applies force to or causes an impact on the body of another, or

    (b) causes another to believe on reasonable grounds that he or she is likely immediately to be subjected to any such force or impact,

    without the consent of the other.

    hope the ambassador gets charged over this - way over the top reaction going by what ive seen so far


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,947 ✭✭✭20Cent


    stimpson wrote: »
    A. He probably had lawful excuse
    B. He would have diplomatic immunity
    C. He's my hero. We should ask him to police water protests
    D. Canada is awesome.

    What lawful excuse?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 140 ✭✭luftmensch


    20Cent wrote: »
    2.—(1) A person shall be guilty of the offence of assault who, without lawful excuse, intentionally or recklessly—

    (a) directly or indirectly applies force to or causes an impact on the body of another, or

    (b) causes another to believe on reasonable grounds that he or she is likely immediately to be subjected to any such force or impact,

    without the consent of the other.

    Didn't the "victim" approach Charlie Flanagan, as well as the British and Canadian ambassadors whilst shouting? He has a right to protest of course, but from a security point of view, that could be interpreted as threatening behaviour. Especially considering the high profile guests that were present.


  • Posts: 3,251 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Just to give some background on Ambassador Vickers

    Canada hails hero Kevin Vickers for shooting gunman dead during attack on Ottawa’s Parliament Hill
    As Canadians continued to mourn Thursday for a murdered reservist soldier, the focus was turned to Kevin Vickers, a man deemed a hero for stopping the callous terrorist attack on Ottawa’s Parliament Hill.

    The 58-year-old House of Commons Sergeant-at-Arms has been lauded by lawmakers for shooting dead suspected shooter Michael Joseph Hall, a 32-year-old recent Islam convert from Quebec known as Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, inside Parliament’s Centre Block building Wednesday morning.

    “MPs and Hill staff owe their safety, even lives, to Sergeant at Arms Kevin Vickers who shot attacker just outside the MPs’ caucus rooms,” New Democrat MP Craig Scott tweeted after the chaos.

    “Kevin Vickers is such a fine man,” added Green Party Leader Elizabeth May. “His actions today are no surprise. Proud to call him a friend.”

    The modest public servant has spent the past eight years in the largely ceremonial position at Parliament, where he dons green robes, white gloves and a tall imperial hat while carrying a gold scepter into the House of Commons each time before elected representatives meet.

    But he’s also armed with a handgun and is ultimately responsible for the building’s security. As video shows law enforcement swarm Centre Block, Parliament’s main building, it was Vickers who stopped the attack on Canada’s federal complex.

    “He’s a very intelligent and responsible person,” Vickers’ cousin, Keith, told CBC News. “He’s a people-person-type fellow, too, but you don’t want to mess with him. All the boys, the local guys, they’ll be quite proud to hear he did what he did.”

    On Thursday, Vickers led the procession of elected officials into the hall, where he was met with a standing ovation and roars from the members of Parliament. He appeared to hold back tears during the emotional moment.

    In a speech from the floor of the House of Commons, Prime Minister Stephen Harper heaped praise on Vickers before walking over and offering his hand and hug to the hero.

    "Here were are in our seats, in our chamber in the very heart of our democracy, at worker," Harper said during a defiant and emotional speech. "We will not be intimidated.

    Before he took the Parliament post, Vickers spent 29 years with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, earning accolades for his work 14 years helping settle a heated dispute in Burnt Church, New Brunswick over native’s fishing rights in the community.

    “The inspector was a real community man,” Bobby Sylliboy, a longtime band constable with the Burnt Church First Nation, told the National Post. “People around here, let me tell you, they hold him in the highest regard. He was this 6-foot-3, non-native guy, coming to our reserve — and even coming to our Christmas vigils. He was hard to miss. He was a Down East guy, just a guy from the Miramichi. But to us, he was the chief.”

    The understated Vickers again proved adept at diplomacy in his duties as sergeant at arms when he decided to allow Sikhs to bring in kirpans, a ceremonial dagger, to the House of Commons. The decision in 2011 came despite the fact the Quebec National Assembly had banned the kirpan and earned Vickers a tribute from the World Sikh Organization of Canada, The Globe and Mail reported.

    Vickers told the group he had been raised to accept diversity and differences in culture as a boy in Miramichi, a coastal New Brunswick city of some 20,000 people.

    "I see your wearing of the kirpan, especially in our Parliamentary buildings, as exactly that, respecting your dignity," he told WSO members at a 2011 fete in his honor. "But just as the kirpan issue came before us last winter, we are reminded how vigilant we must be to not only defend but promote the practices, cultures and religions of all peoples."

    In the aftermath of Wednesday’s shooting, which shook up sleepy Ottawa and the rest of Canada, normally so secure against gun violence, Vickers was once again lauded by his countrymen for his decisive and sure actions.

    “Mr. Vickers, the whole country is unanimous in all matters that count: bravery, duty, selfness – you are as good as they get,” CBC reporter Rex Murphy said during his “Point of View” show Wednesday evening. “The office of sergeant at arms can never have been better filled.”

    sgoldstein@nydailynews.com


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭Augme


    20Cent wrote: »
    2.—(1) A person shall be guilty of the offence of assault who, without lawful excuse, intentionally or recklessly—

    (a) directly or indirectly applies force to or causes an impact on the body of another, or

    (b) causes another to believe on reasonable grounds that he or she is likely immediately to be subjected to any such force or impact,

    without the consent of the other.


    Ding ding ding.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 222 ✭✭SmilingLurker


    I am proud of the ambassador of the country of my birth.

    A polite protest is fine. I might disagree but I respect that. The protester does not do his views any good.

    I am a strong be liver in a Republic (even of Canada)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,208 ✭✭✭✭Cienciano


    davycc wrote: »
    hope the ambassador gets charged over this - way over the top reaction going by what ive seen so far
    Diplomatic immunity


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,711 ✭✭✭stimpson


    20Cent wrote: »
    What lawful excuse?

    Self defence.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭Augme


    20Cent wrote: »
    What lawful excuse?


    A and B should have him easily covered.

    Section 18(1) of the 1997 Act gives lawful excuse a statutory basis. It provides:

    The use of force by a person for any of the following, if only reasonable in the circumstances as he/she believes them to be does not constitute an offense:
    a) Protecting against injury, detention or assault caused by a criminal act.
    b) Protect from trespass
    c) Protect property
    d) Protect another’s property
    e) Prevent crime or breach of the peace


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    He gets my vote well done ambassador


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,947 ✭✭✭20Cent


    stimpson wrote: »
    Self defence.

    Was he being attacked?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,208 ✭✭✭✭Cienciano


    Augme wrote: »
    A and B should have him easily covered.

    Section 18(1) of the 1997 Act gives lawful excuse a statutory basis. It provides:

    The use of force by a person for any of the following, if only reasonable in the circumstances as he/she believes them to be does not constitute an offense:
    a) Protecting against injury, detention or assault caused by a criminal act.
    b) Protect from trespass
    c) Protect property
    d) Protect another’s property
    e) Prevent crime or breach of the peace
    I like what he did, but neither a or b apply here. Breach of the peace maybe, but you can argue any protest is breach of the peace


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Lol... Just lol.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,428 ✭✭✭h2005


    Massive over reaction by the ambassador and probably actually is assault. Why hadn't the many gardai that were there intervened? Had the man actually committed any offence? Next time someone protests and I don't agree with it can I act the same way?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭Augme


    Cienciano wrote: »
    I like what he did, but neither a or b apply here. Breach of the peace maybe, but you can argue any protest is breach of the peace


    I'd have thought that would be the case quite often with protests.


Advertisement
Advertisement