My personal opinion: your threshold to kill free speech is way, WAY too low.

Free speech has nothing to do with it.

Look at how casually you make these connections: speech -> noise -> sleeplessness -> damage ... therefore implying, purposefully or not, that speech = violence.

No. Speech is NOT violence. I suggest you get a pair of earplugs.

Sadly, I doubt you even recognise your contribution to the polarisation of society and removal of nuance from social discourse.

> No. Speech is NOT violence. I suggest you get a pair of earplugs.

Threats. That's one form of violence. Yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, that's another.

Threat is instigating fear of injury. Violence is causing injury. You can have your own personal definition, but from a legal perspective, threat is not a violent crime.

Yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre isn't even illegal. Let alone a violence. Inciting panic is illegal. If you incite panic through yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, you'll answer for inciting panic and will bear responsibility for the actual consequences, if any, not for the yelling.

https://dictionary.thelaw.com/violence/

this violence is not confined to an actual assault of the person, [..] whatever goes to intimidate or overawe, by the apprehension of personal violence, or by fear of life [..] equally falls within its limits

Instead, read a little further: The term “violence” is synonymous with “physical force,” and the two are used interchangeably, in relation to assaults

Speech is not physical force, and is not an assault, and is not violence.

Anyone here with on the ground experience about the nighttime situation?

Took 5s to find.

Perhaps reading the comment in context of the comment chain is necessary. I am making no claims as to the truckers, I am stating that the onus is on those who are causing damage by their "Free Speech" to adjust to avoid causing that damage, rather than on the people suffering the damage.

It doesn't have to be either one or the other. A more conciliatory approach by the Canadian government would pay off better. My personal opinion, only. I might be wrong, who knows?...

This whole thread is people arguing about something they evidently know nothing about.

I cannot have a festival out on my lawn for similar reasons...

If that is the only type of demonstration that gets your point across, ok, but I seriously doubt that is the case.

I don't have the right to go lay on my horn outside your house, and for good reason.

Unless Trudeau does that, and god forbid show some humility, this will not end good for Canada.

In what way will this "not end good for Canada"?

Most likely the blockades will be shut down and everyone else will be able to get on with life.

1 - https://youtu.be/pcGsqLRyKo0?t=67

2 - https://givesendgo.com/FreedomConvoy2022

If you can't even describe the situation accurately, why should anyone care about your take on it?

This doesn't look like public discontent, it looks like a small group of motivated contrarians and their international backers.

You know what looks like public discontent? The public coming together to stop trucks disrupting their lives and their city - https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/battle-of-billings...

And none of this answers the question about how this will "not end good for canada".

Of the ~90k GiveSendGo donors, ~35k were from Canada. Population: 36-38m.

Here's one of the top donors confirming their entry was accurate: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-sussex-corne...

"Most likely the blockades will be shut down and everyone else will be able to get on with life."

Except for all people who can't because they got unlucky in the vaccine lottery, like Maddie de Garay:

https://thecovidblog.com/2021/07/08/maddie-de-garay-ohio-13-...

Note: de Garay is a child. Zero benefit from Covid vaccines to her or anyone else. It's bad enough when parents submit their children for medical experimentation like that, but when governments force them to do so it's even worse.

Well I can see you're not interested in things like facts, evidence, science or reality. Never mind then.

An absolute handful of children have been (possibly; causality unclear) sickened by the COVID-19 vaccine.

About 1,000 children have died of COVID-19 in the US (https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-Focus-...).

The exact details of why the virus hits children less hard are unclear; one theory is that the primary cause of lung-failure death in adults is a cytokine storm (i.e. the immune system reacting to the virus by attacking too many healthy cells at a rate the body can't repair), and a younger, more naive immune system is less likely to have picked up whatever environmentally-primed triggers COVID-19 aggravates to kick off a cytokine storm.

... but sadly, "less likely" isn't "didn't happen," and if that causality is correct, some thousand unlucky kids have gotten snake-eyes on the immune dice and died of a disease that we can now vaccinate for. That's an order of magnitude more children than the number we even suspect of being sickened by the vaccine.

We should vaccinate those who haven't been vaccinated because the risk balance is pretty clear at this point from the gross numbers we have on under-18 vaccination already.

from your source:

> COVID-19 deaths are those with confirmed or presumed COVID-19

i.e. 1000 children have died with COVID, not of COVID. Big difference.

The BLM protest in Ottawa showed up, stayed peaceful, protested, and left. As did all of the many protests I saw while living in downtown Ottawa.

I have friends living in the area still and they were subjected to a sleepless week of harassment by damagingly loud train horns and people giving them shit for choosing to wear a mask.

That's not a peaceful protest. It's not just discomfort. It's a crime. And the fact they're behaving better now doesn't erase their past behaviour. I think that having a discussion on ending mandates is fine. It's a good time for that.

But I also want to see them face legal consequences for their behaviour toward the innocent citizens of Centretown. And I don't like how they tried to blackmail the government into making changes by hurting their fellow citizens. I think that is undemocratic.

These were train horns that were well over 100db outside and still over 80db inside people's apartments. Loud enough to cause permanent hearing damage. So yes, if you're doing something that can cause lasting damage, it's violence.

There's a wide gulf between honking loudly enough to annoy and honking loudly enough to injure. It's really not that hard to not cross it, but they did, for days on end.

As I said - they seem to be behaving better now. Maybe it's petty and vindictive, but I don't think it's okay to just let that kind of thing pass without consequences for the perpetrators.

I bet some of the people they were tormenting are anti-vaxxers themselves. Everyone gets annoyed if you keep them awake all night, every night.