How Big Will The Over Reaction Be This Time?

[Johnny]

I get the impression that this guy in Ottawa was about as Muslim, as I am. The religious conversion was an excuse to kill someone. It looked to me ( I am no gun expert ) that he had some antique single shot rifle?

Too bad someone couldn't have grabbed it after the first shot and beat him with it.

[DEFCON]

Why did the Mounties take away his passport? Why restrict other parties from heading over there at all? Wouldn't it make more sense to let them go and then revoke their passport / citizenship?

[acsidestick]

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote' data-author="Johnny" data-cid="1641484" data-time="1414082997"><p>I get the impression that this guy in Ottawa was about as Muslim, as I am.  The religious conversion was an excuse to kill someone.  It looked to me ( I am no gun expert ) that he had some antique single shot rifle?  Too bad someone couldn't have grabbed it after the first shot and beat him with it.</p></blockquote>Johnny, it is not a single shot. It is a Winchester model 1894 (known also as a 94). It is 30 caliber lever action capable of rapid firing 8 .30-.30 cartridges. It is the "cowboy" rifle from Western movies. It is not necessarily antique as they are still made today and are one of the most famous rifles ever made. It is not a toy, easily kills deer and elk, can kill anything including bears. The bullets it fires are bigger and more powerful than the AR15/M16 military rifles you think of when you see a soldier, and roughly the same as a AK47. Other manufactures (Marlin)have also made knockoff versions.I wouldn't walk up to him and grab it to try and hit him with it.The gun registry is a false avenue. This individual is a criminal and barred from owning guns, therefore, this will show to be a stolen gun, that was at one point, registered. See the difference it made. Criminals want guns, criminals get guns.

[mo32a]

Sadly, I also commend Coyne for this column. It's an uncomfortable truth.

Except his comment of "lone wolf", I agree with the director of the FBI that calling them that implies some degree of honour, they are "lone rats".

[chockalicious]

@Defcon. I do not think there is a mechanism to take away their passport/citizenship once they have left Canada. I agree with the RCMP, take away their passports so they can not travel somewhere to become battle trained/hardened and return to Canada with more lethal skills.

[Kip Powick]

@Defcon. I do not think there is a mechanism to take away their passport/citizenship once they have left Canada. I agree with the RCMP, take away their passports so they can not travel somewhere to become battle trained/hardened and return to Canada with more lethal skills.

Taking away their Passports does very little to alleviate the problem. They can acquire all the lethal skills they want via the Internet. Taking away their Passports may only make them more desperate to prove their mettle and thus the single murderous attacks. We all realize the attacker is fully aware that they will probably not come back alive and that is merely part of their mind set.

The Humane attitude ...............If CSIS has a watch list, the govt will have to enact a law which provides for an arrest and mandatory "de-radicalizing" classes.

My Hawkish attitude ................Personally I would rather just have them parachute out of a Herc, 10NM south of the North Pole , naked, with a box of Smarties and if they get back to civilization...they are free men.

[Kip Powick]

I believe I said "parachute...I'm not so cruel as to throw them out "chuteless".

[Moon The Loon]

The over-reaction will be to increase the surveilance culture. So we all, again, suffer - not those that perpetrate this but the average Canadian. More civil liberties will disappear.

But the issue here is Islam. Not Arabs or Muslims but radical Islam and, as this week has shown, twice, it exists in Canada. Why do we insist on tiptoeing around the issue? Why do we bow to the cries of racism and other rhetoric?

If these attacks had targeted a different race, Jews etc there would be absolute outrage (rightly) and massive exposure of those people/groups involved and who esposed similar views. If it was white supremists we would have raids, arrests etc.

These extremists were nutured in Canada--in mosques in Canada and it cannot be allowed to continue. Hate is hate and Canada has to start dealing with it in its own borders. One can't preach hatred against Jews (or deny the holocost) but we allow Islam in some Canadian mosques to preach the equivalent?

"But the issue here is Islam. Not Arabs or Muslims but radical Islam and, as this week has shown, twice, it exists in Canada. Why do we insist on tiptoeing around the issue? Why do we bow to the cries of racism and other rhetoric?"

I'm not sure I agree. I think the issue here, and with the nut-bar in St. Jean, is mental illness. What's the difference between what either of these two individuals have done, because of "voices screaming in their heads", and that of the fellow on the bus east of Winnipeg killing and beheading a companion traveller on a bus?

Canada may have a "world class" health system, but it has a thirteenth century class mental health system.

[Specs]

@Specs

Disagree with your characterization of the 2 as "mental health cases that were provoked by the RCMP." Honestly, to try to give these 2 losers and type of credit of provocation or justification is something I find saddening.

Your rush to judgment to minimize these guys is the equivalent of the war hawks on the other side of the spectrum. I watched most of the coverage yesterday and was on Twitter and the overwhelming majority of what I saw and heard were calls for restraint and calls that we don't let this incident change us.

These guys are terrorists. Their aim is to instill terror. ISIL calls for violence against non believers everywhere (along with taking a video) This killing is no different than the beheading of the soldier in the UK.

These 2 losers and others who have gone to Syria to fight are being radicalized in Canada, surely it is not your assertion that they are all mentally ill? There is an issue with Islam, not sure why this is so hard to accept. I am by no means saying that all Muslims are terrorists, far from it, but let's not bury our heads in the sand and pretend that there is an equivalency in other religions that call for Jihad.

How do you differentiate between a terrorist and somebody who is just ticked off at the government. Is everybody that's mad at the government to one degree or another a terrorist or a terrorist in the making? Was the guy who took a shot at Marois after the PQ won another election in Quebec a terrorist or a crackpot?

The mind is a curious thing and there a myriad of motivations for why people do the despicable things that they do. Not all of those motivations are ideological. People jump off buildings and bridges when they see no other way out. Some lash out and go postal. In the absence of any other explanation I tend to think these western converts to Islamic fundamentalism are like cult members. They've lost perspective on who they are and their identity. They look for a way to get it back and they're desperate. It's not ideological religious belief that motivated these 2. In the end I expect we'll find these guys these just wanted to be acknowledged and recognized in some twisted way we can't imagine.

Maybe I'm wrong.

I still find the government's attempt to immediately spin all this to promote a more invasive state security apparatus extremely offensive. There is more terror in the halls of any low income housing building in Toronto at night but little is done to address that state of affairs.

We live in a democracy and that requires we remain vigilant to protect our freedoms. Not only from threats without, but also from threats within. The slightest change in the fragile balance of power between the individual and the state has huge repercussions and we shouldn't treat it so lightly as to endorse a response to threats with knee jerk reactions. There are plenty of other courses of action to prevent it happening again. This fella in Ottawa was already known to police and had been in jail. How did those folks miss the clues? He walked into the parliament buildings with plenty of advance notice and nobody thought to lock down the place before he got there? Where was the security? Why did it fail? He had a gun - How? Why not deal with those questions first before limiting our individual freedoms?

[CanadaEH]

Bingo.

But painting him as a terrorist and pitting "us" vs. "them" is much easier to do. It's convenient for us to paint him as a terrorist when Harper is trying to rally the troops against the Big Bad ISIS.

[chockalicious]

@Specs. The reason I am calling him a terrorist is that his action seem to be driven by what ISIL is advocating, as was the killing of the soldier in PQ.

We also have radicalized Canadians who have travelled to fight with ISIL. This isn't the govt saying so, it is the fighters on Youtube and Twitter claiming their actions. The apparent commitment to the ideology is why I call them terrorists. I, like you, could be wrong about this, just going from what I see and read. There is a group calling for death to non believers, these guys apparently were followers of that group.

I do not know the specifics of the legislation that was already being put forward however I have yet to see a call for a draconian response by the government. I ask sincerely, what have you seen or read about new proposals that limit our freedom?

@CanadaEh, not sure if you are being sarcastic with your "big bad ISIS" comment but yes they are big and bad. It is estimated that they are getting $1M per day from selling oil on the black market, additionally they are well funded by others in the middle east.

I think a healthy skepticism is good however I also think it is naïve to underestimate the passion from some of those who want to do us harm.

[ILB]

Why is this being called a terrorist attack? Senseless murder, sure, but terrorism!? That just comes across as sensationalism to me. In this era of ISIS BEWARE! it seems over the top.

This was deliberate, direct attack; first on an unarmed soldier, representing one of our most sacred symbols; and then an attempt on our most powerful political institution.

What would it take, in your mind, to qualify as a terrorist attack? Is there a certain body-count threshold you're looking for? A more significant target?

[CanadaEH]

I heard Harper's speech on the radio last night as I was driving home and all I could think about was how he was already pointing the finger at terrorists, or more specifically, ISIS/ISIL. I thought that was a defining speech; almost aggressive. Something about it seemed different to me and it just didn't sit right. I don't really know why? Maybe I don't think it's Canada's place to go hunting for "terrorists" abroad. Maybe I don't trust politicians. Maybe I see Canada turning into the same propaganda machine as the US? I still have no idea why I was **bleep** off but I still am.

My fellow Canadians, for the second time this week there has been a brutal and violent attack on our soil. Today our thoughts and prayers are with the family and friend of Cpl. Nathan Cirillo or the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders. Cpl. Cirillo was killed today, murdered in cold blood, as he provided a ceremonial honour guard at Canada’s National War Memorial. That sacred place that pays tribute to those who gave their lives so that we can live in a free, democratic and safe society.

Likewise, our thoughts and prayers remain also with the family and friends of Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent, who was killed earlier this week by an ISIL-inspired terrorist.

Tonight we also pray for the speedy recovery of the others injured in these despicable attacks

Fellow Canadians, we’ve also been reminded today of the compassionate and courageous nature of so many Canadians, like those private citizens and first responders who came to provide aid to Cpl. Cirillo as he fought for his life. And of course the member of our security forces, in the RCMP, the City of Ottawa Police and in Parliament, who came quickly and at great risk to themselves to assist those of us who were close to the attack.

Fellow Canadians, in the days to come we will learn more about the terrorist and any accomplices he may have had. But these week’s events are a grim reminder that Canada is not immune to the types of terrorist attacks we have seen elsewhere around the world.

We are also reminded that attacks on our security personnel and on our institutions of government, are by their very nature, attacks on our country, on our values, on our society, on us Canadians as a free and democratic people who embrace human dignity for all.

But let there be no misunderstanding, we will not be intimidated. Canada will never be intimidated. In fact, this will lead us to strengthen our resolve and redouble our efforts, and those of our national security agencies, to take all necessary steps to identify and counter threats and keep Canada safe here at home, just as it will lead us to strengthen our resolve and redouble our efforts to work with our allies around the world and fight against the terrorist organizations who brutalize those in other countries with the hope of bringing their savagery to our shores -- they will have no safe haven.

Well today has been without question a difficult day. I have every confidence that Canadians will pull together with the kind of firm solidarity that has seen our country through many challenges. Together we will remain vigilant against those at home or abroad who wish to harm us.

For now, Laureen and Ben and Rachel and I join all Canadians in praying for those touched by today’s attack. May god bless them and keep our land glorious and free.

Am I wrong for not towing the line and calling this a terrorist attack? I just don't think it is. If Bilbeau was a white man from Alberta it wouldn't have been labelled a Terrorist Attack. How is the below any different? 4 police officers killed.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/4-rcmp-officers-killed-on-alberta-farm-1.521207

[Fido]

Maybe you should all look up the definition of terrorism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism

[Specs]

@Specs. The reason I am calling him a terrorist is that his action seem to be driven by what ISIL is advocating, as was the killing of the soldier in PQ.

I know. We all thought that. The newspapers, TV and radio all posited exactly the same. So did that the politicians. All within moments of the event on Parliament Hill. That doesn't mean we're right, just that we all agree. But were we right? From Fido's Wikipedia reference:

"...There is neither an academic nor an international legal consensus regarding the definition of the term terrorism.[1][2] Various legal systems and government agencies use different definitions. Moreover, governments have been reluctant to formulate an agreed upon, legally binding definition. These difficulties arise from the fact that the term is politically and emotionally charged..."

We've all heard the expression that 'One man's terrorist is another is another man's freedom fighter'. Where you see a terrorist I think we might find a guy with mental health issues. Maybe that's at the root of all these terrorists - mental health issues? Were there a coordinated concerted attack of many of these guys that spoke of strategizing, resources and planning I would wholeheartedly agree - they're terrorists. When it's just a couple of guys acting independently and alone I'm not so sure.

We also have radicalized Canadians who have travelled to fight with ISIL. This isn't the govt saying so, it is the fighters on Youtube and Twitter claiming their actions. The apparent commitment to the ideology is why I call them terrorists. I, like you, could be wrong about this, just going from what I see and read. There is a group calling for death to non believers, these guys apparently were followers of that group.

I agree. The ones that are fighting overseas are terrorists. These guys - I'm hesitant to disagree with you here, they certainly do seem to be committed ISIL followers but they passed up on a lot of non believers despite ample opportunity. Instead they went after symbols. The military and the government. Why? Some twisted sense of honor rooted in their western personna that would allow them to think of themselves as soldiers? I doubt they got direct orders from ISIL HQ to attack our institutions. Then again.........that could explain the nearly coincidental timing of the separate events.

Still though, I simply can't fathom why a westerner would convert to such an extremist group. I have to believe there are emotional and mental issues at play here in these guys. If not, then we're in more trouble than we ever imagined.

I do not know the specifics of the legislation that was already being put forward however I have yet to see a call for a draconian response by the government. I ask sincerely, what have you seen or read about new proposals that limit our freedom?

I found it odd that Harper took 8 hrs for Harper to make a public statement. Then I watched his speech. That it was so devoid of any emotion whatsoever, fear nerves, anger, indignation, etc and full of "doublespeak" left me fearing more for the country from him than from the gunman earlier in the day.

From todays Globe

- Harper vows to strengthen national security laws after Ottawa shooting

The link is

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/mps-return-to-house-in-emotional-gathering-after-ottawa-shooting/article21263777/#dashboard/follows/

Newscasts were addressing the same story within 12 hrs of his speech.

I'm pretty certain that once those powers are given, they won't soon be given up and that 20 yrs from now we'll be quietly shaking our heads in private at some of the freedoms and rights we'll have lost.

Democracy is a fragile thing.

[Wolfhunter]

No doubt some extremists are mentally ill. The idea that you have to be mentally ill to be an extremist though is not strait line logic; it's a stratospheric leap Nothing in my experience would lead me to consider the notion for longer than the time it takes to compose three sentences.

Yes, this presents a more troubling idea than many imagined and it keeps contingency planners up late. If, domestically, this is truly the domain of the mentally ill, the situation is even worse and the potential recruitment pool larger than most pessimists could even imagine. Part of the trouble here is that most people think of multiculturalism as a summer holiday with ethnic food. That doesn't mean that Canadian values need to dramatically change. Simply put, I believe that complacency is just as dangerous as over reaction.

The question of where he got the gun is certainly valid. I was simply pointing out that it was the easiest ingredient on a demented shopping list. Simplistic equations like 0 guns equals this or equals that qualify as cute T shirt slogans only.

[Kip Powick]

In New York....

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/24/us/new-york-hatchet-islamist-suspicions/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

[Boney]

He intended to go to Syria, but was denied a passport. So, he took up arms and did his deed, as per the call from Isis.

I sure hope that our government don't listen to the "bleeding hearts", but ensure they fully monitor the "93", even though it requires they infringe on mine and yours rights to privacy.

By declaring "war" on any group, one must protect ones homeland, even from its own citizens. Isis responded by threatening Canada. Do you wait for them to strike? The best defense is a strong offense.

Just saying.

[chockalicious]

@Specs. Thanks for the thoughtful response.

With respect to the mentally ill question I do not think that this guy was mentally ill. He was probably disenfranchised and from reports was a drug addict but radical Islam gave him something to latch on to. Had he latched on to being a born again Christian, Buddhist Monk or an adherent to the Flying Spaghetti Monster then I do not think he goes and attacks a symbol of Canada. Plus he was not going to Syria in search of a better Donair, pretty sure he was going to fight.

I am not for a second saying that he was given orders by ISIL to do this but he was imo he was influenced by the groups teachings.

I think that is an unfair criticism of Harper on his speech that day. Whether he took too long is debatable but please give the guy a tiny bit of credit in that he was probably as stunned and shell shocked as everyone else. It can be argued that his calmness and detachment the day of the shooting offered its own kind of reassurance as most saw the same Harper as always.

I saw the speeches in HOC, well done by all the leaders. I personally think there probably is some room to strengthen some of our national security laws. Society and threats to it evolve and the laws should evolve with it. I have not yet seen any details and am by no means a security expert but I would like to think that the job of govt is to respond to threats, preferably in the framework of robust legislation.

@ CanadaEh. Your argument is off base. The Mounties were killed as part of an ongoing dispute by a career criminal in the actions of a criminal enterprise. Had he gone after the Mounties as a result of some misguided ISIL teachings then yes, would definitely call him a terrorist.

The "white guy from Alberta" is a thinly veiled comment that implies that there is some sort of racism involved here and you could not be more wrong. Lots of white guys from all over the place have gone to fight with ISIL and previously the Taliban. The dogma is the issue, not the skin color.

[dagger]

In New York....

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/24/us/new-york-hatchet-islamist-suspicions/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Police have now dismissed this theory. This guy, pardon the expression, had a serious ax to grind with authority, and no ties or aspirations re: Islam.

[Thebean]

He intended to go to Syria, but was denied a passport. So, he took up arms and did his deed, as per the call from Isis.

I sure hope that our government don't listen to the "bleeding hearts", but ensure they fully monitor the "93", even though it requires they infringe on mine and yours rights to privacy.

By declaring "war" on any group, one must protect ones homeland, even from its own citizens. Isis responded by threatening Canada. Do you wait for them to strike? The best defense is a strong offense.

Just saying.

Why not simply let them go, cancel their passport 24 hours after their departure and be done with them?

I know...the devil is in the details.....

[Specs]

@Specs. Thanks for the thoughtful response.

Likewise.

It generated some interesting ideas and challenged me to take apart some of my own notions about mental health.

[Boney]

Why not simply let them go, cancel their passport 24 hours after their departure and be done with them?

I know...the devil is in the details.....

Agreed.

But until then, we are in a state of war. as declared by our Prime Minister. I not saying not continue with our lives, but be more vigilent. Give our authorities the ammo to go after these so call combatants, and deal with them in the approapiate manner.

Cheers.

[moeman]

If the Catholic church, the Pope, if you will, had been preaching that any and all adherents to his particular ideology strike out in any way they can against those who don't follow Catholicism, with him stating that certain countries were to be targeted, and that was followed by a bunch of Christians killing random Muslims or Jews or (insert whatever you'd like here) across the planet because of it, would you call it terrorism? I would. ISIL has done just that. Whether these clowns are terrorists or not is irrelevant. The call to arms has been made and every whack job out there who supports ISIL, whether mentally ill or just disenfranchised, has a job to do and apparently they're doing it.

[dagger]

Agreed.

But until then, we are in a state of war. as declared by our Prime Minister. I not saying not continue with our lives, but be more vigilent. Give our authorities the ammo to go after these so call combatants, and deal with them in the approapiate manner.

Cheers.

Vigilence yes, but a state of war? That's going way too far for my liking. I'm fairly confident the police have the tools already to do the job.

If the Catholic church, the Pope, if you will, had been preaching that any and all adherents to his particular ideology strike out in any way they can against those who don't follow Catholicism, with him stating that certain countries were to be targeted, and that was followed by a bunch of Christians killing random Muslims or Jews or (insert whatever you'd like here) across the planet because of it, would you call it terrorism?

I call that the Spanish Inquisition.