Skip navigation

Woman cuffed for not holding escalator handrail

From Saturday's Globe and Mail

‘It was horrible, disgusting behaviour,' Montreal transit rider says after she is detained by police ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Tim Bryson from Claresholm, AB., Canada writes: Just as I finished reading the article on the apology issued to the mother of Robert Dziekanski by Dr. Webster, I catch this one. Looks like the good doctor's concerns extend beyond the RCMP. What a disgrace!!!
  2. Tim Bryson from Claresholm, AB., Canada writes: This comes from a part of Canada that has, in the past, fined store owners for having English writing on signs that was outside the prescribed size limits...WTF.
  3. Katherine Mann from Canada writes: What is this 'only in Québec' nonsense? There are pompous asses enough throughout the country for this sort of ridiculous behaviour to be not particularly surprising. The lesson learned here has little to do with following instructions and a lot to do with stupidity. It strikes me that the less powerful the person in the uniform, the more over the top the enforcement behaviour tends to be. I hope the victim sues.
  4. Kevin Desmoulin from TO, Canada writes: It is forbidden, lol Oh my.
  5. North Star from Canada writes: Police state.
  6. Dave M from Canada writes: What's happening in this country. Just this week we have this incident in Montreal, in Ottawa an off duty cop beats a taxi driver and breaks his wrist using a police hold, reportedly because the cab driver cut him off in traffic, in Winnipeg a 17 year old is ordered out of his vehicle and onto the ground, at gunpoint, in obscenity laden language, all in front of his little sisters, by two plainclothes cops because the cops thought he was too young to have a drivers license, and again in Winnipeg, a documentary maker was taken into custody and his film seized for filming a backhoe digging up the street... the cops said he was intimidating the backhoe operator. Police right across the country are losing it and abusing their power, and it won't stop until they're held accountable in a way they'll understand. Fire their asses.
  7. Mike Walton from Sherwood Park, Canada writes: Did I read this correct?

    She got a $100 fine for something they don't give fines for?

    She was handcuffed and given another $350 fine for obstruction?

    How do you say 'Lawsuit' en francais?
  8. North Star from Canada writes: Binding civilian oversight of police forces now!
  9. George George from Canada writes: Obviously a danger to herself and others, I'm surprised they didn't taser her back to the stone-age.
  10. Action Jackson from Canada writes: What a disgrace.
  11. Mike Sumners from Toronto, Canada writes: Gee, Montreal actually has police patrolling the subway system, what a novel idea! Of course, Mayor David Miller would never do such a Politically Incorrect thing regardless of any crimes that might occur on the TTC.
  12. Shawn Mckone from Calgary, Canada writes: Completely disgusting. Do individual rights mean this little?
  13. pants 7 from Japan writes: What is wrong with that cop? Ridiculous!
  14. Chester Rockwell from Canada writes: Mike Sumners from Toronto, Canada writes:' Gee, Montreal actually has police patrolling the subway system, what a novel idea! Of course, Mayor David Miller would never do such a Politically Incorrect thing regardless of any crimes that might occur on the TTC.'

    The TTC does have police patrol the system, they can be quite pompous as well I might add.

    What an unbelievably dumb story. I hope I am wrong, but stuff like this just gives the impression that the only people who join the police nowadays are megalomaniac losers looking for power trips. A 320$ fine for 'obstruction', how obnoxious can these jerks be?
  15. G. Veneta from Canada writes: WTF
  16. Peter vliegende hollander from Calgary Foothills, Canada writes: It is a good thing she did not carry a stapler......
  17. J Norman from Edmonton, Canada writes: There's a cop in Montreal that should be losing his badge. Absolutely disgusting.
  18. Some Guy from Canada writes: Wow, another power mad thug with a badge, why am I not surprised. Apparently, they don't all become mall cops.
  19. daniel saliken from Vancouver, Canada writes: In my youth, (not so long ago) the cops were good guys, not sociopaths.

    I could have told you a dozen good-guy cop stories from my teens and twenties. What happened in the past 20 years?
  20. Kevin Desmoulin from TO, Canada writes: You would think That the guy could have offered to hold her bag and spoke on the matter of safety.
  21. Brian G from Canada writes: Hold the handrail with both hands and wear a helmet for good measure. What a disrespectful law breaker. This woman is clearly a menace to society.
  22. Red Arrow Crossing from Canada writes: Being from Montreal I can attest to 2 things:
    1. This sort of behaviour is all to common amongst the police force.
    2. The reaction the woman received was probably worse because she responded in English.

    Do you need anyother reason why these bullies should not have Tasers?
  23. Warron yu from Canada writes:
    What's with the 'only in Quebec' comments?

    This is a phenomena that extends well beyond that province.

    Okay I'll post it.

    In related Police State news a 17 yr old calls 9/11 when her father collapses on the floor and starts seizing.

    The officer on the end of the line at 911 hangs up on her THREE TIMES!!!!!!!

    Why?

    She said the F-word before he even picked up the phone.

    She then sprints to the police station, scared her father will die, only to be arrested.

    Watch it here:

    http://tr.youtube.com/watch?v=P-Ny-ub7E1E

    .
  24. Sherman P. Carswell from Toronto, Canada writes: I don't believe very many Canadians respect the police any longer. The police appear to be turning into thugs. How long before they are shaking us down for bribes and threatening our families?
  25. Black Gold from Canada writes: Hah! G&M closed the comments on the Robert Dziekanski / Dr. Webster article citing legal reasons. What - is the RCMP intimidating the media with legal action now, just because they allow negative comments about the force?
    This Montreal cop should join them, looks like he already meets their basic requirements.
  26. J Norman from Edmonton, Canada writes: joeman 67 from Kamloops, Canada writes: 'I also wouldn't be surprised if a native-born Canadian were treated completely differently in the same circumstances, even if he/she had also not understood the officer's instructions.'
    Maybe, maybe not. Some of the jackbooted thugs that disgrace the title of police officer are racists, others just get off on bullying whoever they can. None of them belong in any position of authority, and incidents like this will continue until they are removed.
  27. El Grande from Canada writes: The officer who did this should be fired. But of course there is no accountability whatsoever for law enforcement. Let's face it, we're a nation of petty despots whenever we get the chance. Give a Canadian the tiniest bit of authority and he thinks he's Stalin.
  28. Rani Das from Canada writes: It is becoming impossible to respect the police in this country. Disgusting.
  29. K L from Vancouver, Canada writes: Police / security take note: there is a difference between simple instructions that are designed to protect the service provider (transit authority) from litigation if someone happens to hurt themselves, and rules that are for the safety of the wider public. If a person falls on the escalator, it is their own fault; that's why the signs are there. It is not your job to police them to hold on.

    If we can walk down stair without holding onto handrails, we can manage to stand on an escalator. No police necessary, thank you.

    Go police activities that have the potential to harm other people. Please. Have some common sense.
  30. Ken from calgary from Canada writes: Officers must have had RCMP training
  31. Conservatives Lie from Canada writes: The time has come to stomp the police back into line. They serve the public, not the other way around. If they abuse their power, then they should be stripped of it. If they commit a crime, eg: the murder of Ian Bush, then they should be dealt with in the harshest fashion to set an example and to make it clear that abusing the public trust will not be tolerated.
  32. North Star from Canada writes: No wonder the public riots against the police in Montreal.
  33. Howard Young from Canada writes: Sounds like selective enforcement, I lived in Montreal for a few years and never held the rail with my hands. I would normally keep one foot on the step in front of me for balance.
  34. Matthew Beattie from Waterloo, Canada writes: K L said 'If a person falls on the escalator, it is their own fault; that's why the signs are there.'

    OK, but what happens if they fall into nine other people? Then you have a pile up of ten people at the bottom of the escalator with an even higher potential for injury, and nine of those people were doing the right thing and holding on to the rail.

    Plain and simple, this lady was just being ignorant. Would you go ahead and jump a subway turnstile? No, because that is against the rules and is just ignorant.
  35. Bruce MacDonald from Gatineau, Canada writes: These incidents are the result of on-going dumbing-down of law enforcement folks. If they are too intelligent, or, even intelligent, they might make smart decisions that would out-shine their dull-normal superiors.
    Enforcement or criminal investigation, it seems, is one of the few places where bright people are rejected in favour of drones who exact the letter of the law.
    Not that many years ago, a domestic complaint would result in a beat officer knocking on a door and talking to a fighting couple and resolving the situation.
    Now, a domestic dispute that one well-trained officer could settle involves a highly trained weapons and tactics unit that easily escalates and results in serious injury or death.
    Why not dis-engage law enforcement from frivolous things like 'Hold that handrail or else!' and engage people in meaningful dialogue that encourages them to hang on for their lives on escalators.
    After all, what sort of person likes to return home to his family after a shift declaring how he upset a person's life for failing to hang on and then says he also busted her for making a fuss.
    I must say that if I was in the woman's position, faced with the same thing, I'd be shot dead for my protest.
    After all, obstruction is obstruction.
  36. Warron yu from Canada writes: Matthew Beattie from Waterloo, Canada writes: Did we all read the same article? There are signs posted saying that you must hold the handrail. The lady didn't, and when the cop told her to, she replied with a rude comment.

    ---

    You're right.

    She should of licked his boots like a good slave.

    How dare she not comply with the Nanny state.

    Officer Jackboot is coming for you next Mathew.

    .
  37. North Star from Canada writes: Welcome to Harper's New Canada.
  38. Some guy out west from Canada writes: This is appalling. This cop is displaying characteristics of psychopathy! It should be declared a dangerous offender and locked up at least until we are absolutely certain it is safe to let it out.

    I hope this woman wins a huge lawsuit - lawyers will be lining up to take the job.
  39. K L from Vancouver, Canada writes: Matthew Beattie: you have completely missed the point.

    You can construct whatever extreme 'what-if' scenarios you like. Such as what if she had a bomb in her bag and she drop it. Maybe we need a sign that says 'people, hold on to your bags.' No we don't, or at least I hope we don't.

    The risk of someone falling while STANDING on an escalator is no greater than someone WALKING on stairs. The signs are there just because an escalator is a machine, and the operator puts the sign there to prevent being sued.
  40. A. Nonymous from Canada writes: Matthew Beattie - Well said Sir. Those comments have been the only well thought out comments on this forum.

    Perhaps the rest of you would be happy in an anarchy? Or maybe the police should only enforce the 'important' laws and regulations?
  41. K L from Vancouver, Canada writes: Was she running down the escalator? No.

    Was she sliding down the escalator? No.

    Was she a risk to anyone else? No.

    Case closed.
  42. Black Gold from Canada writes: Mathew Beattie - Your blatant denial of the fact that this cop acted like an asshat demonstrates your desire to brush wrongdoings by law enforcement under the rug. As we have seen lately they are quite adept at it. Damn those cell phone cameras, eh?
    The bottom line is that strict civilian oversight of law enforcement in this country is sorely needed. No more cops investigating cops. And finally, take the damn tasers away.
  43. Common Cents for Dollars from Canada writes: Oh yes, let's slap multiple tickets on women for not holding handrails in the Montreal Subway instead of stopping the regular drug dealing and chronic pickpocket problems in Montreal. You have to be indifferent, blind, or paid off to ignore the drug problem. I charitably think the problem is indifference, but you do get bored ignoring these problems, so why not pick on the evil escalator handrail avoiders. Incroyable!
  44. K L from Vancouver, Canada writes: No, Matthew Beattie. She did not break any rules that are worthy of the name. The police did not have to confront her. There was not problem to be dealt with.

    The issue that 98% of the people are having with this situation is the trivial nature of the rule that is being enforced, the waste of policing effort that could be better directed elsewhere, and the abuse of the citizen for a trivial infraction.

    Next time you walk down a sidewalk, the police will be watching. If you step off it and onto the street, they will arrest you, because you might, you just might, cause a car accident. How do you like that?
  45. Warron yu from Canada writes:

    Lick those boots Matthew.

    Good slave.

    .
  46. steve notgoingtell from Toronto, Canada writes: In this situation, if a police officer told me to hold the hand rail,,, I'd say, 'your not my mother' and seriously,, your not. This is to far.

    And,, i do applaud the police, I'm a huge supporter. but this is just strange.
  47. Some guy out west from Canada writes:
    Somewhere I read :

    'The subject who is truly loyal to the Chief Magistrate will neither advise nor submit to arbitrary measures.'
  48. Warron yu from Canada writes:

    You're remark was a ''what if'

    I'm relly not a speeder.

    Why not charge this woman with Terrorism?

    This meets the criteria.

    She meets the definition:

    'terrorist activity' as an action that takes place either within or outside of Canada which is taken or threatened for political, religious or ideological purposes* and threatens the public or national security by killing, seriously harming or *endangering a person, causing substantial property damage that is likely to seriously harm people or by interfering with or disrupting an essential service, facility or system

    http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/antiter/sheet-fiche/DEFTER/defter1.html

    Rules are rules.

    Tyranny means selective enforcement.

    .

    .
  49. Doris Wrench Eisler from St. Albert, Canada writes: Holding the handrail in a subway station seems like a good idea - not doing so could cause accidents. But whatever happened to taking a person aside and giving them a lecture, with perhaps, a warning? However, saying this is in keeping with Quebec mentality is a bit of a stretch considering what's been going on in many other parts of the country.
  50. Warron yu from Canada writes:

    Above comment was for Matthew.

    Spelling mistakes and all.

    So Matt, Should she be charged with terrorism?

    She put human life in danger for her idealology.

    It's a rule.

    It's for you as well. Remember that next time you speed or jay-walk.

    .

    .
  51. Geoff Wilson from Kamloops, Canada writes: Too many laws.
  52. pants 7 from Japan writes: Matthew Beattie from Waterloo.... I think I understand why you will not find any support for your opinions.

    'When he proceeded to punish her for it by trying to write her up....'

    It is not the role of police to punish anyone and if they do they will go to jail. It is the role of the court to punish people in ALL cases.

    Wait till winter and people start getting their mittens stuck in the hand rails, sue their butts off.
  53. doctor business from vancouver, Canada writes: There is more to this. We live in a culture that tolerates such abuse of authority. A sensible place would have the public laugh the officer's absurd mandate out of the train station. It's not just love of rules and laws but cynicism amongst the individualist types that this sort of abuse of power is typical and unavoidable --so, nothing will be done to stop it... even by those who are supposedly against it. As they say: all that evil requires is for good men and women to step aside and do nothing. The other part of the problem is many object in principle but not in practice. Our model of behavior is movies with heros who do things that normal people can't. We don't know how to act together to solve a problem in a more simple way that doesn't require heroism. The same can be said about allowing crime by criminals. There are solutions that are neither vigilante nor hiding inside and calling the 'proper' authorities. We need to be responsible in our own cities!
  54. Fortune Daily from canada, Canada writes: why didn't they just taser her?
  55. super heavy from On the water, Canada writes: Wait for it.....Wait for it.....Wait for it........

    Suspended with pay.
  56. N. Edwards from Canada writes: The symptom of a 'nanny state'.
  57. Sl Cha from Surrey, Canada writes: Maybe there is something wrong in the structure of the escalators? maybe it is not up to standard that anyone, who might not hold the greasy handrail might fall? What happens, if the handrails come out? What happens, if the person behind you looses his/her balance and falls on you? Quite naturally, there is some structural mistake with the escalators in Montreal! One must check, who built it, who signed the contract, who gave the OK for its exploitation. If anyone had been to Russia and gone in a Metro, you might see people running down the escalator and reading books, newspapers, but none seem to hold on to a handrail. AND none seem to fall... How come Montreal's escalators made that bad?
  58. Dennis O'Keefe from saskatoon, Canada writes: Worse in Saskatoon that would happen for spitting in public!
  59. ed ncda from Calgary, Canada writes: A $420.00 penalty for not holding a handrail? Anyone who doesn't consider that as punitive and abusive is an utter idiot. As a former Montrealer who is not unfamiliar with how things work in that part of the world, I would pay her fine myself if it should turn out that she replied to him in any language other than English.
  60. Paul S from Stratford, Canada writes: The police officer needs to be fired. We are paying this jerks wages!!
  61. A Toonie abroad from France writes: How many ways can you say DUMB? This must be submitted for the 'Darwin Award'

    Police over-zealousness at it's all time best.
  62. whistler fan from Sechelt, Canada writes: Look folks, you're being led astray by a poorly written article by the Globe, again. An alarmist and inflammatory piece like this invites more people to click on it and read it. I know I did. It doesn't, however, add to the public discourse, all it does is polarize opinions.

    It should have read: 'Woman Refuses to Identify Self to Lawful Authority, Is Arrested for Obstructing a Peace Officer'. She was approached for committing a minor transgression. She could have cooperated but chose not to be, so the PO probably decided to take it to the next level and write her a ticket. If she had sighed and provided valid ID, the Officer would have written that ticket which she could have disputed later in the proper forum if she so chose, and she would have been sent on her way.

    Instead she caused a scene and the police officers had to restrain her using a tool they have at their disposal especially for that purpose (handcuffs). For a PO to handcuff a woman she would have had to be pretty out of control. Handcuffs don't bruise wrists unless the subject is struggling and resisting.

    People, with this kind of uninformed reporting, and such an adversarial reaction from the readers, we create a climate of us vs. them between the police and us. Police officers are your neighbours, they are normal people like you and me who have chosen what is one of the most difficult careers in the world. They have to approach and deal with people who we have the luxury to give a wide berth and avoid. The result when they deal with these people will sometimes not be neat and tidy and civil, but let's give them the benefit of the doubt. When Police Officers make a mistake, let's review it and provide better training and resources instead of vilifying and demonizing and blaming them in a kneejerk fashion. If not, we risk having even more trouble recruiting our finest, best and brightest to be our police officers.
  63. Vernal Conflagration from Tiranha, Canada writes: While mayors of large Canadian cities are trying to increase use of public transit, this sort of farce (and it must be due to a municipal bylaw/regulation because it's too breathtakingly absurd to be enacted by any higher form of government) will only serve to discourage the very people they're trying to attract to the system. What's next? The shoelace police?
  64. Johnny FromCanada from Vancouver, Canada writes: My Canada does not include 'Société de transport de Montréal'.
  65. A Canadian from Cole Harbour, Canada writes: Warron yu from Canada writes:
    What's with the 'only in Quebec' comments?
    This is a phenomena that extends well beyond that province.
    Okay I'll post it.
    The officer on the end of the line at 911 hangs up on her THREE TIMES!!!!!!! Why?
    She said the F-word before he even picked up the phone.

    -

    another posters wrote 'The symptom of a 'nanny state'. I could not agree more, we now live in a society where we have so many rules it is not even funny anymore and who do we have to thanks for this, all the socialist babies that keep on crying to the government for more and more rules and regulations to protect ourself from our own stupidity. You guys know who you are, you are always on this board complaining about everything.

    I also blame the liberal court system in this country. There is no doubt the reason why there is a law that say to hold on to the handrail is probably someone in the past did not, fell down and went to court claiming negligence because there was no sign that said to hold on to the rail and of course, the court agreed and paid this person a large settlement.

    I hope you are all happy, your uthopian socialist world is coming around to bit you in the a@#.
  66. Pete S from Canada writes: More out of control cops. Canada continues it's decline into a corrupt police state.
  67. geraldine veleti from MILAN, Italy writes:
    POLICE STATE- This is just the latest sign of police abuse - which is part of a larger picture - POLICE STATE. If we in canada re no careful we will find ourselves in a possible police dictatorship - these forces are basically out of control. they can taser someone to death and not be charged, arrest you for not holding on a a handrail, arrest you for talking back - etc. etc . etc. WHY ARE THEY NOT OUT THERE ARRESTING REAL CRIMINALS??? When police forces strt harassing the little guy, it is a sure sign of a police run country. DECMOCRACY - if this keeps up and nothing is done to stop this abusive power by our forces we can kiss our democracy good bye.
  68. Brad Reddekopp from Hazelton, British Columbia, Canada writes:
    What ever happened to individual responsibility? When will people wake up, see that the goddamn nanny state is infantilizing the population? When will we finally stop tolerating it?
  69. Roop Misir from Toronto, Canada writes: I suppose discipline's the thing, eh?
  70. edith french from France writes: Hi!! you people from Canada.I would like to comment on Montreal subway incident & Dziekanski case letter by dr. Webster.I/v been living in Canada (Toronto) for 24 years..2 Years ago i have had enough..& i come back home (France). People wake up!! Pattern of police abused is all over your country!! I have to say : You are living in POLICE STATE.Al this police action are to intimidate you to submision, to pleace FEARS in you dayilly life, so you can be easy control. Thosepolice action are to remind you this.I/m very sorry for you..i/m really are.I wish you do something to get your RIGHTS & country back. EDITH
  71. Brad Reddekopp from Hazelton, British Columbia, Canada writes:
    Way to make a former citizen of the Soviet Union feel at home, eh? :P
  72. Sidney M from Toronto, Canada writes: I used to respect and admire our police forces. Now I view them as a necessary evil at best.

    The field sure does seem to attract a lot of bullies who enjoy throwing their weight around just because they have a uniform and a gun.

    Uh oh, maybe some cop out there is logging the IPs of people who leave comments on this article so they can get their name and address from their ISPs...So yeah, as I was saying, the police are always right! They hire only the most intelligent, emotionally stable and responsible individuals. So if a cop arrests you for not holding a handrail when you physically can't, and bruises you in the process, you say 'Sir! Thank you Sir!' And when you're tasered to death for being foreign and acting upset in an airport, with your last breath praise the Almighty Police for eliminating troublemakers like you.
  73. Carl White from Canada writes: What's next in the nanny state, fines for incorrect usage of toothpick? Plus handcuffs and jailtime?
  74. ed ncda from Calgary, Canada writes: Judging by some of these comments, the woman should consider herself fortunate that she wasn't charged with ignoring/disobeying a lawful order, obstructing a peace officer in the performance of his duty, assaulting a police officer, resisting arrest - all of which if carried to a (il)logical conclusion could mean up to several years in penitentiary and a criminal record - all for not holding a handrail.
    When I was much younger Arlo Guthrie's folk song 'Alice's Restaurant' about being arrested for littering was considered a farcical send up of authority. And now, less than 2 generations later, this farce is becoming all too real.
    I suspect that in the 43 years since the Montreal Metro opened, very, very few people have been taken into custody and fined for not holding a handrail.
    If the law can be used as an opportunity to single her out and punish her for some perceived misbehavior - whatever it might have been, then it can happen to any of us tomorrow or next year.
  75. Tinfoil Hatt from A single green shoot of justice in a cesspool of lies, Canada writes:
    Kevin Desmoulin from TO, Canada writes: You would think that the guy could have offered to hold her bag and spoke on the matter of safety.

    Kevin, I was going to write something scathing, but your comment made me feel so damned ... nostalgic. Thank you. I am hopeful. These times may come again.

    (Meantime, if I were in this poor woman's situation, I probably would have ended up with an assault charge--if he caught me!)

    ...
  76. Pierre Santa Ana from Costa Rica writes: Had it be with the RCMP, they would have fried her with a taser gun.
  77. Regina Phallange from Canada writes: Didn't the article say she attends the Universite du Quebec a Montreal? Is that a French language only school?
    If she attends a French language university then of course she understood the officer when he approached her, so this wouldn't be a language issue.
    It is a bit insane, however.
  78. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: Gross abuse of authority by Quebec Police is SOP. Manslaughter included. And that's before we get into a discussion of language 'issues', as noted above.

    The Montreal by-law requiring people to hold the handrail is NOT a 'nanny state' issue. It is a CYA issue. As in the municipality is protecting itself from frivolous and vexatious lawsuits. Trust me, those are not as uncommon as one would think.

    There are all sorts of interesting by-laws out there. Many of them are even reasonable. Someone raised spitting (on the sidewalk) as an example of such. That one is old and very widespread. The reason for it is that spit is a great vector for infectious diseases. Like Tuberculosis. When that by-law was enacted, TB was common and incurable.

    Jay-walking - crossing a street at any point other than a crosswalk or intersection - is an offence pretty well everywhere. This is not to protect the pedestrian, it is to minimize any interference to traffic flow. Here in Toronto it is a C-note ticket.

    And so it goes.

    The critical issue here is that the LEO did overdo it, and that there needs to be tighter civilian oversight of police.
  79. Regina Phallange from Canada writes: Sorry, the article says she didn't catch the officer's instructions when he fist approached her. I don't think this was a language issue.
    Still insane, though.
    All governments could eliminate their deficits/debts tomorrow if laws/rules were enforced to the extreme.
    The money that could be made from people who don't come to a complete stop at a stop (or arret, as the case may be) sign would go a long way.
  80. Tinfoil Hatt from A single green shoot of justice in a cesspool of lies, Canada writes: _whistler fan from Sechelt, Canada writes: ...Blah ...
    Handcuffs don't bruise wrists unless the subject is struggling and resisting.
    ... blah, blah ...

    Any reasonable citizen of a free nation would resist being arrested for not holding a handrail.

    The road to a fascist state is paved with groveling apologies to authority like yours. Next thing you know, the G&M will be shutting down forums like this from fear of legal intimidation, just because readers are saying unfavorable things about our country's police forces.

    ... Ooops. Sorry, Robert Dzenski(sp), it's already happening.

    ...
  81. Ya Basta! from Canada writes: She looks foreign, which in itself is a misdemeanor or crime for a number of Canadians.
  82. gerhard beck from Canada writes: How fast to those escalators move? Anyone can ride them without holding the polluted filthy rails. And by the way if you would like to speed up and climb steps at the same time you could not do it hanging onto the rail. Swineflue or idiotic brains? It seems the latter win.
  83. Sean Connery from Canada writes: CAN YOU IMAGINE IN QUEBEC EVER BECAME A COUNTRY? IT WOULD BE A THIRD WORLD BANANA REPUBLIC WITHIN 5 YEARS!!
  84. Pierre Santa Ana from Costa Rica writes: Sean Connery from Canada writes: CAN YOU IMAGINE IN QUEBEC EVER BECAME A COUNTRY? IT WOULD BE A THIRD WORLD BANANA REPUBLIC WITHIN 5 YEARS!!

    * * *

    It is a good thing we have monkeys like you to keep us in the right path!
  85. J.P. O'Brien from New York, United States writes: What utter nonsense. The worst I have seen in Canada to date. I really don't think you would find this behavior in London or New York on the part of the police or the immigrant population.
  86. Misery No one from Toronto, Canada writes: Just another over zealous police act backed by incompetency. One word: Disgusting.
  87. brm 2000 from HOGTOWN, Canada writes: Power Trippen!!!
  88. Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes: By the tone of her responses to the police and her comments in general, this woman comes across as being disrespectful of authority and having a misguided sense of entitlement. According to the news article, the accused claimed she didn't hear the officer's first order to hold the handrail (because she was rifling in her bag), but when she did hear his second command, she blatantly disobeyed and even talked back to him: 'Ms. Kosoian... says she didn't catch the officer's instruction to hold the rail when he first approached. When he told her again to hang on, she says she replied, “I don't have three hands.” That's when the officer demanded identification so he could write her ticket, she said. Ms. Kosoian started arguing. The officers handcuffed her and threw her into a small holding cell.' Perhaps where Ms. Kosian comes from it's normal procedure to argue with police officers, but in Canada it can result in arrest, and so it should. Police officers represent the authority of their office, which is the upholding of public law and order. It is our duty as citizens to abide by their orders, even if we consider these orders inane. The time for argument can come later, in a court of law. As a student of international law, this woman should have known better. I'm also appalled that so many people on this comment forum think it's OK to blatantly disobey a police officer's order and to be rude and disrespectful in the process. Many of you raise the spectre of a police state, but I think what's more to fear here is widespread disrespect for those who represent the authority of our collective laws.
  89. tablogloid sadmanwhosane from toronto, Canada writes: Every commenter has a theory on this thread. Some offer reasonable analyses, others project their hostility on Quebec, the police or unrelated topics from wtf land. Some are genuinely concerned, some just want the 'good old days' to return and some just want to see their rant in print.
    I just think there are a few bad apples in every occupation and in every location on earth.
    As the Buddha says, 'There will always be suffering. This is the reason we must strive to perform good deeds and try not to take jobs that will hurt others.'
  90. DON BARTA from Canada writes: -

    - ' ACHTUNG' 'You vil hold das handrail'

    - 'ACHTUNG' 'You vil show me your papers'

    - 'ACHTUNG' 'You vil come vit me to das cooler'

    - 'SIEG HEIL' 'SIEG HEIL' 'SEIG HEIL'.......

    ~
  91. Can't believe it from Canada writes: Welcome to Gulag 13.......if you don't do as I tell you ....I will beat you senseless!! Is that clear!!!

    Ja!! Naturlich!
  92. Pete Ware from Canada writes: That is ludicrous... and where will one wash their hands? Are there any basins down in subway stations that are convenient? NO!

    If the simple way is to wash your hands, then install wash basins at the top and bottom of ALL escalators! EVERYWHERE!
  93. Michael J. Carley from Montréal, Canada writes: Montreal cops too often behave like fascist thugs, but when you want to see them on the '4O' or the Decarie stopping hyper-aggressive drivers, they are never to be seen.
  94. Charles de Secondat from 1689 - 1755, Canada writes: But constant experience shows us that every man invested with power is apt to abuse it, and to carry his authority as far as it will go.
  95. vincent furnier from montreal, Canada writes: Every Canadian is at risk from the police at any time in this country, whether one realizes it or not. Wrong place, wrong time, a little stress and miscommunication and what happened to this woman could happen to any of us.
  96. Frederic Feingold from United States writes: I regularly use the subway system In New York City. Anyone who fails to hold onto the escalator handrail endangers everyone who is behind if ascending or ahead if descending. Initially there would be fallen scraped riders and then possibly a panic. I think that this enforcement was fair and justified.
  97. tablogloid sadmanwhosane from toronto, Canada writes: Dear Ms. Creamer: There is the letter of the law and there is the spirit of the law. You have obviously chosen the former and I appreciate your excellent analysis and qualifications. Proceed to Area 5 to collect your brown shirt and jackboots.
  98. Sean Connery from Canada writes: Pierre Santa Ana from Costa Rica writes:

    It is a good thing we have monkeys like you to keep us in the right path!
    ___________________

    What type of welfare are you receiving from the federal government as you live in Costa Rica eating bananas?
  99. Allan b from Canada writes: Unfortunatly all police forces are becoming this way. It is time for a house cleaning of our forces, and for the f...kin government to stop givning them so much power. Canada is truly becoming a police state. As another poster commented the artical on the polish imagrant not letting any more comments, is the G@M starting to get threats from the RCMP? We are LOOSEING OUR FREEDOM people.
  100. Raymond P from Canada writes: Ms. Kosoian should be familiar with this type of attitude since she grew up in the Soviet Union. It's police who think they are immune to all laws and it's not only Quebec. Winnipeg police have a long and abusive history.

    Perhaps these rent-a-cops could cuff and fine drugs dealers at Berri-UQAM metro station. Why not fine those who panhandle and smoke in the stations? This is what happens when security firms hire guys with too many muscles and too little brains. Anyone tried to give an IQ test to the new breed of American border guards?

    Not only should she contest the fines she should sue them for unreasonable search and seizure, abuse of power, etc.
  101. 1 i from northish gta, Canada writes: It seems pretty obvious to me that Dr. Webster's observations on law enforcement training are not restricted to the horsey set. Intimidation as a strategy to compel obedience seems to be pretty prevalent. Come on, how do you feel when a uniformed big guy with a gun approaches you for some unknown reason? Pleased? Secure? Safe? That strategy may work, in a narrow sense, but the unintended consequences completely nuke any benefits. Generally, tactics as strategy means epic fail.
  102. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: Those wide staircases at all subway stations raise an interesting question. How, exactly, is anyone walking in the middle of those stairs supposed to hold the hand-rail - which is several meters out of reach? Keeping in mind that people routinely trip and fall on stairs as well as escalators.

    Why aren't these criminals using the stairs being charged, ticketed and abused?

    More critically, why is it ABSOLUTELY necessary to hold the handrail on an escalator, but not on a staircase?

    Hey there Matthew Beattie, perhaps you could comment on this one.

    Compare and contrast the relative safety of stairs and escalators. Especially the likelihood of someone slipping and falling on the stairs and taking out everyone below them. This should be easy, given the historical record of the use of stairs vs escalators, which are a recent invention.
  103. Jim Saxon from Toronto, Canada writes: I don't know - it appears that this woman was plainly combative in her behaviour towards law enforcement authorities. She is not someone who is just off the boat and does not understand language or Canadian laws - she is a resident of Canada. She is lucky she is not dark-skinned, she would have been shot.
  104. Anthony B from Maritimes, Canada writes: Quebec bashing aside (some posters seem to take every spurious opportunity to do this) this is one more example of a Canada-wide malaise, wherein those with authority - or delusions of authority - abuse their powers to victimise the general population. It's time to weed out these sociopaths and send them packing.
  105. Ryan Ginger from Canada writes: What a disgusting officer. Fire him immediately. Demote that loser back to being a mall-cop.
  106. Raymond P from Canada writes: I just sent the following letter to the Societe du Transport de Montreal.

    To whom it concerns,

    It was with disgust that I read the Globe and Mail article pertaining to Ms. Bela Kosoian Saturday, May 16, 2009.

    Is this an example of how poorly trained STM security are? If it is I may return to driving to work. I ride the metro regularly and have seen hundreds, if not thousands, of actions far worse than this. If I carry a stroller down the stairs for a woman with two children, am I going to be commended or charged by your officers?

    Yes, there is a pictogram for holding the handrail but this was an excessive abuse of power by the officers involved. Perhaps you need a few more pictograms showing people what not to do such as drug dealing, smoking, panhandling, consuming alcohol, doing graffiti, littering, etc. Not holding the handrail isn't an offence and your officers acted incorrectly.

    It is my suggestion that you drop all charges against Ms. Kosoian and give her a year's worth of metro passes in order to convince her not to sue the STM.

    Feel free to contact the STM at:

    commentaires@stm.info
  107. Prairie Boy from Canada writes: Nanny State.
  108. simple complexity from Toronto, Canada writes: It's a shame that so many intelligent people take time to comment on such a trivial G&M story. I'm sure that the victim of this nutty police situation will seek legal advice and that should be the end of it. G&M should devote reporters' time to things more significant. If G&M chooses to report on such things, I'm sure that there are thousands of similar stories on a daily basis.
  109. H B from Canada writes: Physically restraining someone and hauling them off to a room, and then charging them with an infraction, for giving an officer some lip when they wouldn't hold a handrail is simply not reasonable. Cops are not infallible and arguing with a cop in a non-violent situation is perfectly acceptable. Most of us have learned to play as nice as we can with cops. I'm thinking of the OPP officer who a few years ago probably could have thrown the book at me for traveling 136 down the 416, and without my registration in the car. He knocked it back to 119 with a warning on the registration. All he really wanted to do was slow people down at an hour when there are deer all over the place, and I was appropriately contrite. But I would certainly consider arguing with a cop for not holding a handrail. It's not a crime - it's a by-law infraction, and one that could be easily overlooked. We don't have absolutism in this country - the entire legal system is based on the 'reasonable person'. No 'reasonable person' is going to accept that this cop was at all justified in their choices. The difference between police officers and mall cops should be that officers make well-considered choices and have the training and education to exercise good judgment. That clearly wasn't the case here. Like other posters have noted, the police are in serious danger of losing credibility with the public. Until they start using the best tool they have - the good judgment of their officers - that credibility is just going to keep diminishing. If their superiors start expecting them to work in a binary if/then fashion, then we might as well at least save the taxpayer some coin by staffing the departments with mall cops.
  110. marc *.* from quebec, Canada writes: I ride the Montreal métro everyday and my take is a little different.

    It certainly is true that if she were to fall and tumble over, such a situation could have caused injury to others. Holding the handrail causes people to not run down the stairs or engage in other dangerous behavior.

    I think the reason why she ended up getting the ticket was because she was combative and likely abusive towards the police. They have a job to do too. She does not dispute the fact that there is a regulation and she did not comply with it. Perhaps if she would have just grabbed the handrail and did not continue to fumble in her bag when the advised her to do so, she would have not got the $100 fine. Her arrogance and bad behavior is probably what led to the $320 extra fine.

    It's important to remember that while this situation is unfortunate, the ticket is not a condemnation. She has been accused of an offense and will have an opportunity to make her case, and contest the police's version of what happens.

    If she wins, then I guess the police will have a lesson to learn. If she loses, then she will.

    As to all those who bring up the Quebec/francophone issue, Do you not realize that the whole affair could have taken place in French? She is a student at Université de Montréal, so it is likely that she was speaking French at the time. This racism charge is unwarranted.
  111. A D from Oakville, Canada writes: Jim Saxon from Toronto, Canada writes: I don't know - it appears that this woman was plainly combative in her behaviour towards law enforcement authorities. She is not someone who is just off the boat and does not understand language or Canadian laws - she is a resident of Canada. She is lucky she is not dark-skinned, she would have been shot.
    ---------------------------------
    Jim you are wrong; if she were dark-skinned the cop would have never touch her, since that would be considered as racism (like in T.O. where nobody can say anything about dark skinned people) i would say she's lucky because she is not polish...
  112. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ Charlotte Creamer: You're way too funny. And clearly missed the part about her being raised under Communist totalitarianism. Which she managed to escape. Why should she - or anyone else here - submit to arbitrary police abuse of their authority?

    Your comment makes it crystal clear that you would have been a very fine and highly regarded operative of the GESTAPO, KGB, SAVAK or any other of the the secret police employed by assorted totalitarian regimes.

    Indeed, based on your posts, you would have been an enthusiastic member of assorted death squads throughout history.

    You may want to reconsider and reassess your ideology and political position vis a vis reality.
  113. Pierre Santa Ana from Costa Rica writes: Sean Connery from Canada writes:
    What type of welfare are you receiving from the federal government as you live in Costa Rica eating bananas?

    * * *

    You see Sean, you are that type of person who makes that comments based on what you perceive, what you don't understand or what you don't know. There are a many words for this and they usually don't fit with the traditional definition of a good Canadian.

    In any case, Sean, I am Canadian, live, work in Canada and pay tons of taxes even if the nick says Costa Rica. And I don't agree with the initial comment that you made. You have concluded that Quebec would become some kind of police state based on the actions of one single policeman in Laval. This logic is weak, to say the least. However, assuming it is good logic, then I believe Canadians are in great danger: remember the cops tasering that poor man at Vancouver airport or those in Manitoba abandoning a native man outside of Winnipeg in -40C weather?

    Anyone making inferences to Quebec based on this incident should take a good look at him/herself and ask the question: am I a good person or just someone ready to pass horrible judgments just because that thing took place in Quebec?
  114. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ simple complexity: It's not trivial.
  115. Paul, Bytown, from Canada writes: That's what happens when the Liberal pro-nanny state trains our cops.
  116. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ marc *.* from quebec: Denial is not a river in Egypt. Nor a State of the Union. Reality -deal with it.
  117. Hee Hoo Sai from Canada writes: Persons carelessly cavorting on escalators disregarding protocol are plainly incapable of making decisions for themselves. It is time for an escalator utilization permit system to be implemented. This would prevent the potential carnage of someone running amok, causing disaster and resulting in grief requiring annual days of national morning and remembrance.
  118. marc *.* from quebec, Canada writes: @ Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: ... why is it ABSOLUTELY necessary to hold the handrail on an escalator, but not on a staircase?

    I'll tell you why: An escalator has MOVING stairs. There is a greater chance of serious injury for several reasons:

    1) The body is moving, and has kinetic energy. When riding down on an escalator you can more easily tumble forward if pushed from behind, simply because of the kinetic energy. Imagine riding in a car without a seat belt, vs sitting on a chair in your living room.

    2) The escalator stairs have joints that open and close. If you were to fall a hair or other clothing could get jambed and pull the body towards the stairs to crush a finger or other bone.

    3) Escalating stairs are almost ALWAYS more congested than fixed (ordinary) stairs. One person's fall can therefore increase the chance of injury to others.
  119. marc *.* from quebec, Canada writes: I wrote:

    1) The body is moving, and has kinetic energy. When riding down on an escalator you can more easily tumble forward if pushed from behind, simply because of the kinetic energy. Imagine riding in a car without a seat belt, vs sitting on a chair in your living room.

    Yes, I do understand that going down an ordinary staircase the body also has kinetic energy. But what I meant to emphasize, is that when you fall on a moving staircase, the stairs can pull you dangerously.

    The danger is very real, even though the story reported is quite unfortunate.

    @Orest Zarowsky: I know where the Nile is and how to spell it. Perhaps you should brush up on your grade 7 geography and keep your comments on topic.
  120. james mcintyre from Canada writes: Hard to believe. I live in US, and was just thinking I'd drive to Mtrl this week, haven't been since the riots after a hockey game a few yrs back. And, at the time of planning that visit, hadn't been since my son celebrating a groom's pre-wedding dinner was charge $3,500 for one bottle of wine...that's not a typo. They said even the cop who came to their beck and call was in on the deal with the restaurant. Keep your darn city to yourselves, I'll go to NYC!
  121. Jacques Hache from Gatineau, Canada writes: I haven't read all 130'ish previous comments, but some of them referring to the 'Quebec here we go again' or 'only in Quebec' types make me sick. Yes, this story is a nonsense but we see these things everywhere. Thanks for those who are able to leave racism aside while commenting on unusual stories like this one...
  122. Turning Right from Canada writes: I think this lady go off easy for such a heinous crime.
  123. SL S from Canada writes: She must have felt right at home, like she had never left Russian Georgia. This entire situation sounds absurd to me. Must have been a real slow day for Montreal Police. I know, on slow days like this maybe they could look for my car that was stolen in Montreal a few years back instead of harassing people.
  124. Old Edmonton Man from Edmonton, Canada writes: Those transit cops are 'actualy' persons who 'applied and failed' their regular cop entrance exams. Now they are wearing paper badges and behave like a 'regular' cops. Of course, they want to 'copy' what their 'big brothers' do. Wait till they are equipped with real working tasers.
  125. Robin Hood from Toronto, Canada writes: I was on a jury that was a case of woman suing because of an escalator coming to
    an unexpected halt. A person behind her was'nt holding the handrail a fell onto the back
    of her causing physical damage and lots of pain and causing her to give up her job
    because of this accident. Is'nt it just sensible to hold the handrail to prevent such
    accidents? Better to be safe than sorry as the old saying goes.
  126. SL S from Canada writes: It's not so much a matter of whether or not you should hold the handrail, that's easily solved. Post a sign that reads 'ride at your own risk'. It's more of a case of overkill by the police. I'm surprised they didn't just taser her. There never was, nor ever will be, a requirement to cuff a person in this situation. So she argued back, 90% of all drivers pulled over argue back but I don't see 90% of them being cuffed and thrown into cells. The outrage her is due to the response by police. All that was required by them was a chat with the young lady and the issuance of a ticket if she didn't want to listen or if she wanted to get beligerant about it. From then on it's the courts decision to deal with it or not if she decides to fight the ticket or not. The officers actions were far too extreme for the situation at hand and some sensitivity training is in order in my opinion.
  127. A reader from Canada writes: In Toronto, we got the Tamils breaking the law every couple of days yet police do absolutely nothing but watch. The police always appear to go after the responsible people as the task is much easier. The police should go after their own rather than a young woman riding down an escalator as it appears they are the ones continually breaking the laws of the land.
  128. Dawn from Minnesota from Minnesota, United States writes: I only use the handrail if the operation of the escalator is jerky or if there is reason for me to believe that I might lose my balance. In other words, I regard the handrail as something that is there to use if I need it.

  129. Roger Cooper from Canada writes: She was lucky she wasn't riding one in Vancouver. They might have tasered her.
  130. jomo wanjala from Toronto, Canada writes: A reader from Canada writes: In Toronto, the Tamils break the law every couple of days yet police do absolutely nothing but watch. The police always appear to go after the responsible people as the task is much easier._________________________________________
    _____________
    A Reader From Canada, you are a RACIST
  131. peter dunn from Canada writes: It is no wonder some people go postal. To bad he did not fall down the stairs (By accident) She must have thought she was dreaming back in Russia. If it is a rule then it should be changed NOW!
  132. Bill Hopkins from London, Canada writes: I've ridden a lot of escaltors in my life and I don't recal ever seeing a sign telling me to hang on. None-the-less, I'm sitting here thinking -- you know, I always did hold onto the rail anyway. It just seemed to be the smart thing to do, just to improve your balance.

    Noe-the-l;ess, I think this young lady's experience is extreme beyond reason. A simple admonition that for her safety and the safety of others she should hold the rail would have been sufficient -- and the 'officer' should have taken the trouble to be certain that she understood.
  133. gerhard beck from Canada writes: Orest Zarowsky, your 7:14 comment is right on. Congrats,
  134. Northern Boy from Canada writes: Sounds like there was a cop on a bit of a power trip that day.
  135. Northern Boy from Canada writes: jomo wanjala from Toronto, Canada writes: A reader from Canada writes: In Toronto, the Tamils break the law every couple of days yet police do absolutely nothing but watch. The police always appear to go after the responsible people as the task is much easier.________________________________________
    ____________
    A Reader From Canada, you are a RACIST
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Jomo, there was nothing at all racist with A Reader's comment. The Tamils have broken the law and disrupted traffic. Point out facts does not make someone a racist. You should be disgusted with yourself making accusations based on something that has absolutely nothing to do with racism.
  136. Roman Haluszka from writes: This clearly illustrates the fact that society must be much more careful in selecting people to become police officers. Some people are psychologically unfit for the job as they enjoy abusing their power. It might well be that this sort of officer should be immediately fired, as I don't personally believe that any sort of sensitivity training can overcome his fundamental character flaw.

    I don't believe that the police want the public to view them this way, so it is incumbant on their organizations to act effectively and immediately when abuse of police authority occurs.
  137. Joe Wallach from Russell, Ontario, Canada writes: Now that's GREAT law enforcement. The woman is clearly a criminal and should find a home in St. Vincent de Paul for about 45 years. Let that be a lesson to all of you criminals and potential criminals out there. We are tough on crime in Canada. BUT if you want to appear to go against the law, and face no consequences, you might want to set up a roadblock on the Gardiner Expy or across the 401 or even the CN mainline between Toronto and Montreal. For the ladies out there you can even kill your newborn baby and face no consequences.
  138. Deskof Reason from Canada writes: Agree with Black Gold about comments closing for 'Letter a scathing indictment of RCMP'. WTF happened to freedom of speech?

    More importantly, wtf happened to the justice system in this country? Bullying is coming under fire in schools but when you become an adult, this kind of behaviour is conducted by police officers and treated with kid gloves.

    DoR
  139. G B from Toronto, Canada writes: Here's another scenario for how that could have played out, no matter what country you're in: Cop cautions woman on escalator, woman doesn't hear. Cop cautions her again, she says 'I don't have three hands'. Cop waits for woman to get to the bottom of the escalator, stops her, makes eye contact and says: 'Excuse me, I was talking to you. In future do us both a favour and read and follow the instructions for escalator use according to the laws of the province. Have a nice day.' Anyone have a problem with that?
  140. D L from Canada writes: So what's next - getting a fine for walking on the side walk the wrong way? This is too much. Nanny Country!
  141. gerhard beck from Canada writes: Jomo whatever, when were you in Germany? The Nazis are gone for over 60 years, with them their racist ideology. If you dont know what you are talking anout, keep your trap shut. Besides that, AD from Oakville has nothing to do with Germany. If you are mad about the LTTE finally getting what they derserve, why dont you rush home and help them.
  142. A reader from Canada writes: jomo wanjala from Toronto stop playing the racist card. If one breaks the law, they should be punished no matter the colour, the religion , the profession etc. I believe the police in Montreal acted irrationally as the young lady was not hurting anyone nor was she inconveniencing anyone. She was endangering only herself. The approach by authorities could have been more subtle.
  143. kevin o'connor from Canada writes: 1)Note to police: the use of force against non-threatening women is not good. Very poor form.

    2)Congratulations to all posters who made a bee-line for Nazi analogies in their comments. Goodwin's law holds true again. Good job, the judgement displayed mirrors nicely the judgement of the officers in question. The symmetry of idiocy is beautiful to behold.
  144. pants 7 from Japan writes: Robin Hood from Toronto, sounds like a frivolous lawsuit. keerist, I have had my feet stepped on by woman wearing high heel shoes on public transportation in at least 5 countries, hurts like B, but that's life.

    It is reasonable to expect that another person might bump into you on an escalator, so YOU should take the darn stair and leave the escalator to the people who live life on the edge.

    Everything darn thing anyone does in an urban environment can under some unfortunate circumstance result in another person getting injured.

    Do they ban high heel shoes? No.

    Do they ban people from carrying briefcases? No.

    Is it illegal to carry an umbrella? No.

    This story will get picked up my the media around the world as a 'joke' story that everyone will laugh at.

    Yeah but if....blah, blah, blah;
  145. Geordie Lad from Canada writes: Police Academy course 101 is always arrogance that's after they replace the brain with porridge.
  146. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ marc *.*: You should try the TTC for crowding and 'risk'.

    This incident is a joke in very poor taste. All your justifications notwithstanding.

    As for that river in Egypt thing, man you are thick and slow.
  147. Joan Forsey from Toronto, Canada writes: It is often impossible to hold on to a rail on an escalator because the rail is moving at a different pace than the escalator.

    In that case -- and it has often happened -- you'd need rubber arms because your hand is at the top of the escalator while your feet are moving inexorably towards the bottom. Or, sometimes, your hand is taken down much faster than your feet. Not having rubber arms, you have no choice to let go.
  148. geraldine veleti from MILAN, Italy writes: The question here is not whether holding on to the rail or not. It probably is a good idea to hand on BUT THE POINT IS that our country has come to the point where a CITIZEN cannot even express their word to a cop - they will either be tasered or handcuffed. COME ON CANADIANS THIS IS TAKING AWAY OUR FREEDOM OF VERBABLLY DEFENDING OUTSELVES - YES EVEN TO A COP. AS LONG AS THERE IS NO FOUL LANGUAE OR DISRESPECT USED- I THINK WE AS FREE CANADIAN HAVE THE RIGHT TO TALK BACK TO THEM. COMUNISM IS OVER. AND WE ARE NOT YET IN A POLICE STATE. I hope that woman takes the police officer to court and sues him for abuse of power, illegally handcuffing and whatever else she can throw at him. Get a good lawyer .
  149. summom bonum from Canada writes: When are Canadians going to get up off their knees? Who gave government the right to tell us how to live from cradle to grave?

    Go for a ride this long weekend. Canada now requires you to stop at one of many police roadblocks to show your papers. You no longer own your own your own property and must pay heavy taxes and mfees to be allowed to stay. The list is endless. The whole country needs to join the Ontario Rural Landowners Association or some similar vehicle. Let's start a national version.

    Government MUST be put in it's place. Please Canadians, pull back from this fascist life your government is instituting. It may already be too late. My money and support is looking for an alternative and it's not ANY of the current parties.We need real change. SMALLER government now.
  150. Private Person from Toronto, Canada writes: Safety is NOT First. We balance safety against speed, safety against productivity, safety against progress of every kind. Stairs are safer than escalators, but we use them because they move people better. A 40km/hr limit on major highways is safer than 100km/hr, but we go 100 because we value speed. People die as a result. Crossing the street is dangerous but we don't forbid it, or install tunnels at every intersection. That would be crazy!

    They inspect our stuff as we enter airplanes but they don't confiscate stainless steel ball-point pens, which are excellent weapons. If Safety were First, they would. ome to that, if Safety were first, they'd ground all airplanes permanently.

    Safety First: never leave your home.

    Next time someone justifies an inconvenience by saying it'll improve 'safety' or 'security', be very suspicious. They're going to take away something you value.
  151. Bobcat 64 from Canada writes: I love how people come on these forums and defend cops for their ridiculous behaviour. As Canadian citizens we have the right to question a police officer if you feel they are in the wrong. This woman had the right to question this thug and too bad if he thought she was 'rude'. I didn't know being rude was against the law. Those who feel otherwise are, well, cops. I do not have to listen to them just because they carry a badge if I know what they are doing is wrong or illegal.

    If they pulled me over on the side of the street and demanded to search my person or vehicle without just cause do you honestly think I am going to allow it. Not a chance in he!! I have never committed an illegal act and would have absolutely nothing to hide but would still never allow it to happen. Should I then be arrested or fined because some badge carrying street thug demanded I do as I am told?

    I hope this man gets fired. Heck make him pay her fines and throw another $1,000 on top of it just for being an idiot.
  152. Ken DeLuca from Arnprior, Canada writes: On the surface of it, it seems to have little to do with safety and a lot to do with that cop being too full of himself. The legal question will revolve around his authority to issue tickets.

    Language and race inferences are purely speculation and say more about the attitudes of the people making comments. Maybe there were, maybe there were not.. but none of us were there, nor are we privy to what goes on in people's minds.. save by inference from their actions. In this case, ( my speculation ) sounds Good Cop/ Mal Cop with too much time on his hands.
  153. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: When you argue with transit or real police, no matter how unreasonable their order, you are asking for it.

    Which isn't the same as deserving it. In Ottawa, a runamuck off-duty cop chased down and beat up a taxi driver just a few days ago, and then was strangely whisked away by fellow policemen. A transit 'cop' shook down a few students for taking pictures of buses (a security threat don't you know?)

    Let's not even talk about border guards. And Mr. Harper's plan to give them all guns,
  154. summom bonum from Canada writes: Jacques Hache from Gatineau, Canada writes: I haven't read all 130'ish previous comments, but some of them referring to the 'Quebec here we go again' or 'only in Quebec' types make me sick. Yes, this story is a nonsense but we see these things everywhere. Thanks for those who are able to leave racism aside while commenting on unusual stories like this one...

    Quebec is a race? Let me guess. It was a unanimous vote in the House of Commons, and our intrepid media missed it as they were busy at their proverbial, ubiquitous game of 'gotcha'.

    Mr. Hache, a little thin-skinned?
  155. The Iconoclast from Canada writes: Give the cop a break. He is a very decent human being. He showed a lot of restraint and compassion. The lady was never tased!!
  156. D. Hall from Canada writes: It is increasingly seeming that police forces across this country need to dramatically improve their psychological screening. There are way too many power tripping fools wearing a uniform these days.
  157. Richard Daystrom from Canada writes: Since the mafia still runs rampant in the Quebec construction industry it's obvious the cops have to step it down a notch and go after targets they can actually arrest. Way to go guys!!!!
  158. R OBryan from Canada writes: POLICE TASER MAN TO DEATH IN BC AIRPORT.

    POLICE ALLEGEDLY BEAT TAXIDRIVER AT OTTAWA AIRPORT.

    POLICE STEAL DRUGS TO BE USED FOR EVIDENCE.

    MOTHER OF TWO CUFFED and FINED FOR NOT USING HANDRAIL.

    Our country needs some fixing. The police force needs a whitewash. Their priorities are so wrong!
  159. COUNT IGGYTOSIS OF IFFYLAND from Dildo NFLD, Canada writes: D. Hall from Canada writes: It is increasingly seeming that police forces across this country need to dramatically improve their psychological screening. There are way too many power tripping fools wearing a uniform these days.

    ..............................................................................................................

    Lurd Tunderin, it be the psychological screening that be producing this problem. Common sense went out with it.
  160. Mike McFae from Canada writes: In the RCMP article, Mr. Webster has attained his 15 minutes of fame. The Globe and Rag will publish any article infinitum if it promotes criticism of the RCMP. Sure, there are some bad cops just as there are some bad teachers, nurses and autoworkers. Why are all RCMP officers bad in the eyes of a few. Methinks the handful of cop haters on these sites have a few skeletons in the closet.

    Regarding this article, it sure sounds like an as#hole cop but I can't help but notice that the article just glances over the initial confrontation between the lady and the cop. Why not do a little research and give us the whole story . It may not exonerate the cop but at least we won't feel like we are being led .
  161. summom bonum from Canada writes: WE live in a country in which the Supreme Court has ruled that police can set up roadblocks anytime, anywhere.

    Do you really think it is going to get better? Do you see anyone speaking for Canadians ? For civil liberties? For less State control? An influential lawyer? University professor? Business leader? Any organization?

    A nation of cowards. Kowtowing to the state. Meekly. Silently. A slow walk to servitude. Sentencing future generations to slavery through their pusilanimousness. Think of the children. Funny that that has always been the big government comrades rallying cry and modus operandi.
  162. Bad Bob from Canada writes: Interesting article. I searched Montreal websites for news of it and nothing.
    Anyway be careful in Montreal because the handrail police are out in full force and you could be next.
  163. Grunter Grimm from Victoria, Canada writes: I never use the filthy handrails. Disgusting.
  164. J A from Ottawa, Canada writes: This is funny stuff and should be good material for humour for the foreign media. Have you been to the subway of any large cities in the world like London, New York, Tokyo or Hong Kong? It is so busy that everybody is practically running up and down the escalators (despite the fact that it is moving). And the police fines someone who does not hold on to the railings? Oh dear, people will laugh their heads off!!!!!
  165. Donut Care from Ottawa, Canada writes: Quote: 'Laval police were unable to provide an explanation yesterday.'

    I'm willing to bet that she speaks French with an accent. There was a time when police provided security, not threatened it.

    The present state of affairs has been decades unfolding, and depends upon an uncaring, unknowing, and uneducated population. Get used to it folks. This is the society we live in now, and it is not going to change for the better. If you have ever lived in Egypt, Colombia or any other police state, you will know what is being prepared for you.
  166. Bad Bob from Canada writes: summom bonum from Canada

    Go for a ride this long weekend. Canada now requires you to stop at one of many police roadblocks to show your papers. You no longer own your own your own property and must pay heavy taxes and mfees to be allowed to stay. The list is endless. The whole country needs to join the Ontario Rural Landowners Association or some similar vehicle. Let's start a national version.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Where do you find such things? I have lived here for more than 68 years and have never seen one.
  167. Richard O'Connell from Melbourne beach, United States writes: I am beginning to believe the police are out of control in both the U.S. and Canada. I also belive local governments are using the police in more civil duties so they can fine people to raise money for themselves. There are some communities here who are trying to charge for responding to traffic accidents and are using cameras at traffic intersections to take pcitures of violators, then send them tickets in the mail with a fine attached. Pay the fine and all is forgiven, no points on your license , no notifing your insurance company, just give us the money. The reason is the cameras have not been proven to be legal. It's all about the money, forget about safety.
  168. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: summom nonum, exactly. And from what does police power arise?

    1. Way more money and 'boots' on the ground

    2. Way more technology toys for surveillance purposes, and to identify us via Automatic License Plate Recognitions systems, biometrics, etc.

    3. More authority to watch and entrap us, turning the presumption of innocence upside down

    4. More authority to obtain our personal information without a court order, doing likewise

    5. More authority to takes our fingerprints, extract our blood and breath, sniff and metal detect us, conduct 'virtual' body searches, etc.

    6. More secrecy and therefore less accountability
  169. Jared Mulligan from Canada writes: I'd like to hear the other side of the story on this one. On the surface this does seem like a ridiculous situation but I have to think there is more to this story.
  170. Listen up from Interior BC, Canada writes: Rules are Rules, right? 'Befehl ist Befehl' - that's where. When almost an entire nation followed the Rules of a little dictator with a moustache. We all know what came of that.
  171. David Ho from Markham, Canada writes: how is this related to Harper? I hope no one ever takes comments like this seriously
  172. Steve Nikodim from Frankford, Canada writes: She was not cuffed for not holding the handrail. She became combative and a danger to herself and those around her. I'm sure she was not 'thrown' into a holding cell. The 'little signs suggesting riders hold the grimy handrail' are apparently NOT suggestions. So stop rewriting the events Les, stick to the facts (if you care to find them). Pretty ironic that Ms Kosoian is a student of International law, yet picks and chooses which laws pertain to her. I'm sure there are several flights a day back to Georgia if she doesnt like it here.
  173. Mike McFae from Canada writes: Jared, well said.

    Too many people are obsessed with this police state foolishness. I thought that died in the 60's when we were ' anti-establishment ' and challenging ' the man '. We never did find out who ' the man ' was.

    Read the 10:02 post for a good example of scary posts. The 9;36 post is a close second ( some guy just itching to confront a cop ). Too much self-righteousness and indignation towards police.
  174. Oslo Karmen from Canada writes: That officer needs discipline, and a new job!
  175. Dr Riff from Canada writes: i'll bet sherriff roscoe was hiding behind some bushes there waiting for a culprit to fall in his handrail trap.
  176. Jeremy K from Burnaby, Canada writes: Yet another case where a person with a warped personality type has managed to get themselves into a job where they have AUTHORITY over people.I've noticed that many job that have authoritarian roles often attract people who seem like to like having power over other people. For some cops and border patrol there seems to be something almost sexual with the pleasure they get in throwing their weight around and making other people miserable because their job allows them to.
  177. In a Fog from Toronto, Canada writes: The behaviour of the officials in question is indefensible. They are simply too stupid keep their jobs. Fire them.
  178. R Hamilton from Canada writes: What is wrong with this policeman. Polite is part of Police work. Why couldn't he, noticing that this woman need help with her parcel, give her a hand. Why must hostility instead of common courtesy and decency prevail in so many police actions.
  179. Mia Zen from Canada writes: In Montreal, young freshmen coming from the police academy work for the transit system while waiting for a job.
    Too bad this policemen's name and face is not made public !
  180. Sassy Lassie from Canada writes: Welcome to a liberal utopian socialist's nation, where it's legal to have public sex with a table saw because it's ART but if you fail to hold a handrail you will be arrested and fined.

    This is our future under Modern Liberalism, perhaps she should of invoked the ole Liberal excuse of I have a 'Social condition' thus it is a violation of the CHRC act to fine her cause personal responsibility will cease to exist under the Liberals new policy.
  181. George Nikitin from Hamilton, Canada writes: If fascism is the prevailing ideology of our time, why did we bother to bleed in WWII?
  182. Ken Woodwords from Ottawa, Canada writes: I never hold the handrails and also instruct my children not to do so because of the very fact that they are full of germs, fecal matters and alike. Go ahead fine me.
    As far as some police officers abusing their power I can attest to that from an incident occurred few months ago in Montreal. 'Rules are rules, we must obey them' crowd should think twice. A relative of mine was stopped by the police claiming that he was talking on the phone while driving. He said he did not even own a cell phone which is true. Police claimed that he threw it somewhere in the car. He asked the officer to search for his pockets and the car. Police wrote a ticket and went away. Now, the onus is on him to go to court and prove that he did not have a phone. Is this a society that we would like it to turn into?
  183. Sam Bolton from Ottawa, Canada writes: Bela Kosoian, Sue the brutal police and launch another suit against the individual police officers who assaulted you, I am more than happy to donate up to $1000 if you setup public fund for this law suit, our police increasingly becoming aggressive and acting like in third world countries and the only way to stop this brutality is to sue the police department and make a personal claims against the individual police officers involved in brutality and try to squeeze in court without mercy.
  184. Wild Bill from Canada writes: That might be another reason to add to my list of why I refuse to visit the province of Quebec.
  185. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Geez, I checked out the posts because I thought I might be a guilty party! Turns out the posts weren't scary at all. People are genuinely concerned about too much police power. It is possible that the 'war on terror' stuff foisted on us by the most failed US president in history is also a war on us: on our person, rights, freedoms and privacy.

    Freedom from arbitrary search and seizure, to move about, to communicate in private, to associate and express oneself......

    The 'right to be let alone' is a hundred years old in the USA. This right is disappearing at an alarming rate, almost everywhere, any especially in the US, the UK and here at home.
  186. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: She didn't get detained for not holding the handrail, she was detained for beaking off.
  187. Tim THorton from Toronto, Canada writes: .
    .
    We need more GARBAGE POLICE. I see too many people littering everday day. That is an area where we need better enforcement. We have to PUNISH PEOPLE THAT LITTER.
    .
    .
  188. Ontario Man from Canada writes: Red Arrow Crossing from Canada writes: Being from Montreal I can attest to 2 things:
    1. This sort of behaviour is all to common amongst the police force.
    2. The reaction the woman received was probably worse because she responded in English.

    --------------------------------

    Considering the hatred for English and the dispatch of language police your point 2 seems entirely plausible.
  189. slapdash dapoint from are your gov'ts out to ruin you? mine are, Canada writes: it's obvious that there are too many laws for the latest batch of under-educated police officers to interpret. not holding a handrail is not cause for detention or interrogation. her comment shows great restraint in the face of stupidity.

    i'd like to see pay and training increases for cops. then it'd be reasonable to raise the hiring standards. too many buffoons in uniforms giving the rest a bad rep.
  190. lianne ritchie from nyc, Canada writes: the Montreal police have a reputation ..over many years...of being 'strong arm' and undereducated..bad for tourism....Signed: FR Maxwell NYC
  191. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Tim tHorton, I think we need obesity police. There's a real national security threat. And venture more into thought control. Thought police isn't exactly a new concept.
  192. Arvid Hambler from Canada writes: She's lucky she speaks English. At the Vancouver Airport they murder people who can't communicate.
  193. david t from Canada writes: Canada is turning into a fascist country right before our ignorant eyes. The more we follow the US the more fascist we become. Wake up dummies.
  194. Tinfoil Hatt from A single green shoot of justice in a cesspool of lies, Canada writes:
    Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes: ... Police officers represent the authority of their office, which is the upholding of public law and order. It is our duty as citizens to abide by their orders, even if we consider these orders inane. ... Many of you raise the spectre of a police state, but I think what's more to fear here is widespread disrespect for those who represent the authority of our collective laws.

    Widespread disrespect begins with disrespectful behavior by those who 'represent the authority of their office.' When our police officers abuse the authority of their own office, how is any self-respecting citizen to blindly abide by their orders? Keep in mind, Charlotte Creamer, that the basis of our nation's laws lies in the consensus of its citizenry. In that sense, I fully agree with you that widespread disrespect for those who represent the authority of our collective laws is something to be feared, but only because it means that the foundation is beginning to question the edifice. Respect for those who enforce the laws developed through social consensus is inherent, and therefore theirs to lose. Don't blame the disillusioned or the rebellious: blame those who abuse their positions of power.

    ...
  195. Andrew S from Canada writes: I am disgusted by this. More and more this country is becoming a police and nanny state. I am sick and tired of people telling me what Canada should be when Canada isn't all that when you look at it.
  196. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ Prairie Boy: You neo-con fool. This is the State doing CYA, not Nannying.

    For real nanny state, see requirements for warning labels that specify a cup of coffee is hot, or that cruise control doesn't mean that you can stop steering the vehicle. MacDonalds and Winnebago. Real cases.

    Why are you neo-cons so stupid?
  197. Modest Insights from Ottawa from Canada writes: This is by no means a trivial matter. It's one thing to respect authority, but we as citizens of this great country need to know when authority disrespects us and must respond accordingly.

    Based on the story and the accompanying picture, it would appear that Ms. Bela Kosoian is an attractive, intelligent, educated person, who seemingly knows the difference between what makes sense and what doesn't.

    Clearly, the arresting officer must have none of those qualities. Since he caused infinitely more harm than good with his actions, he doesn't deserve to be in his job.

    I just hope Ms. Kosoian has the wherewithal and courage to make this jerk pay the price for his callousness and stupidity.

    'They cannot take away our self-respect if we do not give it to them.' - Gandhi.
  198. G.K. Fields from Penn's Woods, United States writes: We had to shoot her to save her life! The same guy who said, 'We had to destroy the village to save it,' emigrated to Canada (well, Quebec anyway)?
  199. Linda WS from Peace, Canada writes: Canadian police are acting no better than thugs. Does anyone know why the cop in Ottawa that assaulted a cab driver isn't arrested yet?
  200. anonymous in Ont from Canada writes: Good thing he got this dangerous criminal snicker. Our whole police force is getting a bad reputation & deservedly so. From police brutality, to murder, theft etc etc. The lunatics are in charge of the asylum
  201. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ GlynnMhor: Freedom of Speech - a radical concept. But then, you would like to bring on that authoritarian state. Where no one dares challenge the police or the government. Remind us all - what was it that we fought WW 2 for?
  202. Eric Martin from Canada writes: Another policeman on a power trip. These guys come out of police schools believing they have a god given authority over all non-policeman. Many policeman need psychiatric help to remind them that they are paid by the public to serve and protect.

    This incident is an abuse of power, not intended to protect anyone but aimed at asserting the supreme authority of the police.

    This woman should sue the Laval police force and the officer should be fired.
  203. been there from Toronto, Canada writes: Hopefully this will be a wake-up call for the public who allow themselves to get intimidated and shamed to accept fear-based heavy-handed policies under the guise of 'safety', 'terror', 'criminals', etc.

    While this particular incident is likely a one-off aberration, the bigger issue is that there has been a relentless campaign by politicians and the security industry (police, prisons, etc.) to exploit collective fears about all sorts of imagined calamities to extend their power and 'relevance' to the populace that is neither needed nor wanted.

    Over the past few decades, we have allowed this to campaign to go on and the typical reaction is to roll over like sheep.

    It is a position that both the 'left' and 'right' labeled political factions are exploiting equally.

    Why? Because it is cheap politics and it works. As long as people themselves feel insecure and fearful, then all the government needs to do is press a few of those 'safety', 'security', 'criminals' buttons and their agenda will get through.

    How much political support a politician will get if he argues against policies that claim 'will make us safer' even when it is utter nonsense?

    And it is relatively cheap to implement. A little more increase in police and enforcement budgets is all it takes.

    Real useful and forward thinking policies, like transforming the country to a much needed 21st century economic and industrial structure, proactive regulations against real risks (like putting propane depots in residential neighbourhoods) requires large sums of cash, a hefty sales job, and political risk. Exploiting fears and pushing for 'safety', 'security' doesn't.

    If we behave like sheep, then we deserve such heavy handed repression.
  204. W M from Canada writes: I have no problem with this article, but I believe that the headline is what is called 'yellow journalism' (i.e., journalism that exploits, distorts, or exaggerates the news to create sensations and attract readers'). Regardless of whether one thinks the woman in the article should have received a ticket, it is pretty clear from the article that she did not get it because a cop 'caught' her without her hand on the rail, but because she responded to the request to hold the rail by belligerently refusing to do so. The cop may well have overreacted and been in the wrong, but it is also possible that this woman was equally or more complicit in turning what should have been nothing into a ticket.
    .
    I have seen cops overreact, but I have also seen them take extraordinary and unwarranted abuse and been awed by their patience. This could be a case of a cop with a short fuse and a chip on his / her shoulder or a petulent, abusive citizen who pushed the cop beyond reasonable patience. Until this goes to trial, I don't think we should jump to conclusions.
  205. Mass Nine from Centre of the Hockey Universe? nah......., Canada writes: stupidest......fine......evar!
    sue the bejesus out of them.

    of course, we'd have to figure out what 'bejesus' are in the first place, but I digress....
  206. Edward Carson from Canada writes: Self-righteous ignorant b-word describes this woman. Whether you like it or not if the police ask you to do something then do it. She was looking for fare? She couldn't do that at the landing once off the escalator? And then she argues with the cop? She deserves everything she got quite frankly.
  207. Graham Connell from Victoria, Canada writes: I really loving the range of comments on this story. I have never lived in Montreal and probably never will but I don't think this is something unique to that city. We entrust police officer with sweeping powers and I guess with all their complaints about being over worked and working with minimal resources there would be some level of prioritizing what needs to be enforced and what can probably pass. The law books are littered with offenses which have fallen aside as our values change, but have not been repealed. I have to laugh at a PO who has the time to worry about hand rail holding, must have been a slow day. Here in Lotusland we have seat belt and bike helmet laws which are rarely enforced. It's almost laughable there on the books. In fact I have only witnessed one individual who was fined for not wearing a bicycle helmet and he appeared to be homeless. A glaring example of selective enforcement, much like racial profiling is. This case is a clear example of a PO going too far. I'm sure this waif bruised his ego when she didn't blindly obey his command. Let us remember it took one individual to change justice for us all. Many years ago the jury was directed to come back with a verdict the King had requested. It took a brave man to say the hell with that and was jailed for doing so. Today the jury is independent and can render a decision it sees fit. So in some cases we should question what laws are reasonable and just. A fine for over $400 for not holding a hand rail is unjust as was the method of imposing it on her.
  208. W M from Canada writes: Ontario Man from Canada writes: Red Arrow Crossing from Canada writes: Being from Montreal I can attest to 2 things:
    1. This sort of behaviour is all to common amongst the police force.
    2. The reaction the woman received was probably worse because she responded in English.

    --------------------------------

    Considering the hatred for English and the dispatch of language police your point 2 seems entirely plausible.
    ===================

    And, where in this article does it say that she responded in English?! Do you know that or are you assuming and, if so, why? Did you happen to notice that she is studying law at a French language university?!
  209. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Do we really need these transit police? Have they got that little to do? Isn't this a 9/11 off-shoot?
  210. been there from Toronto, Canada writes: As for the comments about her 'defiant' and 'combative' stance:

    1. We don't know all the facts. We weren't there. This is a news clip, not trial-grade evidence. Can't tell anything.

    2. Contrast this sort of police tactic to the principle of 'measured and proportionate response to public safety' Chief Blair laid down in dealing with the Tamil protest on the Gardner.

    Even if she were defiant, and even if the rule book says that police CAN do this or that, it is a really hard to argue that this was a measured and proportional response for such a trivial matter.
  211. Jah Nee Kah Sun from Canada writes: Edward Carson from Canada writes: Self-righteous ignorant b-word describes this woman. Whether you like it or not if the police ask you to do something then do it.

    I can't believe that there are folks who cave in to authority so easily. React just because the Cops ask?....Madness !

    Keep the flags of discontent flying...and always defy authority.

    Bela Kosoian....sue the crap out of the cops.
  212. tip finlay from St. John's, Canada writes: i was no one before,
    they gave me a little tin star,
    now i live for the chance,
    to make them all dance,
    to a tune they dare not ignore.
  213. Cubby . from Ontario, Canada writes: garth mckenzie from Canada writes: Frankly, I'm happy when pigs gets killed
    ____________________

    Takes a sick puppy to say something like that.

    I agree with the poster from Sechelt and a few others - just because there are some power-tripping cops it doesn't follow that all police officers are abusive. I've encountered some pretty decent ones.

    I'm not justifying him ticketing the woman but seems to me that she got cuffed for not producing ID when it was requested.
  214. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: I live in Quebec and speak faltering French. I can count the number of times I've been snubbed for my language failure on one hand.
  215. Rain Couver from Canada writes: Never mind that there are creeps in the Metro doing other strange and nefarious deeds. On any given day, when I used to use the Metro, there would be flashers, streakers, taggers, suicides, drug dealers, stabbers, muggers, etc.

    The fact that these cops are more concerned with people rifling through their own bags and nailing them for not holding on to the railings rather than keeping an eye out for the dregs of humanity is disappointing, but not surprising. Remember, this police force is second only to LA police when it comes to ridiculous behaviour. She is learning law, even if it is at UQAM, so she should go and nail the cops for this.
  216. I. Con O'Clast from Canada writes: Clearly, uniforms and guns are attracting bullies. If the police in this country want to regain respect, they will have to weed out the jackboots that infect their ranks, and, through better selection process, make certain that the thugs are not the ones wearing the uniforms.
  217. Michael Luger from gulag, quebec, Canada writes: I would not intervene if I were witness this gross abuse of authority; the system works.
  218. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ kevin o'connor: Goodwin's so-called law is a fine way to stifle debate. Especially when the references to Fascism, the NAZI state and its totalitarianism are accurate and factually correct.

    Pipe down boyo, and consider the implications on a wider social scale of this incident. Keeping in mind the recent spate of extremely egregious examples of police abuse of their authority and power over the course of the past few years.
  219. Pierre-Yves P from Canada writes: .
    Quebec`s totalitarian streak is looking better every day.
  220. Mark Shore from Ottawa, Canada writes: Canadian laws need to be amended to incorporate the long recognized but not-actually-written-up crime of 'backtalk to, insufficient level of respect towards, or annoying of bully with badge'. Responses up to and including lethal force to be applied at officer's discretion, subject to rigorous post-incident investigations by said officer's own police force.

    See related crime, 'bleeding on police officer'.

    Yes, once upon a time they did work for us.
  221. Yvonne Wackernagel from Woodville, Canada writes: This is so typical Canadian. What about a sign which reads: The Transit Authorities will not be responsible for any accidents caused by your avoidance of holding the handrails provided for your safety, or something like that. Then the onus would be on the riders. No expense would be incurred for the police services either.
  222. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: A slight diversion, s'il vous plait. Traffic cops.

    I drove all over Southern France last August and never saw one, except in my service to help park at beaches. No radar traps either. For a month.

    Back here, they're like a swarm of flies. They're everywhere. Video surveillance/ticketing, automatic license plate recognition systems, unmarked cars.....

    We drivers are clearly now a matter of national security.
  223. mad hat1 from Kingston, Canada writes: This is a perfect example of a 'power-trip'. It's unfortunately far too common in our society. In my opinion, a great majority of people do not have the capacity to isolate the respect they deserve because of their job from the respect they think they deserve as a person. Police officers deserve respect because of their job, but unfortunately officers like this Montreal/Laval police officer use their job to satisfy their own personal hunger for respect. I personally had to deal with Canadian custom agents on the border with similar misguided sense of entitlement. I came out of that experience with a very a negative view of Canadian customs agents. Uneducated, crude and lacking any common sense. The only difference from this story is that I did not argue and avoided a very unpleasant situation from getting worse. There is no point in arguing with people with no common sense.
  224. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: The woman was foolish to argue. It sounds like she was sort of rude to them. This is never a good idea. I would have thought that someone from a former Communist country would be more respectful of authority...

    Yes, it seems ridiculous to fine her.

    Yes, it is a good idea to hold on because if someone falls or slips you would have a domino effect. It is especially foolish to rummage in your back while on an escalator. I wouldn't have ever done this.

    Next time, the officers should back off I think, but this woman needs to not be aggressive when asked to obey the rules. I say let her go without a fine and tell the officers to loosen up. This isn't a police state!
  225. Commentsclosedfor Legalreasons from Toronto, Canada writes: Given that this happened in a jurisdiction with a moronic, draconian and probably unconstitutional language law, this egregious example of police stupidity is not surprising. This poor woman is lucky that she wasn't in Vancouver airport however or she might have found herself on the receiving end of four or five taser jolts.
  226. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: What if a police officer, having mistaken you, tells you to get out of the car and lie down in the mud or snow? What if s/he tells you to produce ID when you have done nothing wrong? What if you are obstructed from access when you want to freely associate or express yourself or protest? What if you are entrapped into committing a crime you would not otherwise commit? What if you are humiliated by police practices such as handcuffing, shackling, exposing your conviction on the Internet, your lawn or your release from prison?

    And on and on.
  227. Elmo Harris from Niagara, Canada writes: daniel saliken from Vancouver, Canada writes: In my youth, (not so long ago) the cops were good guys, not sociopaths.
    ===

    I agree with you completely.

    We now have a situation in Canada where we are more afraid of being mugged by the cops than by the criminals. The criminals want your money. The cops want your life!
  228. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: K L from Vancouver, Canada writes: Was she running down the escalator? No.

    Was she sliding down the escalator? No.

    Was she a risk to anyone else? No.

    Case closed.

    ------------------------
    Was she a risk to anyone else? Maybe. From reading the article, it would seem that if she was rummaging in her bag this means she may have been bending over. She might not have been looking ahead of her. It isn't clear. Maybe a surveillance camera would answer this question.

    Frankly, she was foolish to argue. She should have been more courteous to the officers. It does seem though that they were heavy handed in cuffing her and taking her away to a back room. And I don't think this is reasonable given the information in the article.

    I guess her 'law school' knowledge may come into use her. Surely, she may very well have a case to sue her?? It looks like she is poor though, so she probably needs a pro bono lawyer. Anyone out there willing to take her case?
  229. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: IN my last post I omitted 'e' when writing 'here'. Sticky 'e' key. Sorry.
  230. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: 246 comments. A good thread with largely intelligent debate. Can't beat that on a rainy Saturday.

    No golf today.
  231. Red Arrow Crossing from Canada writes: Everyone's discussion points are moot. There is NO law on the books dealing with holding the handrail. NONE. The police man stopping her is similar to him telling her to put on a jacket because it is cold outside; take off her hat in church; or tie up her shoelaces.
  232. My Self from Vancouver, Canada writes: I guess holding a handrail was for her own safety.... that is, protection from the police!
  233. L.B. MURRAY from !! from Canada writes: So, she studies in French, at UQAM, but cannot comprehend a pictogram with clear instructions....

    ''Ms. Kosoian, who studies at the Université du Québec à Montreal, was riding an escalator down to catch a 5:30 p.m. subway from the suburb of Laval to an evening class downtown when she started rifling through her backpack looking for a fare.

    Ms. Kosoian, who grew up in Georgia when it was still part of the Soviet Union, says she didn't catch the officer's instruction to hold the rail when he first approached.''

    AT LEAST, IN MONTREAL, there are police officers patrolling the subway system. This article is just another excuse for bashing quebec.

    Good day.
  234. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: Red Arrow Crossing from Canada writes: Everyone's discussion points are moot. There is NO law on the books dealing with holding the handrail. NONE. The police man stopping her is similar to him telling her to put on a jacket because it is cold outside; take off her hat in church; or tie up her shoelaces
    --------------------------
    Actually, I beg to differ. I think there are bone fide rules that are set out by the Montreal transportation authority. You just don't normally hear about people getting 'arrested' for disobeying them.

    Enforcing this rule or law is NOT akin to asking her to put on a jacket. There is a good reason for this law. If someone is distracted or not holding on while on the escalator they could fall and this could cause a domino effect.

    I don't agree with the way to officers acted from what I read here. They were overly zealous it would seem.

    I still think that this woman, Bela, should have been more courteous. If she'd obeyed the officers, perhaps there would have been no story here at all. It would seem they were ticked off more by her attitude and arguing then by the offense itself.
  235. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Red Arrow, there is a law. Which explodes into regulations, written by the bureaucrats. Which adopts policies such as 'Hold handrails' as enforceable law.

    There are millions of things we can't do by law. What matters is how the police choose to enforce the things.

    I think the last few decades of wars on crime, drugs and, the new kid on the block, the war on terror, have been colossal failures.

    As in blow them up. Start over.
  236. tip finlay from St. John's, Canada writes: Zoe Morron from Canada writes: 'I would have thought that someone from a former Communist country would be more respectful of authority...'

    Yea, Zoe - Isn't it funny how when you take your boot off someone's throat they wanna have something to say. You and Ms. Creamer from Halifax should get together with the other few imbiciles on this forum and start your own branch of the 'automaton society'.
  237. Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes: The headline is misleading -- the woman was not arrested for refusing to hold the handrail; she was arrested for being unruly and disobeying a police officer's command to present her ID. In this regard, the police were right to arrest a non-compliant person. The woman certainly had sufficient time to become compliant (and I believe the police officers showed amazing restraint, holding off as long as they did before arresting her), but she continued to argue with the police and refuse to comply with their requests. Again -- THE POLICE DID THE RIGHT THING. If the accused believes she was wrongly arrested, then she can air her grievances in a court of law; that's why they exist. Arguing with a police officer is not how law-abiding people respond to reasonable requests, and certainly requesting the woman to hold the handrail (so as not to fall down on the people below her) or to produce her ID are both reasonable requests. The first words out of this woman's mouth were a snide: 'I don't have three hands.' That is NOT how you speak to a police officer, not in Canada, anyway. She got what she deserves, as I hope do all others who disrespect and disobey those men and women in uniform whose duty it is to 'serve and protect' us. Most of you dissing the cops on this forum would be the first to scream loud and long and hard if the police weren't there to protect you or your family the second you needed them -- you bloody hypocrites. And if speaking up in defense of law and order and in defense of showing respect for the authority of the law makes me a 'nazi', then all law-abiding Canadians (and law-abiding people around the world, for that matter) are likewise 'nazis'.
  238. Allan Libman from Hampstead, QC, Canada writes: The Laval Police are quite notorious for being overzealous (polite description) and botching up routine operations. This is the same Police Force that botched a raid on a suspected drug dealer's home 2 years ago and 1 of the raiding party was killed by the homeowner . It was proven in court that the police didn't identify themselves as such and battered the door in the early morning hours and entered screaming and yelling. The honeowner's defense was that he thought it was a home invasion and wanted to protect his wife and children.The police shot up the house as they panicked and couldn't get their stories straight. The homeowner was found NOT GUILTY. The members of this force have proven time and again that they are poorly trained, uncontrolled cowboys.
  239. Mark S from Calgary, Canada writes: I believe it was in the early 1970 that the band 5 man electrical band came out with a song Sigh,Sighns and I thought it can't get that bad. Seems it has, nowadays if you took time to read all the sighns you wouldn't get anywhere.
  240. Turning Right from Canada writes: Would this police officer have safely guided her off the escalator is it had stopped and she was stuck half way? Would she still be required to use the hand rail?
    I really think that the officer should have called for back up, she definitely sounds like she was out to cause trouble and possibly endanger others lives with he reckless abandon on the escalator.
  241. Naomi Y from Canada writes: 'Ms. Kosoian, who grew up in Georgia when it was still part of the Soviet Union'

    So Canada used to be a free world, but it turned into a nanny state and now Canada is turning into like the soviet union where her citizen have no freedom at all.
  242. jamie yavis from Canada writes: Only in Canada, heh? Our society really is spiraling down a moronic black hole!

    Once, long ago, a business mentor once told me if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys and this is a prime example of that.
  243. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Ms. Creamer good post, however misguided.

    I was once hauled out of my car and kicked in the face by a policeman. There was blood everywhere (all over my white leather coat). I was hauled down to the station and refused to get cleaned up before facing the judge the next morning.

    My offence? I had been stopped at 2:00 am because of a slightly faulty muffler and I asked the PO, 'What's the matter? Did you have a fight with the wife tonight?'

    This guy walked. He's chief of police for all I know.
  244. Mark Shore from Ottawa, Canada writes: Charlotte Creamer writes: 'That is NOT how you speak to a police officer, not in Canada, anyway. She got what she deserves, as I hope do all others who disrespect and disobey those men and women in uniform whose duty it is to 'serve and protect' us. Most of you dissing the cops on this forum would be the first to scream loud and long and hard if the police weren't there to protect you or your family the second you needed them -- you bloody hypocrites.'

    I'm starting to think you work for or with a police force.

    I'm in my mid-forties, have never called on the 'services' of a police force, and my expectations would be quite low if I ever saw the need to do so. But I have been involuntarily paying their salaries for over twenty-five years.
  245. Commentsclosedfor Legalreasons from Toronto, Canada writes: Frau Kreamer von Halifax, if someone behaves like a Nazi, why isn't it fair to label them as such? What 'reasonable request' was there for the cops to demand her ID? Your comments 'THE POLICE DID THE RIGHT THING' and 'She got what she deserves...' are straight out of the Fascist Phrase Book. You are no doubt familiar with others such as 'If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear' and 'If you're not part of the solution, then you must be part of the problem'? I won't take up any more of your time for now. I'm sure you must have a busy day ahead of you, polishing your jackboots and getting ready for the next Harperjugend rally. Make sure your watch is accurate. You don't want to be late for the Two-Minute Hate!
  246. Keeping It Real from Canada writes: Are the officers from KESWICK, Ontario?

    Less and less respect to the police...
  247. joe bloagh from Canada writes: Seems the cop who bravely arrested this non-compliant railing holder must have moved from Keswick Ontario.

    I'm not certain on that, but the severety of the crime and the perceived need to crush such dissent immediately, certainly has Keswickian justice written all over it.
  248. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: This is the G&M's most vibrant story on its website, right now. Some good stuff on police power and excess thereof. We all want 'peace, order and good government.' How our elected/paid representatives deliver on that promise is the subject of ongoing debate.

    Like this one.
  249. Michael G from Canada writes: Charlotte Creamer -- the police are not your parents.

    Asking me for my ID is not a reasonable request. Nor is ordering me to put my hand on the railing.

    The police have no business disrupting someone during the their daily routine.

    If a police office told you to jump off a bridge, would you do it? After all the police are wearing 'uniforms' and empowered by the state. That means they are above you, you can't argue with them as they know best.

    What is it with people who simply submit to power and so-called authority because that is what 'law abiding citizens do.' Did it ever occur to you that the police office him/herself is breaking laws?

    These are just people with 6 months training and X amount of life experience handed a gun and badge. There is no reason to presuppose the police officer is more 'law abiding' or even morally correct than a woman walking down the street (particularly when you consider she is a LAW STUDENT).

    The submissive mentality you displace is tacitly accepting of Orewellian-like practices. Weren't the SS technically 'police officers' complete with badges, guns and matching hats?

    Don't give the police a free pass for being arrogant, rude or breaking the laws they are supposed to uphold.
  250. Steve Marv from Canada writes: The headline seems to be in error. It should read: 'Woman handcuffed for obstructing police.' She broke a bylaw. She was asked for her identity so that the officer could write her a ticket. She refused, and threw a hissy fit.
    Everybody is so quick to condemn the cops. No wonder the Toronto Police are too chicken to clear out the Tamil protesters. Everytime cops try to maintain public order, they get crapped on. Sometimes police decisions, made in the heat of the moment, aren't ideal. But if the cops had let this lady go, without giving her i.d., what then? Should the cops just let everyone go if they throw a little 3-year-old hissy-fit? Think about it.
  251. bruce miles from Canada writes: law student vs police hmm. the only incident i can think off when someone was injured in subway for not holding handrail is from London England and it had more to do with flashfire and stampeding patrons. If the law itself is challenged i would love to sit on a jury
    cheers
  252. Steve Marv from Canada writes: Here's what a citizen should do if they feel that police are stepping beyond their mandate: 1- Don't throw a hysterical fit, which gives the cop an excuse to cuff you for his own safety. 2- Camly explain your position to the cop. 3- Before complying, get the cop's badge number. 4- Inform the cop calmly that you will be making a complaint. 5- If the officer is still asking you to do something that you think he doesn't have the right to do, then tell the cop to arrest you, because you are not willing to comply, and then comply with the arrest. 6- If the officer goes ahead and makes the arrest, it will be gentle, you won't get hurt, but you can still take legal action. 7- If the cop was out of bounds, you get to make some cash. In this case, because she wasn't white, the lady could have gone to the Human Rights Commission and get a nice tidy sum- without having to hire a lawyer. 8- If the officer had the perfect right to make the arrest, then it's not the fault of the cop for upholding the law, it's YOUR fault for voting in socialist city counsellors for the past 30 years who pass all kinds of nanny-state bylaws that interfere with your life! Next time vote Conservative, so you don't have the nanny state in your face...
  253. little bowpeep from FY idiots, Canada writes: Anyone who thinks its OK to fine a person for not holding an escalator handrail is an idiot. For those that say rules are rules, no they are not. Canada has become the land of stupid laws that are targeted to make governments money or punish the citizens into obedience. This country is ruled by ignorant politicians, thug police and elites that are more than willing to chain the public.
  254. Michael G from Canada writes: Steve Marv,

    Great question. What WOULD have happened? Absolutely nothing. Both office and woman would have continued their day as usual. The police can't just questions you for no reason (and yes, not holding an effing handrail is not a good reason).

    I fail to understand why an office requires a look at her drivers license in order to talk to her. She (and everyone else) is still the same person with or with her office state issued identification in the officer's hand.

    Regardless of how 'rude' the woman was there is no excuse for $450 worth of fines and hand cuffs. Expand your perspective and think if that was you -- you've done nothing, a cop hassles you, you stand up for yourself and before know it you're in cuffs and a holding cell. Its ridiculous and the die-hard police lackeys know it.

    Its okay to have a different opinion on every issue. You still can be a bland police supporter and not support them in every instance. Don't worry, you're not a hypocrite you're just critical, its a way better place to be.
  255. Commentsclosedfor Legalreasons from Toronto, Canada writes: Marv, your attitude and that of others like you gives the police carte blanche to trample on everyone's rights. Rather than deal with real crime, those who are allegedly paid to serve and protect are afraid to tackle anyone who is a bona fide threat to society. Like the proverbial schooyard bully (perhaps that is what many of these thugs were before they donned a uniform and were officially sanctioned to assault others with impunity), the police look for easy pickings.
  256. David Beentheredonethat from Canada writes: That student/mother/whatever would be the first in line to sue the transit authority had she tripped and fallen and hurt herself (or even pretended to hurt herself). She deserves what she got. No sympathy here.
  257. Steve Marv from Canada writes: Michael G, if there is a bylaw in place that says that you have to hold onto the handrail, then the police are entitled to enforce it. I definitely disagree with that bylaw. But it's there. Brought to you once again by the nanny state. It would be the same situation if you started smoking in a public place. The cops would have a right to obtain your identification so that they can write you a ticket.
    Either there's a bylaw in place or there isn't. If there's no bylaw, then the cop is way out of line, and she's about to reap thousands of dollars in a civil suit that will support her through the rest of her law school. Or, it's called a Human Rights Commission: this should be right up their alley: a white, racist cop arresting a brown person for breaking a bylaw that doesn't exist. It's in the bag.
  258. jason rohlig from guelph, Canada writes: Sounds like the police officers in the situation were power tripping. What a disgrace! Give me a break fined for not holding a hand rail? What an abuse of power searching, restraining, WTF
  259. Risto Richards from Tofino, Canada writes: Mall cops are smarter.
  260. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Mr. Marv, right on except for this. You conclude by stating that the Cons have this 'law and order' stuff figured out.

    More police, more police power, longer sentences, more prisions?

    Don't think so.
  261. Sassy Lassie from Canada writes: Canada is becoming the mirror image of England and Europe where they pad the poles lest you walk into one and get hurt whilst text messaging. Balloons and bubbles are deemed dangerous and banned. Joy and laughter will be the last emotions the Liberal Socialist Utopian flakes will take from us. Hate has already been banned by the CHRC, freedom of expression is now censored by the state, freedom of conscience also mandated by the state, freedom of religion exist if you are a Jew or Muslim but Christians and Catholics are persecuted to the full extend of the HRCs. Admit it Canada is already a Nanny Nation because people tolerate the government busy bodies meddling into our lives under the guise of hate, racism and bigotry the perpetually offended OWN our souls.
  262. Keating Gun from Canada writes: This being Canada perhaps police will want to hold a $5M inquiry at taxpayer expense to claim they did nothing wrong. Hopefully authorities have learned from the RCMP fiasco and will moe quickly to make amends and send their officer for retraining or disciplnine.
  263. Michael G from Canada writes: I love how people have said the woman threw a 'hysterical hissy fit,' where in this article does it claim that?

    The only things we know for sure are that a woman was fined and detailed for failing to hold a handrail and/or showing a cop her drivers license.

    Its just as likely the officer bullied her, made her feel weak (using his superior masculine size and police power), berated her for not following his order (request) and roughed her up a little bit because maybe she knew more about the law he was trying to enforce than he did.

    Speculation is ridiculous in this case, as is handing up nearly $500 in fines for a non-incident.
  264. Steve Marv from Canada writes: Richard Sharp. You're right on with that. I don't agree with that solution to law and order. But I do agree with their general position that we want the government to stay out of our lives as much as possible.
  265. Michael G from Canada writes: By-law or not, the police have tones of arbitrary power. They use discretion all the time in all kinds of matters. Please don't assume that because a law 'is there' that it must be enforced to its fullest extent at all times.

    If that were the case most right-wing politicians, business executives and stock traders would be in jail in for fraud, tax evasion...etc.

    Discretion, its the name of the game in law enforcement.
  266. tip finlay from St. John's, Canada writes: Steve Marv from Canada writes: 'if the cops had let this lady go, without giving her i.d., what then?'

    Yea tell us Steve - what then? Another errant escalator escapee on the loose in Montreal. What if it spreads?

    The reason police don't behave that way with the Tamil protestors is there are too many of them and the cameras are rolling. Get a grip on yourself man. Don't you grasp the basis of the concern expressed here that Canada is on a slipper slope to an Orwellian police state. Don't you realize that what begins as a minor breach of someone's rights can easily end the way it did at the Vancouver airport?
  267. glop male from US, United States writes: My advice to Bela Kosoian: go back to Georgia where they treat people like people.
  268. Steve Marv from Canada writes: He did use his discretion, Michael G. He could have decided to fine her right off the bat. But instead, he decided to warn her. In turn, she beaked off, in other words, completely flouting the law right under the cop's nose, and challenging him to do something about it. So he did.
    It's the same for jaywalking, or riding your bike on the sidewalk. Cops will let it go. But once in awhile, a cop may ask you not to do it, he's got the right. So you comply. Don't flaunt it right in their face, or your daring them to write you a ticket.
    Remember, this story is only one side. I'd like to hear the cop's side.
  269. Timothy Philips from Barrie, Canada writes: Wow. I'm surprised they didn't shoot her on the spot.
  270. Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes: Why are you defending someone who considers herself to be above the law? Are you so hard up for a hero that you automatically embrace someone solely on the basis of their rudeness and disrespect for authority? How sad; respect for the law is being replaced by mob mentality of the lowest sort, as witnessed by most of the comments on this forum. A woman who should be ashamed of her actions is instead trumpeting them as if she were a victim, and instead of upbraiding this woman for disobeying a police officer's request, the public champions her rude defiance and vilifies as 'nazis' those who point out that she's clearly in the wrong. How far we've devolved as a society, and again, how sad.
  271. Steve Marv from Canada writes: Tip F, I agree with you: we are descending into a police state. But it's not the cops' fault. Instead of roasting the cop, why don't we find out who the politicians were that passed this stupid law. Socialists are always passing these kinds of laws 'for our own safety'. Now you'll have to wear a helmet if you go skiing, then you'll have to wear a winter jacket if it's below zero, then you won't be allowed to eat junk-food, etc....socialists just don't stop trying to tell you how to live your life.
  272. Michael G from Canada writes: How is she in the wrong Charlotte, what real threat was she to you, the police officer or the rest of the people in the subway?

    Do you really want things to get to the point where the effing police can micromanage your life to the point of telling you to hold the handrail on an escalator!

    Alert level orange officer! Female suspect refuses to hold handrail!

    What's next the police make sure you brush your teeth in the morning before you leave the house? Oh yes, this woman was clearly in the wrong and ever law ever written is clearly in the right.

    Rosa Park should still be in the jail.
  273. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: hey tip, from the Atlantic, pleased to make your acquaintance. There is a bigger picture here. It is about police (and security) power. Over us.

    The nonsense we go through at airports and borders. And did you notice squad cars now have two per vehicle? That the police foot patrol in two's and three's?

    This is classic, 'justify your job' stuff. Which is backfiring.
  274. Ken Woodwords from Ottawa, Canada writes: On a lighter note I just noticed that her name Bela means 'misfortune' in Turkish. The police officer had the misfortune to face a tough nut.
  275. Dave M from Canada writes: The people sticking up for this ridiculous police officer keep talking about a law being broken. What law was that. A little drawing advising you should hold onto a rail? Please idiots, I'd like to see this law in writing with accompanying regulations giving officers the right to levy fines or take people into custody for violating this law you've dreamt up.
  276. Diane Schweik from Edmonton, Canada writes: .

    The London Underground would grind to a halt in rush hour if people didn't stand on the right and walk on the left.Why were there so many accidents in TO when they had this policy ?
  277. A C from Albertario, Canada writes:

    J.P. O'Brien from New York, United States writes: I really don't think you would find this behavior in London or New York on the part of the police or the immigrant population.

    Yeah, you're probably right. In New York they'd shoot the immigrant fifty times when he's reaching in his pocket to pull out his ID from his wallet. Remember Amadou Ahmed Diallo?

    Or maybe they'd just beat the person senseless Remember Officer David London who beat a handcuffed vetran last February and was caught on video tape?

    In NYC the beat goes on as much as it does elsewhere. You're not living in Disneyland, Goofy.

    .

  278. Grape Guy from Canada writes: Let's chalk another one up for the 'nanny state' we are becoming. Don't fear, soon Q-Tips will be banned. I imagine toilet paper will need warnings too, lest we forget where to use them.
  279. tip finlay from St. John's, Canada writes: Sorry Steve but that's not how the world works. Almost all progress in the protection of personal freedoms starts with someone making a fuss WHEN their civil liberties are violated. Just because some puffed-up little dictator with a tin badge wants to enforce an obscure and likely unconstitutional transit bylaw doesn't mean we should dutifully submit to their authority. Anyone with gonads would react the same way. There will be no charges to answer. They will be dropped before she gets to court and the transit authority will hope it isn't sued. But by standing up for herself (and us), and by the media paying attention to such moronic behaviour, there is some greater likelihood that the next wannabe keystone cop will think twice before he jackboots a young woman for refusing to hold onto a handrail.
    Now, get a life!
  280. Alan xxxx from Canada writes: What is happening with police forces across this country?? ....video games?.... poor parenting??....

    Sadly the new breed of young cops wants to throw their authority around... seems like police training needs to be altered to give them some humanity
  281. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Toilet paper is something we've come to deem as essential. Well, we didn't have it for the first thousands of civilization or so.

    Like brassieres. Hoisting up stuff in a brazen attempt to deceive.
  282. Sl Cha from Surrey, Canada writes: Hey, McGuinty, you could have learnt a lesson from this Montreal police! How much could you have earned everyone of those LTTE Canadians in your Toronto? Maybe you don't have a law for LTTE Canadians? Or maybe you don't have a law for blocking the streets? Or you had a deal with the employers, so that they could save some money from pay cuts of the latecomers to work? i can just imagine, why your LTTE Canadians won't settle down in Quebec!!!
  283. Matthew De Wolfe from Calgary, Canada writes: It is a matter of choice to do or not do what safety suggestions indicate. This is bullshit -- the cops should be kicked out of the detail for stupidity.
  284. My 2 Cents from Canada writes: Boo hoo, that woman sounds like a real loser. I'm so glad I don't have to resort to public transit and expose myself to the likes of that sarcastic, entitled and spoiled public transit user.
  285. Nature Lover from Canada writes: Me first. I have to look through my backpack for change while riding the escalator. I don't want to catch germs by holidng the handrail. I have a schedule to keep. I don't have three hands. I have a bruised wrist. You're not the boss of me! Grow up.
  286. One More Thing from Montreal, Canada writes: I find it incredible that anyone in this country would accept as reasonable a police officer enforcing someone to use the handrail in the metro. You people who say the officer's response to the woman's resistance was reasonable are missing the point. What happened after this officer's absurd action was unfortunate, badly handled by both parties, but come on -- submitting to such arbitrary and abusive policing is just not a good idea.
  287. Craig Cooper from Toronto, writes: How stupid can things get?

    We do not need to hold a handrail when walking. Why in the world does one need to when riding an escalator.

    Quebec becomes more fascist every day.
  288. L Wilgosh from Canada writes: Too much time to think.....not enough equipment to think with.

    And Matthew Beattie from Waterloo, Canada writes: your application has been moved to the front of the cop HR file . Perfect.
  289. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: One More Thing, right on. It sums the whole up.
  290. Joseph Freeman from Vancouver, Canada writes: From the article:

    'As for fears of catching another flu, a leading germ expert says you are more likely to fall down an escalator than catch illness from a handrail.'

    Um, I think I'd like to see the evidence behind this statement - number of people who fall down escalators (have you ever seen that happen?) vs people who get sick from germs on a dirty public handrail.

    Some 'expert' doesn't know what he's talking about.
  291. Sl Cha from Surrey, Canada writes: By the way, a police officer is not the Court and he/she can't fine as everyone has the right to defend themselves in a court of law. this is just the police officers word against a foreign looking woman commuter. Is there any witnesses, who would state under oath that this foreign looking woman was not holding the dirty rail? Is there any witnesses, who'd swear that this foreign looking woman argued with the police officer? Isn't there any freedom of thoughts? Can a woman have 3 hands? Did the police officer holding the rail herself, while talking to the commuter? How can a woman pull out anything from a handbag with only one hand? I think this is a clear case of racism...
  292. Steve Marv from Canada writes: This all began when we started with the seatbelt law. Once the state can make a law that you have to protect yourself, the game is over. Those that opposed the seatbelt law at the time (like myself) told you so. I just don't understand why you're all upset at the cop for enforcing a bylaw that he didn't write. The legislature writes the law, and the cops execute it. Don't shoot the messenger.
    I agree Sl Cha, this cop should have been in Toronto for the LTTE protests. They could use a cop with a bit of backbone over there.
    Tip, to a certain extent you're right. The only way this bylaw was ever going to get changed is by something like this happening. I can't argue with you there. But on the other hand, if that's the case, then the woman is not a victim. The error of the article is that we're all supposed to cry crocodile tears for the poor woman. No. You broke a bylaw, the cop enforced it, now deal with the consequences. If the law gets changed because of you, then my hats off to you. But don't play the sympathy card.
  293. W M from Canada writes: been there from Toronto, Canada writes: As for the comments about her 'defiant' and 'combative' stance:

    1. We don't know all the facts. We weren't there. This is a news clip, not trial-grade evidence. Can't tell anything.

    2. Contrast this sort of police tactic to the principle of 'measured and proportionate response to public safety' Chief Blair laid down in dealing with the Tamil protest on the Gardner.

    Even if she were defiant, and even if the rule book says that police CAN do this or that, it is a really hard to argue that this was a measured and proportional response for such a trivial matter.
    ================================

    Interesting 'logic'. Let me see if I get it: 1) We don't know all the facts, so shouldn't jump to conclusions. 2) No matter what the facts were, we should jump to the conclusion that the cop was wrong.
    .
    This has great potential for use in coin tossing situations. 1) We can't possibly know whether it will be a head or tail, so 2) regardless of whether it is a head or a tail, it is a tail.
  294. One More Thing from Montreal, Canada writes: Charlotte Creamer, what happens when 'respect for the law' is followed blindly and unquestioningly? This officer's action was rightly disrespected by the citizen, who recognized how arbitrary and ridiculous it was. She was rude, sure, which is unfortunate and ill-judged, but not a crime. This officer just acted like a petty power-mongering thug, like so many people who have a little bit of power and live to wield it however they can. You can watch this at work in any office.
  295. Jeff Pritchard from Canada writes: If I'm minding my own business on a escalator, bothering no one, and I am approached by a police officer who starts barking orders at me, that police officer had better have a bunch of friends with him.

    This is simply more disgraceful, indefensibly obnoxious behavior on part of our police. And I would hope that anyone facing a similar situation would have the gonads to say so to an abusive cop's face.
  296. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Mr. Cha, racism? Where? Not on the basis of skin colour. She is white.

    Not on the basis of national or ethnic origin. The cop didn't know.

    Maybe on the basis of language?

    If an act of hate against another group doesn't count because it hasn't been directed towards an approved list of 'hatees,' we've got it exactly backwards.
  297. Sl Cha from Surrey, Canada writes: In Montreal racism is based on language! Though she looks white as a Georgian, her accent would be foreign, and she doesn't look like these pseudo-French...
  298. rm r from Canada, United States writes: OK, I'll throw out a nice pessimistic opinion for your amusement and suggest that this event is just another symptom of the lack of personal responsibility in our society today. Yes the article makes the police officer look like a thug, but I wouldn't be surprised to read an article next week about someone suing the police, the transit system, the city and/or the country because no one told them to hold the hand rail on an escalator. Many people today are narcissistic, know their rights, and have little interest in figuring out their responsibilities or playing well with others, and our pop culture encourages this behavior. Talking on the cell phone while driving is another example. So get used to having the most trivial details of your lives policed and regulated, like holding on to escalator handrails, because that's the price for running a society where individuals are no longer capable of negotiating the grey areas.
  299. Laura Labelle from Ladysmith, Canada writes: simple complexity from Toronto, Canada writes: It's a shame that so many intelligent people take time to comment on such a trivial G&M story. Man, do you live up to your name. Get a grip, this is Steven Harper's Canada, and if you argue with a RCMP member, you will be tazered. If you question their authority, you will be manhandled , cuffed and arrested. I've had it with their arrogant attitudes, and until the fab 4 who killed Dzienansky are in jail I sneer at every cop I see. Respect is earned, not given. Stand up for your Canada never meant more. The RCMP are answerable at the end of the day to civil authority ! Please take note Warning to those who care, The British Columbia Police Act will be revised when the legislature sits again. The proposal to remove the Police Boards and the Discipline Authorities from being the authorities who determine which complaints are admissible and which ones are not, is a huge smack in the face for democracy. The Police Complaints Commissioner will be the only person of authority to decide if a complaint is admissible, the Commissioner is accountable to no one! The OPCC is unable to investigate complaints, so they should have no authority in deciding which complaints gets tossed! To make matters worse, the commissioner can stop complaints from going to the courts for remidy if they challenge the Commissioners decision! I hope many British Columbians will look into this and display their displeasure with their MLA'S! http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=1&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=PTXT&S1=7,284,280&OS=7,284,280&RS=7,284,280
  300. Matthew Rockall from Mission, Canada writes: I've never heard anything so ridiculous in all my life. I am going to go out and ride all the escalators in town without holding the railing.

    Seriously though, this is unlikely to be about a diligent officer who was concerned about the safety of this woman or her fellow escalator riders or even necessarily a sexist or a racist, though these may have played a role.

    This is more likely to be a little man who likes lording it over the public; possibly more commonly petite women, and foreigners would be a bonus. Would he tell a big biker or a businessman to 'Hold the rail!' I doubt it.

    Did his girlfriend just break up with him? Does he have trouble talking to women at his local gym or nightclub? Maybe. Was he more likely to cuff her and arrest her when she didn't immediately obey because she wasn't native Quebecois? Probably. Who knows? I bet he was just waiting for a woman to not immediately obey one of his trivial commands so that he could get physical and prove his manhood, to demonstrate his real power and threat in that moment.

    I bet it made him feel good ...'til it made the papers.
  301. Tom Smith from Canada writes: I hope that this woman considers taking legal advice.

    While she may well have not been holding onto the handrails this does not entitle any person to possibly have

    1. Used excessive force and committed an assault.
    2. Arbitrarily detained a person.
    3. Committed what may have been an illegal search.

    There is unfortunately a bullying mentality evident amongst some persons in positions of authority. We know that this sort of thing thrives where people do nothing. We also know it stems from Hollywood and the problems in the USA in terms of discipline with respect to the use of force. This is Canada. There is no excuse for this.
  302. Tom Smith from Canada writes: ...the police are also citizens and subject to the same laws as any other citizen.
  303. W M from Canada writes: Yvonne Wackernagel from Woodville, Canada writes: This is so typical Canadian. What about a sign which reads: The Transit Authorities will not be responsible for any accidents caused by your avoidance of holding the handrails provided for your safety, or something like that. Then the onus would be on the riders. No expense would be incurred for the police services either.
    ===============================

    I don't have any idea what the stats are for injuries on escallators so don't want to debate whether this particular rule is warranted, but does it occur to you that the logic behind it is the same as for laws against running red lights? I.e., their primary purpose is to protect people from drivers who run red lights; not to protect the red light runners, themselves.
  304. Laura Labelle from Ladysmith, Canada writes: Tom Smith from Canada writes: ...the police are also citizens and subject to the same laws as any other citizen.

    Tom Smith - you are so wrong. They are untouchable - they are not answerable to anyone by our own fuher - oops, I mean our PM!
  305. Nicholas de Panicis from Oakville, Canada writes: This is BULLSHIT handcuffed for not holding hand rail What are we in a Communist State now ...Maybe they should be Handcuffing Politican's lawyers and Civil Servants for Stealing From US...
  306. Bake McBride from Vancouver, Canada writes: I couldn't believe this could happen anywhere, let alone in Canada. The type of personality that would interpret rules/laws in such an ultra-authoritarian manner should not have been selected for civic policing. Also, if the police force could afford to let an employee monitor escalator riders then there are too many police & their budget should be cut.

    As far as trying to avoid injuries & accident lawsuits by having such rules, this is so typical of our liability avoidance society. Just deal with the odd freak accident should they occur rather than be the laughing stock of the world.
  307. W M from Canada writes: Jeff Pritchard from Canada writes: If I'm minding my own business on a escalator, bothering no one, and I am approached by a police officer who starts barking orders at me, that police officer had better have a bunch of friends with him.

    This is simply more disgraceful, indefensibly obnoxious behavior on part of our police. And I would hope that anyone facing a similar situation would have the gonads to say so to an abusive cop's face.
    =============================

    Does it occur to you that your 'zero tollerance' is precisely what you are criticizing in police officers? Not of course that I'm not terrified by your obvious toughness and fearlessness. No doubt you could take on 10 men and win, when your righteous rath has been arroused. When I was a kid, I read comic, too. Very impressive.
  308. Ramon Martinez from Canada writes: What a story! Someone has to crack down on the Police. They should be fired!
  309. Sl Cha from Surrey, Canada writes: What if the escalator handrail machinery gets stuck and the handrail comes off? What if the handrail has a protruding wire and damages a hand/ what if the handrail goes at a different speed than the escalator? Anyway, did the police officer holding to a handrail while speaking to the foreign looking woman? How did he take the cuffs without taking his hand off the handrails? Was he talking to the woman looking sideways? Shouldn't one look the same direction as the escalator moves? The police officer had broken many laws... Who would support the foreign looking woman in a law suit against fascist police of Montreal?
  310. Duane Freemantle from writes: Based of the womans account it seems that the police officer over reacted. There was no reason for the officer to approach her if she was searching her bag. The officer must have been bored, since the behaviour of the officer makes no sense.
  311. Wayne Morrison from Toronto, Canada writes: She's lucky she grew up in the former Soviet Union, as that would at least have given her some prior experience with this type of behaviour. While the whole event was likely quite unpleasant should she should consider herself fortunate not to have been tasered four or five times, and then kicked onto the tracks. Even money says the cop shows up in a Mountie uniform, at Dorval, in the next twelve months.
  312. joh ratte from Canada writes: Hey Charlotte, it's not a law that we must be polite to the police. Nor is it a law we must blindly obey their every utterance. Perhaps this is unsettling to you, but being able to talk back to the police really is advantageous to a functioning Democracy
  313. Crimson The Red from Canada writes: FIGHT THE POWER !!!!!!!!!
  314. Mike McFae from Canada writes: Does anyone know where I can find a detailed story with the facts of this incident ? While the Globe and Rag version is titillating , many of us prefer to read the facts before we rave against the police.
  315. Pamphleteer . from Canada writes: Well, this is the type of service you get when the state hires dimwitted thugs who barely graduated high school as police officers. This woman should be grateful the cop didn't pull out the taser on her. By their high standards, sounds like she was a deserving candidate.
  316. anderson Stevenson from Canada writes: So nice to know big brother is watching out for us. Too amny of these social parasites are attracted into law enforcement careers. Its seem most forces aren't really doing enough to weed them out, maybe thats because too many of the reach the top.
  317. been there from Toronto, Canada writes: WM:

    To explain, here is how the logic works:

    1. We don't know if she was belligerent or not or if so, exactly how.

    Therefore, there is no substance to support the actions of the police (handcuffing, confinement, etc.).

    2. She was charged with 'not holding the handrail' and 'obstruction', not assaulting the police or 'endangering the public'.

    This issue, if there was any, is clearly trivial. Such charges are unwarranted and disproportionate.
  318. joh ratte from Canada writes: When authority trumps reason, it is honourable and courageous to speak out. To not do so diminishes the liberty of each of us
  319. Straw Dog from Centre of the Universe, Canada writes: Unbelievable, that this type of arrest & fine can happen in this country.
  320. One More Thing from Montreal, Canada writes: It's often the schoolyard bullies who self-select for careers in positions of authority. Mall 'cops', security guards, police -- the degrees of difference are small. Not saying all cops are former schoolyard bullies, just that many former bullies find their way to these positions where they can act agressively in socially sanctioned ways --sanctioned, that is, till they go too far. And there is that team mentality. These people just chose to do their power-control thing on the 'right' side of the law instead of the 'wrong' (e.g. gangs and the mob).
  321. One More Thing from Montreal, Canada writes: Well said, joh ratte.
  322. geraldine veleti from MILAN, Italy writes: I take the subway quite often over here in Milan. I can tell you that there are plenty of police all over the subway stations. They are there to try and apprehend thieves, pickpockets, drug related problems. People go up and down the stairs all day without holding on to the rail. Not once have i seen a cop stop anyone for it. I see them standing next to the escalators all the time. Lesson - they have more important things to monitor - and protect us from. Candian police forces have a problem. We as canadians also have a major problem. We are being harassed by police. Our liberty of speech is being taken away. I still think we have the right to respectfully question what a police officer is asking o fus if we think it is unjustified. We should not be arrested for that. Or tasered either.
    The whole police forces need to be looked into seriously. Officers need to have a university education and they need more training, in particular about respecting the people they are supposed to serve and protect.
  323. Bad Bob from Canada writes: I took the Metro today and intentionally did not hold the handrail. Wanted to check to see if the handrail police were around but none there. Must have been Tim Horton time.
  324. Kat Wilson from Canada writes: What the...? This hold the handrail law ranks with the most ridiculous petty stupid laws out there. Ok, so it exists, but enforcing it is even more stupid. Surely, the security idiots have better things to do than handcuff passengers who aren't holding on to the handrail. And what's with the rifling through her bag? I hope she sues for the damage they caused to her person and I urge every Montrealer to NOT HOLD ON TO THE HANDRAIL as a sign of support. This calls for civil disobedience.
  325. paul maxwell from chicago, United States writes: It sounds like only some people have to obey the law only
    when feel like it. The police did nothing wrong, simply enforced the law. Times are changing the more people the more the laws will be
    enforced. Pay the fine and pay attention!!
  326. hanna h from Vancouver,BC, Canada writes: In my opinion this woman was aggressive and rude. This is the way to go in Georgia. She is studing International Law, isn't she? She must be a poor student. Perhaps she should learn better manners first. If her response was polite and with smile the outcome would be different. Smile and friendliness is missing on her face. I don't blame the officer for giving her a lesson.
  327. D K from Canada writes: Good thing, society was being threatened by this blatent lawbreaker. What did you think, you were going on a thrill ride?

    Should also go after people that don't have their shoes tied... they are a safety hazard.
  328. s like from Cochrane, Canada writes: How stupid. Sounds like typical Quebec police heavy handedness yet in Montreal pedestrian traffic is a free-for-all yet Montreal also has one of the lowest rates of pedestrian fatality and injuries in all of North America. Why?

    Because people have to pay attention unlike Calgarians, for instance, who will cross a street without looking because they naively believe cars will just automatically see them and stop.

    If Montrealers can handle city streets I think they can manage escalators without some cop with a 'I'm the Boss' attitude telling them how to do it.
  329. Bad Bob from Canada writes: paul maxwell from chicago - Sorry but if you had taken the time to read the article you would have seen that they do not give fines for that. Just another one of the stupid cops we have here in Montreal harassing people because he has nothing else to do.
  330. C K from Kitchener, Canada writes: Well folks, mystery unvraveled....now we know precisely from what depths the RCMP recruits its newest members!!! This is a sad, sad world when an organism somewhere between mall cop and street cop gets an iota of perceived authority and abuses it to the extreme...sad and sick.
  331. Kat Wilson from Canada writes: hanna h from Vancouver,BC, Canada writes: In my opinion this woman was aggressive and rude.

    -----------------------

    In my opinion, you are a dumba$$ who can't discern even fundamental details in a report.
  332. Kat Wilson from Canada writes: paul maxwell from chicago, United States writes: It sounds like only some people have to obey the law only when feel like it. The police did nothing wrong, simply enforced the law. Times are changing the more people the more the laws will be enforced. Pay the fine and pay attention!!

    --------------------

    Oh look. It's a Bush-Cheney-McCain-Palin supporter (how many laws did Bush break???) dropping in to support police brutality in Canada. Don't let the door hit you on the way out, loser.
  333. Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes: This is from a Canadian government website called 'A Newcomer's Introduction to Canada'. Perhaps some of you who are not 'newcomers' yourselves might want to refer to it as a refresher course on how to interact with the police.

    'As a newcomer, you should be aware of your rights and obligations. Having the right to participate in Canadian society also means that you have a responsibility to obey Canada’s laws.

    What if you are questioned by a police officer?

    Call the police officer 'officer'.
    Accept the police officer’s authority; do not try to argue.
    Be ready to show identification if a police officer asks you for it.

    What if you are arrested by a police officer?

    You do not have to give any information, other than your name and address, until you have talked to a lawyer.'

    http://www.cic.gc.ca/EnGLish/resources/publications/guide/section-08.asp
  334. Commentsclosedfor Legalreasons from Toronto, Canada writes: Charlotte Cremeuse, this woman was a victim - a victim of police brutality. The mindless thug in uniform seemed to be looking for a fight and he did what most bullies do. He picked on someone very vulnerable. If it walks like a Nazi, talks like a Nazi, thinks like a Nazi and acts like a Nazi..... Well, draw your own conclusions, dear.
  335. paul maxwell from chicago, United States writes: A transit officer is now a Nazi!!!
    Are you in a hole. Which one? Draw your own conclusion!!!
  336. Cousin Voltaire from Canada writes: The poor woman should be given an apology and receive compensation - a couple million dollars should do it. I bet you she didn't have any staff whatsoever to hold her parcels for her while she had to rifle through her bag for her fare and therefore how could she be expected to obey the law?
  337. Holly Lovesdemcritters from Canada writes: Ridiculous! What a waste of everyone's time.
  338. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: hanna h... I want to make sure I understand your position. It is part of the function of the police to teach lessons to those that aren't friendly and smiling. So, in instances where a reasonable authoritative reaction is exceeded, to not respond with a smile and kind words should be met with an administered lesson by said authority. If indeed that is your opinion, i would argue that position is serious threat to a healthy Democracy, and would quickly lead to an abolishment of any personal liberty
  339. Joe Nieuwendyk fan from Canada writes: maybe the police officer over-reacted but as far as i can tell he was just doing his job. the lady was rude and not obeying the rules. i'd say the greater issue here is stupid rules, everybody needs a rule for everything these days. as far as i'm concerned the police officer was doing his job which is to enforce laws. it's the law here that's stupid!
  340. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Charlotte, despite your citing of government guidelines, you are not require by law to provide identification on the demand of a police officer unless the officer has reasonable grounds to request it. So, if your walking down the street and are asked by police to show ID, before providing ID, it is within your rights to inquire on what grounds. And your inquiry need not be made in an in a friendly voice lest you are obstructing authority.
  341. J Stratton from Canada writes: Wow.

    I guess she's lucky they did not have a taser.
  342. What Dat from calgary, Canada writes: super heavy from On the water, Canada writes: Wait for it.....Wait for it.....Wait for it........

    Suspended with pay.

    Best letter and it only took 12 words.

    One question? does that sign constitute an actual law? It seems more of a suggestion. If it is a law why can't it say, 'hold the rails, it is the law, bylaw 1984?'?
  343. paul maxwell from chicago, United States writes: cousin voltaire-
  344. Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes: 'joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: you are not require by law to provide identification on the demand of a police officer unless the officer has reasonable grounds to request it.'

    The woman gave the police officers 'reasonable grounds' to request her ID by her unlawful behaviour (resulting in two fines).
  345. mike hunt from Canada writes: once you have reached the age of majority, safety is a personal concern and none of the state's business. whether riding an escalator, or riding a bike without a helmet. its time we push back. defending our right to liberty without having the state micromanage ever aspect of our lives is not irresponsible. pitching the police state as a necessity of justified safety concerns is.
  346. Sassy Lassie from Canada writes: The cop is wasting his talents, he's got what it takes to succeed as a secret agent for the CHRC can you image what he could do with Section 13? Like the Saudi Moral's brigade he could take to the streets beating up and fining anyone who is saying anything that is likely to offend the perpetually offended. Ya gotta love the socialist, they'll be chewing our food soon enough.
  347. c n from Smithers, Canada writes: Police work takes a high level of intelligence and guts to perform it properly. This cop does not show these attributes. He created a bad decision where none existed. Not good police work. Perfect police work would be to arrest everybody who breaks a law. This is not praticable nor desirable. Just think of all the people who did not hold the handrail while he was shackling this menace to society. A little common sense please. If you are going to be a cop people will not always do exactly what they are told. This does not mean you go over the top. If I am to understand the people who support this cop's actions, it is wrong to question a cop's authority. To that I heartily disagree.
  348. Dick Smith from Edmonton, Canada writes: One More Thing from Montreal, Canada. You are dead on, police and security do tend to attract the bully type of personality. Once in a position of authority these people can abuse their position with little chance of repremand. I don't know what the answer is, better psychological testing of candidates or perhaps better pay to attract a higher level of candidate? One thing is for sure, we need more civilian oversight of the police. The police are essential for the functioning of society but they do not have the right to deny civilians their freedoms.
  349. Carl White from Canada writes: 'Robin Hood from Toronto, Canada writes: I was on a jury that was a case of woman suing because of an escalator coming to
    an unexpected halt. A person behind her was'nt holding the handrail a fell onto the back
    of her causing physical damage and lots of pain and causing her to give up her job
    because of this accident. Is'nt it just sensible to hold the handrail to prevent such
    accidents? Better to be safe than sorry as the old saying goes. '

    The bottom line is that you can't legislate away stupidity. Inattentive or irate people will find ways to hurt themselves and others no matter how many laws are passed. So will our elected representatives please stop spinning an increasingly restrictive cocoon of regulations and by-laws around responsible adults.
  350. Dear Johnson from United States writes: This doesn't sound like anything to do with the law. This is a case of power tripping by someone in authority. The cop felt that the woman didn't give him the respect that he wanted. So he responded by asserting his authority in an extreme manner for the situation. Classic cop syndrome. I know a few people from my youth who became cops later on. They were all the types who used to get picked on in high school. Now they're out for revenge. Not on anybody in particular - they just love asserting their authority. Classic cop syndrome. Best thing is to just avoid cops, and act polite if you have to deal with them. Same advice applies to dealing with thugs or gang members, should you ever cross their path.
  351. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Charlotte, my last comment was not in regard to this specific instance, it was in regard to your citing of Canadian Government guidelines. And while it would certainly be pragmatic in most cases when dealing with the police to follow them, collectively we must exercise our rights or we run the serious risk of having them greatly diminished. To voice a protestation to what one deems an an absurb application of the law must to a reasonable degree be permitted and must not necessarily lead to, as hanna h suggested a lesson rightly administered. As an earlier poster commented, application of law without the mitigating context of spirit of the law is indeed the road to fascism
  352. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: I'm not big on psychological tests because the two times i took them, I flunked.

    The first was an aptitude test in Grade 9. I was already two years younger than anyone else in my class, due to a September birthdate and skipping a year. I came out to be a nurse. My teacher ridiculed me in front of everyone and sent me to the back of the room for being too young to partake.

    The second was a job application process for EB Eddy quality control. I was screened out for being inconsistent but when the testing psychologist took the time to review my answers with me, the company reversed its decision and hired me.

    Psych. tests are like lie detector tests. Or the modern day equivalent, facial stress (blush) tests. They're eminently susceptible to capturing a certain percentage of us who are 'nervous' types. And miss sociopaths and psychopaths by the bushel.
  353. Turning Right from Canada writes: The officer should have shot her first then asked questions later, it was obvious that she intentionally did not use the hand rail and that is a really serious offense, ranks up there with capital murder.
  354. Uncle Fester from Canada writes:
    The nanny state tightens the reigns.

    The day will come where people will accept these types of events as normal.

    Our children will be raised in state run daycare factories where they are taught how to line up properly and hold the hand rail.

    Watch for Ignatieff to announce universal daycare as part of his election platform.
  355. Panta Rei from Albania writes: Please help me.I seen an old lady picking her nose. She should be in jail .Where can I find a cop?
  356. One More Thing from Montreal, Canada writes: Charlotte Creamer, your submissive acceptance of authority scares me. I don't want to live in the society that can't question authority. And a police officer's demand that someone hold a handrail, whether or not there' s posted sign saying 'Hold the Handrail' is NOT reasonable grounds for demanding the ID and making a subsequent arrest. This is a perfect example of exceedingly poor judgement on the part of that officer. It's irresponsible to accept it as reasonable.
  357. normand collin from Canada writes: It's easy,
    just follow the sign,
    hold the handrail.
    It is so easy, and this assure that, you wont sue for any fall!!!!
  358. Brent Beach from Victoria, Canada writes: These guys get my vote for dumb cop of the hour. Would be the week but there are so many security groups vying for this honour, it only makes the hourly prize.

    What has happened to us? Why do we think we need all this stupid security?

    Why do we think we need $900 million of security for the winter olympics. Why do we let these people tell us how much security we need? Why does our government roll over for these empire building security zealots?

    Wake up Canada!

    We have nothing to fear but the fear industry itself!
  359. Mark Shore from Canada writes: Here's a thought. Did this Laval police officer's actions remove a significant threat to the safety and well-being of the public, or increase the respect people feel for the law and law enforcement officers?

    Good subject for tomorrow's Globe and Mail poll. I'm voting NO.
  360. Jerry R from Canada writes: My turn to state the obvious, 'ONLY IN QUEBEC...'

    I can see it all now... next year, cameras are being installed into public Quebecois washrooms to enforce the new law to ensure everyone washes their hands after defecating, to prevent swine flu... it will save 2-3 lives a year! This all on the coattails of the handrail law which was hailed as a success!
  361. Francois Matteau from Brossard, Canada writes: Of course , if this is the right story, there is at least a lack of judgment. But wait, we do not have the police version. Would your comment change if you learn that the lady in question insult the policeman? Let's wait.
  362. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: I've just been censored by the G&M. Damned if I can figure out why.
  363. Mike Not from Canmore from Canada writes: Insanity - how much longer before our completely F'ed up society implodes on itself? I'm moving to the third world when I retire......much safer since things like 'common sense' dictate their societal norms and important issues like food, water, and shelter occupy their time so as not to have to be constantly finding frivolous issues to enact laws against....and worse...enforce !
  364. Tony Mareschealle from GTA, Canada writes: I guess we need to redefine in writing the role of the Police. I guess we pay them to 'do little or nothing' - $60 K a year - I guess I missed my calling.
  365. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Mr. Not, me too. But not many 3rd world countries have decent golf courses where it's safe to play.

    Colorado?
  366. Mike Not from Canmore from Canada writes: Richard Sharp - I know a retired military vet who makes a reasonble living as a semi-pro mtm bike racer in Costa Rica....maybe no golf course but hey ...unlimited outdoors....focus on the important things in life ...no useless wal-mart, dollar store, nor sterile suburban lives in houses that are 3 times bigger than anyone needs. Sounds great to me !
  367. Bill Marshall from Canada writes: Bozos with badges. What gets reported is only the tip of the iceberg.
  368. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Francios, an emphatic no to your question. To insult an officer, though probably not sensible, is within reason not an illegal act. In any interaction with the police the balance of power resides firmly with the police- where police have the sanctioned power to exercise force, we must have the power to exercise free speech which may (within limits) include an insult pertaining to an a percieved unreasonable application of law without this escalating the power applied against us
  369. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Mike Not, sounds great to me. The end-point in life is happiness. That you have lived and passed on same. Meaning being decent to your fellow man. Contributing to advancement.

    But, without golf, life has no meaning.
  370. paul maxwell from chicago, United States writes: She is at fault. Throw her in jail. She probably mouthed off
    to the cop. Remember the wako in Phoenix airport.
    She's dead!!!
  371. Will Farnaby from writes: Just another thug hiding behind a badge... there is no shortage of this type of particularly odious creep.
  372. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: k. I've been censored a second time. All I did was admionish Mr. Maxwell about his somewhat Draconian punishment (death) for an ordinary commuter.
  373. la globulle Monsieur from bonus malus, Canada writes: just for the record;i was crossing a downtown street in montreal with 9 seconds remaining before the red light,and a policeman stopped me asked me what I thought I was doing.As I apologized profusely (which they fully expect from us spineless unarmed civilians)he shut me up and dismissively signalled me to move on.I obliged feeling unbelievably lucky they did not wretle me to the ground for having dared speak.
  374. Mike Not from Canmore from Canada writes: Richard Sharp - maybe we should get together for some beers and a game of bike-golf ! : - ) (Although the cops might arrest us - in fact if we play it in Gat Park the NCC might arrest us)!
  375. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: la globulle, they've got you exactly where they want you. Don't ever question these guys or gals. That's obstruction, don't you know?
  376. Jaded in Vancouver from Canada writes: This is inexcusable behaviour on the police side. Like she said, go find the thief who stole tires from the balcony.
  377. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Mike Not, it's crazy in this town of Ottawa, what with amalgamation and the NCC. They've been working on King Edward Street for TWO years.

    Over here in Gatineau, they redo the plumbing in a few months.
  378. John Lansing from Montreal, Canada writes: I live in Montreal and the station that I frequently access, Guy-Concordia, has two sets of escalators between the platform and the ground level. For BOTH escalators, the handrail moves FASTER than the staircase. Unless you're Stretch Armstrong, there is no way one can ride the escalator while holding the handrail.
  379. Mike Not from Canmore from Canada writes: paul maxwell from chicago, United States writes: It sounds like only some people have to obey the law only
    when feel like it. The police did nothing wrong, simply enforced the law. Times are changing the more people the more the laws will be
    enforced. Pay the fine and pay attention!!

    -------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paul - there are way too many frivoulous laws on the books now (thanks to damn lawyers and frivoulous lawsuits...especially in the USA...spilled hot coffee anyone??)..and they have nothingto do with 'protection' of individuals or the public (this is the true raison d'etre of laws). They have to do with bloody liability. If the public does not at some point question rule and authority for it's relavance and intended benefit, and simply blindly folow every law to the letter, without examining the 'intent' - then we go down the slippery slope towards facism and ultimate subserviance ! The more usless laws that are enacted and enforced will lead to less respect for the truely important laws - the ones that are meant to protect the public and individuals.
  380. tip finlay from St. John's, Canada writes: Hail to the Keystone Cops -

    I am a keystone cop,
    If I yell you’d better well stop,
    I’ll taser your as-s,
    If you give me sass,
    Cause I am a keystone cop.

    My taser on stun just in time,
    One jolt of it would probably be fine,
    But if you’re still alive,
    Then I’ll give you five,
    The extras don’t cost me a dime.
  381. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Mike Not...nicely stated.
  382. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Well stated Mr. Not. The law is there to protect us, not the law-enforcers.
  383. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: tip in time. Perfect.

    The cops are our friends never doubt
    Unless they stop you en route

    Never mind their cause
    Forget your laws

    Do what they fuc7ng well tell you to do.
  384. Enduring Silence from Canada writes: Disgusting!
  385. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: laws were developed for people, not people for laws
  386. Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes: 'One More Thing from Montreal, Canada writes: Charlotte Creamer, your submissive acceptance of authority scares me.'.... Frankly, what scares ME is how many people have de facto taken the side of a law-breaker and engaged in cop-bashing with only the accused's side of the story to go on. And getting confrontational with a police officer over a handrail incident shows a profound lack of judgement as well as a lack of self-control. I'm glad the cops cuffed the woman; she sets a poor example to society at large and to her two children. As far as my 'submissive acceptance of authority' is concerned -- I understand that, as a Canadian, I have both rights and responsibilities. If I am to anticipate and expect my rights to be upheld, then I accept that part of my responsibilities are to abide by the law and treat officers of the law with respect. Why that should 'scare' anyone is beyond me. If I have an issue with a particular law or the behaviour of a particular officer of the law, I understand I have the right to pursue that matter in court, not out in a public transit setting. These are very simple fundamental rights and responsibilities that every Canadian has and should be aware of. Acknowledging, accepting, and abiding by them doesn't make me 'submissive', it makes me a citizen.
  387. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: No. Ms, Creamer, you are self-evidently submissive to authority, no matter how misplaced. That's ok. That's your choice. But don't even think about submitting the rest of us to your complacency and complicity.
  388. Harper can't be trusted from Canada writes: Wow

    There sure are a lot of meek Canadians here who seem to revel in submission to 'so called' authority figures.

    No wonder Harper does anything he wants with impunity.

    You meek mild pathetic little fellas LOVE IT!

    Amazing, and so so so sad.

    A Harper promise is still as good as a lie
  389. smelter rat from Canada writes: When did Canada become a police state? Was it the last election? The one before that? I don't remember voting for a neo-nazi agenda. I mourn for the country I used to know. When did we decide that the police could rule with impunity?

    The people supporting this police action are sheeple. If this police action is allowed to stand, we're in big trouble folks.
  390. Jacaranda Jill from Australia writes: Oh for heavens' sakes. If true, this story indicates a ridiculous abuse of authority. However, I must point out that the complainant is a law student, as in wannabee lawyer. And frankly, I don't find lawyers, real or aspirant, to be much more credible than cops.
  391. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Hey Jill, this is all about abuse of authority. It doesn't matter that the abusee was a law student.

    Give it some thought. Then come back,
  392. Jacaranda Jill from Australia writes: It's about someone claiming an abuse of authority. Like I said, if true, it's appalling. But is it true? We only have one side of the story, and I'd like both - partly because it seems so off the wall to me that I find it almost (but not entirely) incredible.
  393. Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes: Submission to a conformist mob-rule mindset that insists ALL authority should be questioned is what's truly sad here; submitting to authority figures of the law is simply being law-abiding.
  394. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: I wish I lived in Australia or New Zealand. How far away could one be from the madness we have here in North America?
  395. Archie 1954 from Vancouver, Canada writes: American fascism is creeping across the border. How ironic that Montreal would show such ugliness to the world. I hope this woman gets the best lawyer in town and sues the police for false arrest and assault and battery. It seems like you can't go anywhere anymore without being manhandled by some out of control police officer. Maybe the chief of police should forefeit his job for not properly training and demanding professional behaviour from his forces.
  396. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Richard Sharp, you have been educational throughout this thread. And civil.

    Just like in your private ife,

    Thx,

    Monique
  397. Maritimer in Nova Scotia from Canada writes: Sieg Heil!
  398. J A from Ottawa, Canada writes: Charlotte Creamer: You are a typical product of the US/Canadian culture. Very interesting point of view which is not shared by people outside North America.

    By the way, policemen are also civilians, and they are civil servants like any other government employees (as opposed to those in the armed forces). That being said, US and Canadian police forces are not true police: in the world standard, they are considered paramilitary forces due to their equipment and mode of operation.
  399. Leon Russell from Gatineau, Qc, Canada writes: I can't follow where people get the 'language' angle in this forum. There is no indication she spoke English or that the cop spoke French. She's obviously competent in French. Probably one of the many trilingual citizens we're are proud of around here.

    The protaganist is a student at Universite de Montreal, a French-language university, so she's obviously competent in French.
    Probably one of the many trilingual citizens we're are proud of around here.

    And cops can be French, English, Arab, whatever, and can speak French, English, Farsi, whatever, are usually bilingual, and often trilingual.

    So this angle is just the usual hick G&M forum gang that can't figure out that you can have life outside of the English language.
  400. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Hey Richard Acute, same thought same time...second time...golf, rain, and a nice forum
  401. winston freeman from Canada writes: At the station , the handrail moves faster than the staircase ?

    I've got arthritis . If I hold on to the rail , on a bad day , I'm not really holding on , I'm faking it . Can . not . really hold . anything .

    A stupid rule is a bad rule , and bad and stupid people can always be found ,
    happy to follow orders .

    If I was working in the subway protection business , I think I'd want to go home after work . Drug dealers or handrail scoffers ? Hmmm .
  402. Vote NDP in the next federal/ provincial election from Toronto, Canada writes: I smell a police cover up. If that were to happen to me as a transit police officer would write a fine for the most frivilous of reasons then I would of ran and escaped.
  403. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: k. I was hornswoggled or whatever. But I'm back and still mad as hell. About police power!

    I love the police. If only they would do what's important to us!
  404. john smith from Canada writes: Police State:
    I find it a 'little' overreaction to handcuff her. was she aggressive? it is how police officers are trained? it is part of a police state to have citizens to FEAR police. and part of being police job in police state is to INTIMIDATE regular people.

    and when you report break in or stolen car they, police, do not have time to investigate. they are too busy fighting 'real crime'.
  405. john smith from Canada writes: @Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes:
    'By the tone of her responses to the police and her comments in general, this woman comes across as being disrespectful of authority and having a misguided sense of entitlement.'
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    in police state, any person 'disrespectful' to the police would be punished immediately by police. I think that painful cuffing of a small female by a strong male should help her to remember who is the boss in this country, right?
    yet again, it is not just RCMP, it is everywhere, small steps towards police state.
  406. Sassy Lassie from Canada writes: So this angle is just the usual hick G&M forum gang that can't figure out that you can have life outside of the English language.

    End quote:---------------------

    If you want a job for life with the feds you have to speak French but not Englais DND is a prime example of people who can't say hello in English but can sputter insults in French.

    Blaming Harper that's rich, the Cons passed a resolution to repeal the CHRC section 13 the Libs passed a resolution to expand their mandate for gawds sake Libs stop lying already.

    Outside of Tarrana the most oppressive province is Quebec, under socialism rule of law has no place in a socialist Nanny Nation like Quebec.
  407. mike green from United States writes: And I thought the U.S. chapter of the Gestapo was bad.
    One needs to earn respect before one receives it.
  408. Bill Marshall from Canada writes: How do we rein in these thugs? It's clear they are out of control and at war with the public they are supposed to serve.

    It's not just the police, it's immigration, prison, taxation and numerous other agencies that are out if control.

    Our politicians are too weak and timid so to whom do we turn? Ourselves?

  409. New Canadian from Canada writes: while that is happening in Montreal, in Toronto hundres of people block streets and police do nothing....
  410. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ gerhard beck: Thanks. But it looks like someone objected to it. So I will be reposting it. Funny how Mathew's posts aren't removed.

    Typical neo-con thug performance.

    Very Rovian.

    But Karl is doing time for his performance.
  411. Mike *** from Hamilton, ON, Canada writes: The law or bylaw is at issue. I don't understand why many above have placed blame on the police officers who were following the law that was on the books. It is not a peace officer's job to question the legitimacy of the law we as a society have asked him to enforce. Commentators and legislators: shame on you.
  412. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: tip finlay from St. John's, Canada writes: Zoe Morron from Canada writes: 'I would have thought that someone from a former Communist country would be more respectful of authority...'

    Yea, Zoe - Isn't it funny how when you take your boot off someone's throat they wanna have something to say. You and Ms. Creamer from Halifax should get together with the other few imbiciles on this forum and start your own branch of the 'automaton society'.
    -----------------------
    Your post is incoherent. How am I supporting an 'automaton society'? You must mistake me for someone else. In my posts I was critical of the officers. I only suggested that perhaps this woman should not have argued with them. That doesn't make me unreasonable. If you check back you will see that all my posts were thoughtful and perfectly valid. I am entitled to my opinion, as are you. Quit the childish mud slinging, tip.
  413. RS IslandReader from Canada writes: I am surprised comments are not closed on this one. I guess RCMP were no involved.

    I am starting to feel like I am back behind the iron curtain.
  414. SouthAlberta 403 from Canada writes: WOW!! 400 plus comments has to be some kind of record!
  415. Rebel Prince from Berlin, Germany writes: She's lucky she didn't get tasered to death. I'm staying in Berlin, where the police, for obvious historical reasons, are far more competent and reasonable.
  416. Small Earthing from Canada writes: OMG...Just handcuffed they show have tasered her a$$. Bet that would have made him fell like a real cop….rolf.

    respect cops ..lol

    like they do not ego trip much ... how about cops showing some IQ now that would be some miracle.
  417. Surley Burley from Ontario, Canada writes: This woman broke the law. Their were posted signs. She admittedly did not hang on to the rail when told to do so by the police. What is so hard to understand about that. I love these people who come to this country and then think they are above the law. I bet if she fell she would be right there in a courtroom trying to sue for injuries. I'm not a big fan of cops but in this case he is right.
  418. jim lackey from Bang Sare, Thailand writes: I am sure Canada is now a much safer place to live. I guess if you can't catch the big fish, go after the little ones.
  419. The Mckenzie Brothers from Canada writes: In Montreal they have also a law that you shoes laces must be tied in a secured knot, failure to do so is a automatic $150 and $300 if you only speak English. Here are some others
    1. walking too fast $125 fine
    2. putting too much food in your mouth $95 fine
    3. wearing a sexy outfit may cause accident $75 fine sorry ladies only
    4. caring too many grocery bags $140 fine
    5. wearing sneakers in the winter time $50 fine
  420. Commentsclosedfor Legalreasons from Toronto, Canada writes: Charlotte Creamer, are you for real or are you merely playing devil's advocate? If you really believe what you have been posting here, I hope that you don't have children. Indoctrinating young minds with such fascist clap-trap is really a form of abuse.
  421. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: This is a very shocking story. I have a niece who was really interested in getting into the police and/or the border services and she didn't make the cut even after some interviews. We were all really surprised. She is a very smart person (tested in top 2% IQ as a kid) and did well on the required exams for these positions. She has a degree (A average) from a top university, is bilingual, enjoys working out and is fit (she's 5'8 and very strong and capable). She has no criminal history and is in fact squeaky clean in every way. She was 100% committed to a career in law enforcement.
    (She started out wanting to do dentistry, but decided she didn't want to do this while at school.)
    This woman would be perfect. She doesn't drink, always obeys the law and is 100% committed to whatever she does. She hasn't even as much been issued with a speeding ticket. Everyone who knew her thought she would not only get hired but quickly promoted because she is 1. extremely smart; 2. has 100% integrity and 3. gives 100% to whatever job she does. She is a principled and honorable young woman and wouldn't ever act in an unfair way.
    And still she has tried out so many times and is completely discouraged now. She says she was a bit nervous at the interviews and fears that is why she blew it. She has gone back to school and is planning another career. Who are they hiring for the border and the police in Ontario when a grade A sort of person like my niece doesn't even get a chance and is given the boot without any serious consideration???
  422. R L from Canada writes: Completely at fault here is the POLICE OFFICER. Not the transit or posters on the wall or Ms. Kosoian or anything else. These cop thugs think they own the place, have huge egos, and if anyone talks back to them, they take out the handcuffs and/or taser.

    Thuggish cops should be fired for using excessive force and charged with assault where applicable.

    But don't worry, the cops will investigate THEMSELVES, with an official report full of lies, and the conclusion will be that no further action is warranted.
  423. Shivan Perwer from Montréal, Canada writes: You are really funny dear friends. Everybody jumps on the accasion to reprimand the policemen, but anybody asks to the policemen what really took place. The lady committed a offence. For some it is a very minor offence, but you know very great majority of time(weather) it is the attitude of the citizen that determines if the policeman gives a fine or not.In that case, the lady did not conform to the orders given by the policemen. When the policemen asked her to be held she should say thank you and to run, because it was for her safety. If she was identified at the request of the policemen and if she was quiet she would not have been handcuffed. Besides, she would have had no second fine. Every thing is a question of attitude. She was shopping and she got what she was looking for
  424. Dick Smith from Edmonton, Canada writes: Zoe Morrow, this is another classic example of being too qualified. Several years ago an unsuccessful candidate sued the police department (can't remember where) because he flunked the admission test. Apparently he scored much too high. The police said he wasn't fit because he was too intelligent and would soon tire of the work. This could only occur in a government or quasi-government organization. Says a for our boys in blue.
  425. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: to the globe ...really
  426. Shivan Perwer from Montréal, Canada writes: Mister Dick Smith here in Quebec the candidates who want to be police officers must have an average of more than 85% and even 90% they complete 3 years in college and then go to Quebec national police school for almost 16 weeks. Our police officers are well qualified man find an other excuse
  427. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: R L I'm more inclined to think the particular statute of law is more to blame than the actual officer involved, whom i happen to think was patently overzealous and evidently unaware of the concept of spirit of law
  428. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: RL, I probably should have stated the underlying philosophy behind the particular statute of law is more to blame than the actual officer, not to exonerate the officer from unexcusably poor judgement .
  429. Shivan Perwer from Montreal, Canada writes: Sir joh you can be right, but as I have already said it if the citizen has a bad attitude it is possible that the policeman is overzealous.
  430. Ken K from Canada writes: Shivan Perwer; here is another 'excuse', as you call it. Put a uniform on some people or a badge in their pockets, and the power goes straight to their heads. This is not to suggest that all police officers are drunk with power but we are seeing too many cases lately where police actions have been significantly out of proportion with situation as reported and subsequently investigated. As citizens of this country we have the right to be safe from the abuses and excessives of the few, especially if they are police offficers. One would think that those in command would want to eliminate the bad apples but it seems it is being left to the general public to bring pressure on those in command to act. The concept of 'back the blue' only works if everyone understands that the police are not above the law. Unfortunately this seems to be lost on those in uniforms.
  431. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Rudeness though seldom desirable, is an appropiate response to an absurb application of the law and in a country that proclaims to what we're about, should never lead to an escalation of adverse consequences.
  432. Steve Struthers from Canada writes: It's a dead certainty that Ms. Kosoian is going to sue the Laval police department for false arrest, among other things. Simply beaking off to a cop is not sufficient cause to be placed under arrest unless you start uttering death threats.

    On the other hand, refusal to provide ID is sufficient grounds if the police are issuing you a ticket for a by-law infraction or some other offence. The Criminal Code of Canada affords the police the right to demand ID in such cases, for the simple reason that it's rather hard to convict someone who cannot be identified.

    However, this whole case is going to turn on one rather picayune detail: if a by-law number was indicated on the sign telling Metro passengers to hold the handrail while using the escalator, then the transit cops had her dead to rights.

    If no such by-law number was present on the sign, and there were no signs anywhere else clearly stating that it is a by-law infraction to fail to hold the handrail, then Ms. Kosoian's lawsuit might succeed.

    I just did a quick check of the STM (Metro) by-laws, which are provided in French only, and I saw nothing that indicated it's an offence to fail to hold the handrail of the escalator. That doesn't mean the by-laws don't address such situations, just that I didn't see anything that was really clear-cut.

    It could be the case that the transit cops were reliying on some section of the by-law which indirectly deals with the escalator situation. Sections 4(a) and (b) of the by-law look like they might apply.

    Basically those two sections state it's an infraction to interfere with the free movement of passengers by placing bags or other objects in such a way that they could cause obstruction.

    Somehow I can't help but wonder if this whole situation could have been avoided if the cop had just simply waited until she had cooled down and then proceeded to explain why she was getting a ticket.
  433. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Shirvan, as I've stated in above posts, with reasons added, I would unhesitatedly answer yes. The issue here isn't whether the situation couldn't have easily been avoided, which undoubtedly it could have, it's whether it should be our responsibility to respond politely to an unreasonable application of law to and perhaps more importantly whether it's desirable for our collective rights to do so
  434. Shivan Perwer from Montreal, Canada writes: Mister Ken, according to what we learnt here in montréal, when the policemen asked to the lady to pay attention because she can fall. The lady would have answered them: ' whom you are to say to me what I have to do. ' The policemen informed her that it was for her safety and that she commits an offence. Then, they asked for her identity that she refused to look while shouting and by gesturing. She wanted to go away and she was not paying attention to the offers. Probably of she was nice to police officers all these things wouldn't happen. I hope she learnt a lil bit frim this experience
  435. Red Arrow Crossing from Canada writes: again - being from montréal and having reviewed the STM's bylaws, there is no, I repeat, NO by-law stating that one must hold the rail whilst on an escalator. The sign just says please hold the rail and stnd right walk left (in french). were it a bylaw, the bylaw number would be written just under it.

    The cop was being an idiot. One doesn't have to respond nicely to idiots, even if they are in uniform.
  436. Red Arrow Crossing from Canada writes: However, i will admit, that i just realised that there is a general bylaw in which it is forbidden to disobey any pictogram in the system...
  437. Harbinger from Out West from Canada writes: Just a matter of time before we read that some civilian transit customer sees a transit cop not using a handrail and executes a citizens arrest? Could happen.
  438. Red Arrow Crossing from Canada writes: Montreal also bans swearing (in French only of course).
    T.O. - You can't drag a dead horse down Yonge St. on a Sunday
    Ottawa - its illegal to eat icecream on Bank St. on a Sunday
    Etobicoke - no more than 3.5 inches of water is allowed in a bathtub.

    and my favourite :
    Alberta - If you are released from prison, it is required that you are given a handgun with bullets and a horse, so you can ride out of town.

    Sometimes laws are just stupid. Where is all the common sense?
  439. Ken K from Canada writes: Shivan Perwer; You are quite right, she has probably learned a very valuable lesson. She has likely learned to fear the Laval police, as will many people who read about this incident. The overreaction of slapping handcuffs on her and putting her in a small detaining room demonstrates either a serious lack of training in how to handle conflict or, what is more likely the case, a police officer purposefully attempting to intimidate a person by a significantly escalated use (or abuse) of his power. Either way, I am certain you are right. The woman has learned a lesson; but likely not the one you were thinking of.
  440. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Not to blow this out of proportion, but we, especially the LAW is the LAW crowd, should reflect that many of the people of the past that we most exalt were defiant of existant laws. The law exists to serve humans, not humans exist to serve the law. The law cannot be unchanging impervious monolith, and in a healthy Democracy that purports to be a free society cannot be be unquestionable
  441. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: Dick Smith from Edmonton, Canada writes: Zoe Morrow, this is another classic example of being too qualified. Several years ago an unsuccessful candidate sued the police department (can't remember where) because he flunked the admission test. Apparently he scored much too high. The police said he wasn't fit because he was too intelligent and would soon tire of the work. This could only occur in a government or quasi-government organization. Says a for our boys in blue.
    ----------------
    Yes, Dick, I think that's what it must have been?? She is too smart and too committed to be overlooked because of not being capable enough. What upset me was that this girl tried so hard, read lots of books to prep for the interviews and gave it her all. And she still came up short. I am sure they hired some good people, but I can't help but think that they may also have hired people of lesser ability than my niece. I know for sure they are often hiring community college grads over university grads and having too many qualifications can seem like an impediment. For the border, for example, they recently lowered the educational requirements and you can get hired with 2 years of community college. There is no way that most of these people are on the same level as my niece who graduated at the top of her class at university, is bilingual, and is just really smart and talented -- but somehow wasn't what they wanted??? For me, I can't imagine this. She is so tough, so committed.
    My point is with recent news stories about tasering and police brutality it makes you wonder about the recruitment and training of these officers. And it makes you wonder again when you know of people who were really excellent candidates but were passed over for community college grads with 'police foundation courses' and experience working as security guards in malls. They need to give people with different backgrounds a chance.
  442. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Shirvan, the personal emotions of a police officer should ideally not come into play when they're on duty. Professionalism and adherence to duty AND to the spirit of the law should supercede any individual feelings when acting under authority of law. I don't think it unreasonable to state nobody should end up in handcuffs, for failing to hold on to a handrail unless violence has in some way been threatened. Impoliteness is not a valid reason for this occuring.
  443. Dave M from Canada writes: Charlotte Creamer... in your little primer on what new Canadians are told about how to show respect to police officers, you left out the opening paragraph which lays out how police officers are supposed to behave. I don't think your hero in Laval measures up... i'll refresh your memory with this paragraph from the gov't website........

    'The police are part of the community and are accountable to the public. They may be either men or women. They are trained to serve and protect the public, including you. Police operate within strict regulations and follow established procedures. Canadians expect honesty and fairness from the police.'
  444. Jennifer Kim from Toronto, Canada writes: This is outrageous behaviour from police, and a clear example of an unjustified exercise of authority. The police had no right to enforce the woman to do something that she had felt would endanger her life. And the fine and imprisonment were disproportionate to the harm caused (if there is indeed a harm for not holding onto the handrailing).
  445. J R from Vancouver, Canada writes: So long as people here just whine, and do not get off their behinds to restore contitutional rights in Canada, they are just helping the police state. Originally a lot of White Canadians supported undermining Charter rights under the understanding that rights abuses will not be done to Whites. Understandably, it has come around to bite them in the behind.

    I do not have a problem with police arresting people who harm others, such as cigarrette addicts who poison innocent people, or who litter. But to arrest someone who is not hurting anyone and is not breaking any law (maybe breaking an institutional regulation) is so telling of the state of Canada's supposed constitutional democracy.
  446. Tong Chua from Coquitlam, Canada writes: Canada has sadly degenerated into the 3rd world with such disgraceful misconduct from her police. Whatever happened to the basic human rights that Canadians were so proud of?
    I think I am much safer on the Shanghai subways than in Montreal.
  447. don dickson from vancouver, Canada writes: We have to find a way to stop this thugish police behavior soon. We are slipping into fascism.
  448. Steven Merchant from Vancouver, Canada writes: The headline to this article is really misleading. Instead of reading 'Woman cuffed for not holding escalator handrail', it could have just as easily read 'Woman cuffed for not following simple instructions and then arguing with police'.
  449. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: The G&M's rules: 'The following types of comments are not permitted: comments that include personal attacks on Globe journalists or other participants in these forums; comments that make obviously false or unsubstantiated allegations; comments that purport to quote people or reports where the purported quote or fact is not publicly known; or comments that include vulgar language or libelous statements.'

    But ignorance is ok. Why this thread is allowed to meander on while others of greater import are cut short is beyond me.
  450. DG Rose from Canada writes: Language Police, Handrail Police. Well done, Quebec.
  451. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ Matthew Beattie: Reposted. You are a coward and maroon. You may want to consider - very carefully - the following points.

    Question Authority Before Authority Questions You.

    Although, given the official definition of TERRORISM posted above, Authority has given itself a blank cheque.

    Technically, Harper and crew could declare any Canadian who doesn't hew to their ideology and perspective a terrorist. I wonder how that makes you feel. Based on your posts, you don't have a problem with that. But I do.

    The likes of you are exactly who real terrorists are trying to reach and give influence to. Specifically, to create an authoritarian police state condition in a previously democratic society. Incidents like this one are the starting point. And your attitude is what the terrorists want.

    Not arguing with police on trivial matters like this one, makes it so much easier to submit to higher levels of abuse of rights and authority. Goebbels and Beria would have loved you and your ilk.

    You really should contemplate Martin Niemoller's little poem. It goes like this:

    When the Nazis came for the communists,
    I remained silent;
    I was not a communist.

    Then they locked up the social democrats,
    I remained silent;
    I was not a social democrat.

    Then they came for the trade unionists,
    I did not speak out;
    I was not a trade unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews,
    I did not speak out;
    I was not a Jew.

    When they came for me,
    there was no one left to speak out for me.

    You won't like it when there's no one left to speak for you.
  452. Matt Stiles from Canada writes: There will be no police state in my lifetime.

    One way or another...
  453. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: When I see the police these days, they operate in two's and three's. Even in squad cars. They have so much idle time on their hands, they are simply watching us, looking for us to screw up.

    For speeding. For smoking a joint. For being drunk. For protesting,

    I wish they would go after criminals instead. Those who impugn others. Including the white collar criminals.

    That's the bunch who cause real misery in this land and who get off Scot-free!
  454. Leon Russell from Gatineau, Qc, Canada writes: In the French-language story in Cyberpresse, it says there had been a fall there recently on the same escalator so they and the woman was being reminded she was in a dangerous postition. 'If she had just put a hand on the rail there would have been no problem.'

    Kind of like the dog people at our local park. Dogs are 'tolerated' on a leash (even though it's against regulations), but people run the dogs all the time with no leash. If the park inspector tells you to leash your dog, and you don't do it, he HAS to give you a ticket. He really doesn't have a choice.

    I know I do personally tend to do what police officers tell me to do. A couple of times in my youth when I was slow to obey I got beat up for it. That was in B. C.
  455. Tony B. from Vancouver, Canada writes: Firstly, Montreal is a story for itself when it comes to their dissent expressed towards English speakers. Now with this officer who obviously has some personal issues and a serious lack of self-respect who simply had to vent it out and prove to this poor and unfortunate woman that he is the law, he is the man and he is the master whom we all must obey without questioning...
    However, we certainly should not lose faith in our police as most of them are normal and unaffected by some subhuman issues... Police are human beings too and we really don't know if this poor woman gave them any 'attitude' to trigger such a dramatic response. We can't really form any dogmatic opinion on what really happened there. Maybe officers did what they had to do to show this lady that she should be more respectful and that was all.
    As for our police force, it's better for all of us to cooperate with them as most of them are simply doing their job (while a few of them take their job over the board and make it too serious and a burden for those unfortunate to have to deal with such a low human beings who were mistakenly given their badges). Cheers.
  456. Jake Smith from Canada writes: The woman should be thankful the police didn't taser her!

    As an aside, I can't help but notice excessive amount of cop stories which may be due to alot of self-promotion on the part of the police which occassionally back-fires.

    Our society is blessed with many professionals that lay their lives on the line and others that make our country great. There exists the occasional rogue element in every profession.

    Mr. Editor,

    How about stories from hospital ER or a story from a fireman's perspective? If a story is on girl guides why not include the perspective of a couple of guiders? How about a GM / Chrysler story that includes the perspectives of car salespeople, and workers at parts suppliers ?

    Why always cops? Can we not spend a few bucks and get back to investigative journalism?

    Likewise, if doing a story on politics, can journalist not probe beyond the surface and not accept politician's attempts to side step the tough questions (assuming a tough question was asked!!)

    Otherwise, what is the point of this paper?
  457. james mcintyre from Canada writes: Upon reading some bloggers' posts, with life at risk, I would like to point out, to such as Craemer from Halifax. It is an odd cultural acceptance in Canada that the people by and large accept anything their govt tells them to do. 'Wear your seatbelts' 'ok', 'hold the handrail' 'ok'! Other countries have input by the citizens. It is annoying often to listen to all the justification individuals come up with, but at least they use their thought processes. Canadians are way, way overly defensive of anyone questioning their authority(s)...even on an individual basis. 'I said and that's it'...Craemer person.
  458. Jake Smith from Canada writes: I have to say, tip finlay's jingle is cool.

    I have a few cop stories to share.

    My wife is driving to pick our young kids at school. A York Regional cop pulls her over and demands her to answer how many seconds she stopped at stop sign for. This goes on for several minutes. Meanwhile, our 6 & 9 year old are waiting for their mom to pick them up, who is now overdue as a result of macho cop interrogating her on an issue which isn't an offense since law only requires you to come to complete stop. If you recall the 8 yr old girl abducted from school in Woodstock, then one would recognize that cop's actions to satisfy his ego are putting young children at risk.

    While attending university, I was a teenager driving my Charger, a off duty cop pulls me over takes me into back room at Esso station, and beats me for no reason.

    Does anyone recall in the 1980's when a security camera caught a citizen complain to a cop in a Montreal convenience store how he parked his cruiser blocking his car? The video displayed on the news showed the cop banging this guy's head repeatedly off the counter!!

    These rogue cops are NEVER charged, and if they occassional get charged, they almost always get acquitted.

    Amazing!
  459. Steve Lee from Canada writes: 'I don't have three hands and I fear catching a bug...' This lady obviously has a chip on her shoulder. She was not cooperative, did not intend to comply with the rules and seems to be the one that was aggressive. In this instance the police or security just carried out the law which they should do more ofdten.
  460. Jake Smith from Canada writes: Orest Zarowsky made some good points. I recall that Bill McCormick jr. once jokingly said regarding the beating of the black man in LA, that we should have a police state.

    The former RCMP person who spoke out against the RCMP states that the RCMP perceives they are at 'WAR' with the public. My wife being harass over a non-issue, as well as many other incidents people have with police regrettably re-inforce this VERY PERCEPTION.

    If we had politicians that existed here in Canada that were more interested in serving the public than self-promotion, just maybe they would address this issue.

    Personally, I find it unbelievable this issue is on the news ALL the time, and leaders such as Harper and McGuinty must be watching the same news as the rest of us.

    Don't they perceive that some elements of the police are out of control, and the laws are way overdue to be changed to rein in any rogue police?
  461. Edward Carson from Canada writes: Jah Nee - its not a case of caving. Its a case of knowing when to fight and how. Instead of being lippy, snarky and generally disrespective the lady could have turned and stated
    'Sorry officer, I was looking for my fare'...I'm willing to bet that 999 times out of 1000 the officer would have stated to her that she should get it before getting on the escalator and please hold on.
    You disrespect the people who can arrest you and guaranteed you will get arrested. She learnt that and I hope she gets taken to task.
  462. Jake Smith from Canada writes: Although Steve may be technically correct, the officier's actions seem to be excessive. Also, the cop may have provoked that response due to his possible aggressive nature.

    The cop that pulled over my wife was like an aggressive cowboy who wanted to bait her by arguing about how many seconds she stopped for? My wife wisely was passive, so the cop let her pick up the kids after 20-30 minute delay

    Really, who gives a rats @$$ how many seconds she stopped for? The cop was picking a fight so he could write some ticket and feel lik a man

    Is this what it is all about?

    Another cop stopped her coming home from girl guides one night. Unfortunately, I had the ins. papers in the trunk, and the cop was interrogating her whether she actually add insurance on our new Mercedes.

    Let's think about this. The police computers can instantly confirm you have insurance on your car, and the car is an expensive mercedes, so does he think we can't afford the insurance but we can buy a mercedes?

    Why harass a girl guide leader about insurance?
  463. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: JR, i have to think, to reach your conclusion, you made a couple of wrong turns on the road of reason
  464. Jake Smith from Canada writes: I would like to suggest that any rogue cop is sent to afghanistan, where they can fight all they want. I am sure they would pee their pants if they had to fight with other men that also have guns.

    i am willing to bet that rogue cops likely are incapable of solving 'real' crimes and getting the 'bad guys'. Rather, they are driven by bullying the public, since occassionally, joe / jane citizen may step out of line and require the full weight of the law applied to them.
  465. Henry Wysmulek from Winnipeg, writes: While the big brave police go after this violent and dangerous criminal, in Calgary a double murderer is released!
  466. yves couture from montreal, Canada writes: Another angle on this...

    Fascinating how so many posters comment without even have the facts rights. For example, the notion that it was Montreal police. No, it was in Laval, a suburb. The notion that the woman anwered in English and that this had something to do with her case. She is a student of international law at UQAM, a French university. Why would she have answered in English? Where does this idea even comes from?

    SOme posters built on that to express their hateful views on Quebec. As if this sort of things happens only in Quebec !

    To the man from Berlin : I saw people in Berlin constantly controlling each others in the most rude manner. I remember crossing a narrow street myself on the red light. A radical Punk with needle in his nose shouted at me : 'Das ist ganz illegal!' ANother poster invent false rules as if it was illegal to speak English on Quebec's street, blahblahblah...

    All this deformation of basic facts, proclaimed in the most dogmatic tone, is one of the most fascinating aspects of those forums.

    As for the issue itself, there will always be cases like that from time to time. Who never disobey such rules ? Everbody does. But if somebody reminds us there is a rule, the reasonnable thing to do is to say, ok, yes. If we say no, I wont comply and I wont give my identity what do we expect ? That the police will smile and applaud ?
  467. Jian Min from Windsor, Canada writes: To me, that just means there are too many people being employed with nothing better to do. The people who passed that stupid thing and the police idiot should be fired for the apparently reason that there is not enough worthwhile work for them to do. They must be declared redundant!
  468. Observer Just A from ottawa, Canada writes: Call out the SWAT, call out the Language police, call out the police: this woman is obviously a threat to the nation, her self, and the entire city of montreal. Am sure she didn't speak french first.

    Oh, and don't forget to bring the Tasers and give her at least 5 jolts.

    The 'police' was obviously scared for his life and acted in self-defence, no wonder he had to use reasonable force to restrain her

    Oh, and did I forget, they must strip search her, for obviously she must be carrying a hidden weapon.
  469. Jake Smith from Canada writes: Yves,
    I agree with many of your points, however, Jian also makes an excellent point.

    Society needs to demonstrate respect for lawful authority, and lawful authority needs to be reasonably applied. We either have read and/or experienced many instances where lawful authority is out of control, and the police have been caught lying explicitly or by omission (as Mulroney is perceived to be doing).

    The government can't properly manage what it doesn't measure, and I believe the government needs to start measuring and publishing the performance of all of our public agencies. Here in Ontario, I believe the government started to publish hospital metrics, such as infections acquired during stays. The goal of these metrics is continuous improvement.

    Likewise, we need metrics on crime rates for each police division, together with police activity metrics, false arrest metrics, public complaint metrics, so we may assess the police in the context of their work environment from a holistic perspective. Perhaps we will find that instead of the cop giving tickets to people he perceives are disrespecting him, there was a pedophile down the street abducting a child, or a home invasion going on!

    The government spends billions on justice, and I bet if the police focus on the big issues first, then our country would be a safer place.

    One more thought. I am sure doctors have to endure abusive patients and/or patient families in ER, yet doctors continue to provide treatments in spite of this. How is it that police cannot uphold the spirit of the law like other professionals?
  470. Jake Smith from Canada writes: Good point Observer Just A from ottawa,

    I forgot about the police's need to strip search. Didn't Toronto police strip search a Jamaican woman on a public street once?

    I don't recall a legitimate reason, nor do I recall anyone getting charge.

    Amazing.

    Hey, people are going to get the perception if you want to break the law maybe you should be a cop!
  471. M. U. from Canada writes: Getting worse than a police state!!!!!!!!!
  472. One More Thing from Montreal, Canada writes: Mackenzie Brothers, I love you!
  473. James Dalziel from Canada writes: Montreal can be hilarious.
    It's a city where pedestrians take traffic lights as mere suggestions. Littering and graffiti are rampant, especially at subway stations.
    But ticketing authorities arrive within minutes if tourists park their cars on the wrong side of the street, befuddled by intricate month-day-hour rules written only en francais.
  474. Jake Smith from Canada writes: How many people read the 'Karate Kid' article, and how the police influenced the crown to drop charges after public uproar?

    I am amazed that the police chief was quoted in paper saying the police learned a lesson. You have to be kidding me! Paid professionals are learning something so fundamental to polcing (i.e. investigate incident prior to charging) as if it is their first day on the job!

    This is exactly the reason why so many people are wrongfully arrested and subsequently wrongfully convicted. Police have strong biases that prevents them from conducting themselves as professionals and ensuring justice is served by a thorough and accurate investigation of the incidents, etc.

    During the Bernando trial, it was revealed in a documentary that a middle-aged man discovered Kristen French's body. It was reported the police were convinced he was the killer, so they bad mouthed him to his wife, his boss, and neighbours, etc. So he was divorced and fired. Later, they realized it was Bernando, however, this man's life was destroyed, and he never got compensated or an apology!

    So Yves, in your infinite wisdom, do you always believe what the police claim? If you do, I believe there are only a couple of marbles rolling around in your head.
  475. Rob b from moncton, Canada writes: You sure it wasn't the officer that was from Russia? Holy crap. What a dick. He needs to do a little time himself, be stripped of his badge for good, do some huge apologizing/sucking up to Bela Kosoian, and pay for any damages.....punative as well. This is Canada, not Russia, Iran, Mianmar, or North Korea for goodness sake.
    I personally do the same thing. I don't know what is growing on those handrails, so I barely ever touch them. It is my choice to hold on to it or not, not society's. What's next?......Fines for not wearing appropriate footwear for the weather? Jailing for walking to closely to a curb where you might twist your ankle? A good beating for not paying attention to stewards/stewardesses when they do their 'emergency procedure' demonstrations?.....Not in Canada!
  476. yves couture from montreal, Canada writes: Jake,

    I also agree with your points, but the issue of 'small offenses' still exist.

    You write 'and I bet if the police focus on the big issues first, then our country would be a safer place.'

    But the fact is police do focus on big issues first. Let's take this small issue of holding an escalator handrail as an example.

    Let's suppose that it happens one million time a day that people do not hold this thing. (I don't hold it most of the time). So out of let's say 365 millions offenses a year, we now have one case making noise. Why ?

    1. Because first of all this woman 's'est penchee' (bent?) to look something in her bag. There had been an accident earlier this week in this very escalator. To bent in an escalator to look in a bag is a somewhat risky thing. The police officers told her she should hold the handrail.

    Is it here that you find them in fault ?

    2. She refused. Is it here that you think they should have said ok?

    3. ANd then she refused to give her identity. Is it here that the officer went too far?

    I would say that the 'menottes' (hand something...) were over the top. But I was not there so it is difficult to judge.

    And yes, we should be wary of the police and control them. But apocaliptic conclusions about a police state on the basis of this example are also over the top, don't you think ?

    I was controlled 4 times by police in my life, on the street, for no reasons, in Canada and in France. Things like that happen. It is annoying. But to build my whole view of society around that would be navel gazing.
  477. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Yves, but in an open society one must be permitted to question an absurd law within a reasonable limit. And I don't think the women's initial response to the demand to hold the handrail, especially when probably she was utterly flabbergasted by the demand and if she indeed was rummaging through her purse was unreasonable. In free and just society the Canada claims to be, I believe the officer's authoritative demand was unjust. And though the situation obviously could have been avoided with a diiferent reaction from the women, to focus on that and not on how it is possible in our society to have an officer believe he has authoritative right to make such a demand over so trivial a matter and then detain the person who exercises a small degree of civil disobedience
  478. Richard Stanczak from Corunna, Ontario, Canada writes: Fortunately for the offender, the arresting officer was not armed with a taser or her lack of immediate compliance might have earned her a jolt to remind her who is in charge.

    This is exactly what will [is] happen[ing] if our police forces and government are allowed to believe they are omnipotent and have no oversight or checks on their behaviour.
  479. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: - accidently hit submit before completing previous comment- so to finish, is misplace
  480. C. B. from Canada writes: People who have used or are using the Metro system and who have caught the flu or any transmittable disease should make a collective lawsuit against the Metro authorities for not providing anti-bacterial handwashing lotion in the stations.
  481. Rob b from moncton, Canada writes: yves couture from montreal, Canada writes: 'I was controlled 4 times by police in my life, on the street, for no reasons, in Canada and in France. Things like that happen.'------------------That would be the day. I would never let those words come out of my mouth. I would never accept as the 'norm' any kind of mishandling by police or other 'authority' figures. That's unbelieveable that you would even suggest that in this country. I'm sorry to hear you were 'controlled' four times but you should never let it get into your head that that is normal, or part of our way of life here. It may be in France, but this is not France, this is Canada.
  482. Jake Smith from Canada writes: yves,

    I really wonder if anything this woman did was against the criminal code or bylaw.

    There was a case here in Ontario, where police gave a ticket for someone flashing their lights to warn other motorist of a radar trap.

    Apparently the cop disliked the action, and gave a ticket for something that is not against the law.

    Isn't that a case of the police taking the law into their own hands?

    And if that woman did break a bylaw, was it necessary to handcuff?

    I am sorry, however, the police serve the public and they should demonstrate professional conduct and not be repeatedly perceived as bullies.

    Again, if the government published policing metrics, I am confident we can drill down on these rogue cops and find they are not adding much value to our society aside from overreacting to minor issues. It is this overreaction to minor issues poisons our society and causes the public to lose faith in our justice system.

    People are raised to respect authority from a young age, however, people cannot help but lose respect when the police have rogue members that do not act professionally and occassionally break the law with no consequences.
  483. yves couture from montreal, Canada writes: Rob b

    'This is Canada'. Yes, Canada, a place where hundred of Quebecers were put in jail for no reasons in October 1970, a place where people are tasered, a place where first nations people are often treated like cattles and fill our jails... A place where a new Brunswick school administrator received death threats because he ended a 19th century chauvinistic habit of forcing children to sign the national anthem.... A place where legitimate protest by Tamouls, for example, is received by most citizen as if there sacred right to commute must preceed everything...

    Let's not be so rahrahrah about Canada.

    I was controlled at six am on the street in Montreal by policemen looking for a criminal. They thought it could be me. I had to put my hands on the roof of their car while they 'fouiller' me. Very annoying. But these things happen. I still think that to alert the universe on my own little case would have been navel gazing.

    I guess I'm rather of a delinquent type. I don't like authorities, don't like the police and I'm suspicious of all forms of power.

    But I find that we Canadians, as other Werterners, have contradictory views on those things. We want rules on everything that is considered a threat to our health, security, etc. No smoking, no this, no that. And then we want the right to disobey our own rules.

    I'm no better. I don't like all those rules in the first place even if I recognize some of them have reasonnable goals.
  484. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Jake, wonderfully stated.
  485. Jake Smith from Canada writes: Yves,

    You have trivialized a serious issue of police abuse without researching the statistics, and the fact that lawyers such as Lockyer are quite busy seeking the freedom of wrongfully convicted people.

    The fact is that even with a small percentage of rogue cops that include those that bully citizens over minor issues to those that wrongfully arrest people and perhaps fabricate evidence, the system doesn't take the necessary actions to cleanse itself of these rogue cops.

    Most people are not tasered by the police, however, a Polish immigrant recently was in Vancouver.

    Your comments illustrate that your both emotional and intellectual IQ (in terms of seeing the big picture) leaves something to be desired.
  486. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Yves, it is because of the imperfections of our country that it is imperative we speak out when injustices occur, lest we be thought to condone them. It's the only way to a more just society.
  487. Francois 35 from Brossard, Canada writes: James Dalziel

    you wrote ''' befuddled by intricate month-day-hour rules written only en francais. '''

    Tell me about signs in Toronto, Calgary and Vancouver ? Are they ''bilingual'' or ''' en anglais ''' only ?
  488. Pierre-Yves P from Canada writes: .
    To Commentsclosedfor Legalreasons from Toronto:

    'Given that this happened in a jurisdiction with a moronic, draconian and probably unconstitutional language law, this egregious example of police stupidity is not surprising.'

    I surmise your comment is sarcastic, but there is something true about the degenerative influence of having to enforce idiosyncratic laws on the ethics of the justice system and the police force. Anyonw who has lived in a non-democratic society knows what I am talking about.
  489. Pierre-Yves P from Canada writes: .
    To Jake Smith from Canada writes:

    'Society needs to demonstrate respect for lawful authority, and lawful authority needs to be reasonably applied. '

    It is impossible to apply lawful authority 'reasonably', because bureaucracies do not reason: only individuals do.
  490. yves couture from montreal, Canada writes: Jake,

    I agree with many of your points, once again. But the end of your post is a cheap shot that do not serve your cause. In fact, it says more about you than about me...

    But let,s go back to the 'whole picture'.

    You're right : fighting police abuse is crucial. But precisely, it is still not clear that this is a case of police abuse. Our information on it is rather limited (a little more in La Presse than in the Globe, but still limited). Did the police use an insulting tone ? Or perhaps it was the woman who did?

    Still, this aspect of the issue, though crucial, is not yet the 'whole picture'. To even think, as you seem to do, that it is for you, and you alone, to define the 'whole picture' indicates... I would not dare to say a poor IQ, but I would say a rather self-pleasing view of yourself.

    I brought another perspective on the 'whole picture'. It is our complain mentality based on the perceived right to be above the law.

    Yes, this is only a bylaw and yes, it may be considered trivial. But still, I'm interested in the contradiction of our attitudes towards the law. This maybe outside your own definition of the 'whole picture' but I would say that you're definition is also limited.

    And my initial point was not to defend the police but to criticize people drawing conclusions on a so-called 'police state' on the basis on this example. Those conclusions, for anyone who knows what a police state is, are exagerated to the point of being trivial.

    Tout ce qui est exagere est insignifiant.
  491. Arent Wee from Canada writes: How many other people has this officer fined for not holding the handrail? I know for darned sure she wasn't the only one! There are lots of times when both my hands are holding or carrying something so I do not have a free hand to put on the rail, and
    I'm sorry to say that if an officer of the law was treating me like a criminal for something so trivial, then I would be giving him/her a rough time too. When I was very young many, many years ago the 'bobby on the beat' was my friend, but today I have lost a lot of respect, faith and trust in the police of today and can honestly say it frightens me more everytime I hear something like this.
  492. mavis murphy from Ottawa, Canada writes: I think many of you would find Robert Arthur Menard to be very interesting. You can find him on the youtube video 'Bursting Bubbles'.
    I believe that the officer in this case was power-tripping. Please take the time to read what Menard has to say about police and authority.
  493. Two Centsworth from Canada writes: Appalling. This charge will be withdrawn. It is just not normal. Police do patrol many stations in Mtl but they are looking for drug dealers - not escalator infractions!

    It'll be fixed within the week. No Montrealer will think this is reasonable.
  494. Robin M from Canada writes: The headline is provocative and misleading... it seems that this young woman in responding to the officers request proceeded to argue and object to a request which was for her own safety... On the otherhand, the reaction of the officer went too far..

    I travel by metro at times and having security there is reassuring..
  495. Alexandra N. from Canada writes: Wow, perhaps everyone should take a deep breath and ask some important questions, like 'Am I getting the whole story?' I don't think we are. It is important to note that she was arguing with the officer, anytime I argue with an officer over a ticket, I get hit harder, I have found taking the ticket, and going to argue in court has always worked better. This lady can go to court and argue these fines.
  496. Leon Russell from Gatineau, Qc, Canada writes: Tony B. from Vancouver, Canada writes: 'Firstly, Montreal is a story for itself when it comes to their dissent expressed towards English speakers.'

    What has this got to do with the story? Nothing says she was an 'English' speaker. If you read it in the French press, it happened in French, and the woman is a student at a French-language university. Like most immigrants in Quebec these days, she speaks French.

    'You people' have a knee-jerk reaction everytime anything happens in Quebec - it all bases down to language because (especially in the West) you can't fathom life outside of your unilingual boundaries. Anything that happens outside of your one-dimensional world is abnormal.

    As for police in Quebec being worse than anywhere else in Canada, I wouldn't know. I've had nothing but courteous, even generous treatment from police here, but I was beaten on twice in B.C. by rogue cops.
  497. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: It's not only how the police do their work, it's what they spend their time doing.

    1. Traffic cops. Maybe this is anecdotal but I saw nary a one for a whole month driving around France. Here they swarm us.

    2. The war on drugs. Such a failed policy that keeps on chugging, handing out criminal records and causing untold, life-long damage and restricted travel.

    3. Security and protection of VIPs. I live in Ottawa and this town is closed down whenever a head of state comes visiting. Our PM gets waltzed around. The baricaded US embassy is frightful.
  498. mike sty the Coalition Centrist from Canada writes:
    Woman cuffed for not holding escalator handrail
    -----------------------------

    This is what happens in fascist states where fascist governments such as the Harper CONservatives rule.......

    The Harper CONservative government unveiled legislation yesterday that would change criminal law procedure so police can fingerprint and photograph people whom they've arrested but not yet charged.............
    .........it raises civil-rights concerns for opposition and defence lawyers
    -------------------------------

    Warning Signs of Harper's march towards a fascist state.........

    Obsession with Crime and Punishment- Under fascist regimes such as the Harper Conservatives , the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. These fascists regimes often overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power fascist nations
  499. MacGregrrrr The Terrierrrr-st from Rrrrollin' up the rrrrim!, Canada writes: Wow. May we please borrow these officers next time we have an illegal Tamil Tiger demonstration in Toronto ... ? (i.e. if they handcuff and ticket a woman for disobeying a safety rule in the Montreal subway, I'll bring my lawn chair and popcorn so I can see what they'd do to a mob who use children as a human shield and unlawfully blockade city streets ... oh, wait ... never mind ... I was fantasizing again ... Mayor Miller, Premiere Dalton McGuilty, Iggy and Taliban Jack might lose votes if we enforce the laws of Canada against an ethnic minority group ... sigh ... sorry - my bad - you can go back to ticketing white folk, however ...)
  500. L F from Canada writes: What came first? Rude and disrespectful police or a rude and disrespectful public?
    How utterly ironic that this woman is an international Law student. Is she setting up her thesis by antagonizing authority?
    People just don’t seem to get it. Children look to their parents and other adults as an example. If they are cheating lying and stealing or argue with authority when it’s a matter of safety then they will emulate that action. Then the adults ask why are our youth so disrespectful?
    How we have changed from a civilized society with people that had manners and understood courtesy to a selfish ME focused society.
    There is no money in the world that would be enough to compensate working with the public of this era.
  501. I calls 'em as I sees 'em from Canada writes: The Nazification of Canada is now complete. Heil Hitler!
  502. mike sty the Coalition Centrist from Canada writes: Woman cuffed for not holding escalator handrail
    -----------------

    We all know what these heavily armed testosterone driven members of the police thug squad have been doing in recent history..............

    Four heavily armed RCMP thugs repeatedly tazer and kill unarmed Polish civilian in BC airport.........

    Officer Koester shoots unarmed civilian in back of head in RCMP office....

    But when it comes to real crimes and criminals what happens to the RCMP thugs..........they get Roz coed.
  503. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: The police are above the law, according to way too effing many 'pundits' here. Hot news flash for you maroons: they aren't above the law. And defending abuse of police authority and power serves the interest of only one group - the police.

    A quickly-buried scandal here in Toronto related to the Police putting a member of the Police Board under surveillance. Because they didn't like her because she asked 'too many' questions.. Another little scandal was the Police attempting to discredit a newly appointed head of the Board. Again because this individual was inclined to hold them to account. Funny how that worked out. Even funnier was that not a single one of the police officers involved was charged, let alone punished.

    This incident is just the tip of the iceberg. Those of you here who are pushing the 'don't challenge police' line would alsos be well-advised to read Niemoller's poem. And contemplate the implications of allowing the police a signed, blank cheque.
  504. Comments closed, censored, hidden, deleted, disappeared from Peso-onie land, Canada writes: We are supposed to an adequate health care system... that is when one can have access to proper care... ---- Judging by the above, it is becoming obvious that psychiatry is understaffed, psychiatrists are overworked, and too many citizens are not getting proper medical attention.
  505. Mark S from Calgary, Canada writes: S. Like from Cochrane, you prattle on about Calgary people crossing the roads without looking. Obviously you have not read the sign comming into Calgary. There is that word again SIGN> It says Calgary is a pedestrian city. That is why Calgarians stop when pedestrians are crossing the road.
  506. James Young from Brantford, Canada writes: The lady should have been tasered five times. Then she would learn respect for the thugs called Canada calls police.
    Durgan.
  507. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: 520 comments and still going strong. I suspect because the police action was so preposterous. Handcuffing a woman for such a trivial infraction and who posed no escape threat.

    Remember when Mr. Schreiber appeared before the commons committee last year. Dressed in an orange jump suit and shackled with leg irons! Like an 80-year old man was going to run away?

    Same thing. A total lack of common sense and courtesy.
  508. Anthony Kettle from Red Deer, AB, Canada writes: How asinine. The policeman in this case should be remanded for a psychiatric assessment. With these types of situations becoming so prevalent is it any wonder that police in general are held in such low esteem by the general public. It's really too bad, because we can't manage without them. In the general population it seems like common sense is not very common any more. Police need to be held to a higher standard.

    Tony K., Red Deer
  509. W M from Canada writes: It's too bad that every time something like this happens, the chronically angry come out of the woodwork to trash the city, province, country in which it happens, often pretending that it couldn't happen where they live. Or, when it happens in Quebec, use the tiny little echo chambers that are their minds to turn an incident that happened entirely in French into an example of intollerance of English. Then after saying something unwarranted and hateful about that other place or group, they accuse those people of causing the whole problem by not liking them or people like them (i.e., if they liked me, I'd like them, but they don't so its their fault). The problem is that the whole thing is an endless cycle of anger, hurt feelings, self-pity and reprisal fuel by the people on each side who most ressemble each other. The ones who can't get out of it always pick a place in the cycle to call it the beginning that exhonerates them and puts all the blame on the others (no sharing responsibility for them!). The tragedy isn't so much the futility of their self-serving demands that the people on the other side accept all blame and open their minds, even as they invent justifications for keeping their own closed; but that every now and then they may suck someone new into their pathetic spiral. And, it is almost always the case that they pretend that the tiny minority of people on the other side, their own mirror images, represent the groups from which they come. Thankfully, they do not.
  510. DG Rose from Canada writes: Yes, Mike Sty, Stephen Harper is directly responsible for CONspiring to give that poor woman a ticket in his headlong rush to create a gestapo-like dystopia CONtrolled by the CONservatives who want to turn everyday citizens like you and I into CONvicts and strip us of all our basic human rights... There's always one mouth breather who has to waft another pointless rant against the CPC as being the evil of all mankind. Also, spelling conservative as CONservative doesn't make you look smarter, it just makes you look as smart as you are. Try to stay on topic; it's easy if you CONcentrate.

    I agree this incident is trivial in the cosmic scheme of things and not indicative of an incoming 'police state' as Yves Couture has said. It certainly is ridiculous and it looks bad on everyone; methinks the officers did protest too much. Get her ID, give her a lecture and send her on her way... Hopefully a sensible judge (I know! I know! We can still dream in Canada, can't we?) can dispense with this incident quickly and fairly.
  511. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: Question Authority Before Authority Questions You. Who works for who in a democracy again? As opposed to in a police state. There is a not so subtle difference - and what we have seen recently is that the police are overreaching their authority and seriously abusing their power.
  512. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Questioning authority must never die out or we're done. If you are stopped and interrogated for no apparent or legitimate reason, ask all the questions you want. You can even be lippy to some extent.

    And the police response is to be courteous at all times. Never to use disproportionate force or take any other potentially harmful action without a damn good reason.
  513. lary waldman from Qualicum Beach, Canada writes: I atribute this Police behavior to the fact that they watch to much American Television, which gets them revved up, wanting some action. These circumstances with this women in Quebec is just one of hundreds perhaps thousands of incidents that go unreported. Think about it, who do you report to. The Police? And when matter relating to Police conduct are investigated, who investigates ? The Police. This country is falling into the imaginary world of the pre glasnost Soviet Union, where breaking down doors and people disappearing with no explanation, was the rule not the exception. Police work together, party together, and rarely have friends outside the criminal justice system. You may wonder why? I don't, they are, with a few exceptions,a bunch of animals.

    Lary Waldman
  514. Comments closed, censored, hidden, deleted, disappeared from Peso-onie land, Canada writes: What this shows is that it is becoming urgent that we, citizens, demonstrate in no uncertain terms that this is a democracy in which we are the source of all legitimacy and power, for we are the power, being the sovereign. --- Not only must we not tolerate, we must put an end to all abuse of power by fighting with the utmost energy and defeating all those who abuse power. That is the price we ought to pay in order to preserve our true freedom, not at the other end of the world but right here at home.
  515. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ W M: Twit that you are. Reality - deal with it.
  516. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: Living in a democracy requires courage. Not only in terms of accepting the sometimes nasty random acts of our fellow civilian citizens, but in standing up for our rights when the 'authorities' choose to exceed that authority and abuse it, and the power, we have granted them.
  517. One More Thing from Montreal, Canada writes:

    Because bureaucracies can't reason, as Pierre-Yves P points out, those people entrusted with representing them must. That police officer didn't. And that's why so many of us are now questioning his actions.
  518. Snow Worn from Canada writes: A law student provides one side of a story and is planning to fight her ticket. Great way to gain experience.
  519. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: I find it hard to keep my balance on an escalator unless I hold on. I too don't like dirty handles, but sometimes you just have to do it and you can use a Kleenex as a barrier.

    After spending sometime in Germany and France, I found it interesting to note that people NEVER walk up or down escalators like they do here. They always stand still and wait to get to the top or bottom in an orderly way. Perhaps, there are unwritten rules there about how to ride an escalator. And, perhaps it is to the benefit of everyone.
  520. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ Zoe Morrow: Germany is a bad example. Try the UK.
  521. Sask Resident from Regina, Canada writes: The weather must be lousy outside from the number of posts.

    Remember, two sides to every story. He is a law enforcement officer for a subburb and she is studying to be a lawyer, so I would question both of their stories. Wait for the movie.
  522. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: I would hate to be caught not holding onto the handrail while in Laval...
    (of course, as I said I do hold on, because I don't feel safe not doing so).

    The difference between me and Bela would be that I wouldn't talk back to the officers if I was reprimanded. I would obey them even if I was angry about it. If I thought they had been inappropriate I would complain to a higher authority after the fact.
    I wouldn't get scrappy with the foot soldiers. I am not naive. You don't put up a fight with these people. Surveillance cameras or not, witnesses or not, if it comes to their word against yours, they will probably win out because they carry the badges. I am 100% against a police state mentality, but I think some people want to be heroic and speak their minds and they do so in a foolish way. They are better ways to make your voice be heard than picking a fight with the the plodding street cop.
  523. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: Why is Germany a bad example?
  524. Ken Woodwords from Ottawa, Canada writes: To people who defend the action of the overreacted police officer and suggest that we should obey the law I would like to point out that there is a difference between obeying the law and let the police define what the law is. Some of us escaped from countries where police can beat you, kick you, push you, arrest you for no reason and you can't do anything about it. No consequences for the officer who behave unlawfully. We do not want to see it happening in Canada. Believe me, it is not a pleasant regime to live under.
  525. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: Ken Woodwords from Ottawa, Canada writes: To people who defend the action of the overreacted police officer and suggest that we should obey the law I would like to point out that there is a difference between obeying the law and let the police define what the law is. Some of us escaped from countries where police can beat you, kick you, push you, arrest you for no reason and you can't do anything about it. No consequences for the officer who behave unlawfully. We do not want to see it happening in Canada. Believe me, it is not a pleasant regime to live under.
    ------------------------
    Yes, you are right. We need to be vigilant and never accept abuse or police brutality. I think the whole RCMP tasering fiasco is truly shocking and an example of corruption. The officers involved should be fired.

    I don't understand tasering at all. In the old days, people were physically restrained, now the cops stand 10 feet away and electrocute people. It seems a lazy alternative. And why do it when the person in question isn't even armed? I think there needs to be some serious reassessment here across the board and across all law enforcement agencies in Canada when it comes to judging situations and restraining suspects. There is clearly something wrong here.
  526. Kam So from Victoria, Canada writes: The women should just hold the rail and not show attitude. Problem solved.
  527. geraldine veleti from MILAN, Italy writes: As Ken writes it is not pleasant to live under a police regime. And this is what is slowly happening in Canada. The signs are there, and unless something is done, it's one step at a time folks. Do you really want your beautiful country to become a police regime? However, after many cases of police abuse having gone unpunished and like the recent RCMP taser death trying to get covered up by the rcmp - or the recent off duty cop beating up a taxi driver in ottawa and not getting arrested (immagine if it had been the other way around) I believe that we have already taken the first steps towards this type of regime. It seems that police forces are beyond and above reprimand, punishment or arrest if they break the law. There is always an excuse for them. They are always right. Come on folks they can't be alwys right. Something is deeply wrong in canadian society if police forces can get away with wha they have been getting away with in the last years.
  528. Ken Woodwords from Ottawa, Canada writes: Kam So from Victoria, Canada writes: The women should just hold the rail and not show attitude. Problem solved.

    If it happens to you just do that. I think that's how it is in China, obey to whoever wears a uniform.
  529. geraldine veleti from MILAN, Italy writes: Ken, but that is exactly what is happening to Canada. OBEY TO WHOEVER WEARS A UNIFORM OR you get tasered, get handucuffed for not hanging on to a rail and DARING to question the police authority.
  530. Mahat MaCoat from Fort Erie, Canada writes: This is just another example of foreingers coming to our country and not learning our stick-figure signs. Come on people. If you want to reside and educate yourself in our perfect country you will have to learn our stick-figure language.
  531. mary tell from cadillac, Canada writes: I dont see the problem here. The sign said hold the rail for your safety and that is what you should do. If she had fallen while not holding the rail she would have sued, mind you, that is what she will probably do now. These type of people ( I dont mean all of them) who come to live in a country like Canada from places where their freedom is limited, seem to have a chip on their shoulders and we are the recipient of their anger. I think they should be grateful to be allowed to come here and if following the rules is what is ask of them they should follow the rule like everybody else! Small price to pay to live in this great country!
  532. john smith from Canada writes: I am more and more proud I live in Canada:

    there is a law here that forces me to hold elevator rail with one hand. you see it is your government trying to protect you. they even hired police officers to enforce this law.

    any lowlife here that has problem with it?
  533. J A from Ottawa, Canada writes: geraldine veleti: I totally agree with you. I too have lived in many different parts of the world and can clearly see that there is a problem re police and other uniformed professions in Canada (and the US). This society has a rather strangely, or can I say naively, devotional attitude towards police, fire services, customs, armed forces, etc. I guess part of the reason is that they have never really gone through totalitarianism or war. The signs of sliding towards some form of fascism is definitely there, but I hope the Canadian democracy would put a stop to it before it is too late.

    I have also recently found out that the school children here have to sing the national anthem to the flag every day. It sounds really creepy to me. I doubt if our Canadian friends would be able to see why I am not comfortable with this.
  534. geraldine veleti from MILAN, Italy writes: John Smith. VERY FUNNY hahahahahhaha. Maybe the government should hire police to make sure we blow our noses?? Or make sure we put clean clothes on every day. Make sure we take a shower when dirty? I could go on and on ..............
  535. la globulle Monsieur from bonus malus, Canada writes: after having sheepishly obeyed the policeman's orders although I had done nothing wrong,I suddenly realized that 35 years of this miserable existence here had finally done the trick:I had at last become Canadian!
  536. Paul Harker from Ottawa, Canada writes: I hope she gets an apology for being so roughly treated (and also gets her money back).

    If the authorities are really so concerned about this safety issue, they should have much more prominent signs.
  537. hanna h from Vancouver,BC, Canada writes: I guess Sudan must be a great country, lawless and government free..
  538. Montgomery Scott from Boise, United States Outlying writes: The issue at hand is far more serious than the 'escalator rules'.
    Who decides what fineable actions to enforce? the next step in a totalitarian dictatorship is coming. Worship and obey the 'rules' of these power brokers, or be killed...

    The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
    The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
    The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity.
    ...
    somewhere in sands of the desert
    A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
    A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
    Is moving its slow thighs, while all around it
    Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
    The darkness drops again; but now I know
    That twenty centuries of stony sleep
    Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
    And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
    Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

    Turning and turning in the widening gyre
    The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
    Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
    Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
    The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
    The ceremony of innocence is drowned;

    Sorry for changing the order.

    The Poem by William Butler Yeats:
    The Second Coming
  539. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: The European comparison is interesting. There are no borders there. You wander from country to country uninterrupted oy anyone. If there are traffic cops, there are far fewer of them. Some big train stations have armed guards (kids with guns), such as in Marseille.

    I'd love to see a comparison of the kinds of law enforcement efforts made by us vs. them. I know we waste a whole lot of police effort over here on failed policies such as the war on drugs and traffic offences.
  540. akber khan from mount albert, Canada writes: you j ratee you have no idea...?lol
  541. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Every breath you take
    And every move you make
    Every bond you break
    Every step you take
    Ill be watching you

    Every single day
    And every word you say
    Every game you play
    Every night you stay
    Ill be watching you

    ...

    Every move you make
    Every vow you break
    Every smile you fake
    Every claim you stake
    Ill be watching you

    ....

    Oh, cant you see
    You belong to me
  542. Crusty Curmudgeon from Ottawa, Canada writes:

    This is the same province that fines entrepreneurs for not having their store signs in French.

    Enough said.
  543. sleazy Silvester from Canada writes: James Seymour from Carrollton, United States writes: And another mindless liberal bites the dust! hahahahahahahaha

    How's that republican party doing these days, great support from within, great legacy in recent history, ya there doing great, thanks for your political insight.
  544. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Whoops. by The Police.
  545. Skeptical Observer from Canada writes: The official who fined and arrested this lady needs to be fired.

    This reminds me of a new story a while back where a female officer purposely aimed a taser at a mans genitals and tasered him for not getting into the back of the police car fast enough.

    Is it all those who apply to enforce our laws, male and female are power hungry and want to go on power trips for their ego, lack of self esteem or anger management problems.

    Or another news story where a man was filming the police beat his son only to have been tasered and his film taken away.
  546. Montgomery Scott from Boise, United States Outlying writes: M. Pantouflard from Montreal, Canada writes:
    my point is that the handrail was incidental, the arrest was for not reacting to a police instruction and that could happen anywhere on the planet.

    YES, it is a brave NEW WORLD, and it is run by cowards who lack morals and judgement.
    I guess that this person would submit to any request without dissent, even if it means the loss of dignity, rights, libery, and, even, LIFE.
    OBEY ME, or DIE! (Satan)
  547. James Seymour from Carrollton, United States writes: And another mindless liberal bites the dust! hahahahahahahaha
  548. Skeptical Observer from Canada writes: Pantouflard, Not obeying a request by police to stop speeding is and adequate to issue a fine, and in certain circumstances arrest.

    Not obeying a request to hold on the hand rail is an entirely different matter altogether.

    Actually the statement if said by any other person that was not in uniform would be considered very disrespectful.

    The police is not your mommy or daddy. They dont have the right to spank you if you fail to hold onto the rails.
  549. Rudy Haugeneder from victoria, Canada writes: Too many laws made by people who have nothing to do but write laws and rob individuals of the ability to make decisions while also robbing people of rights.
    That's why it is important to vote in elections: to stop this rape of rights. Otherwise the slide towards this rape will continue until no individual rights remain.
  550. censured ... from Canada writes: perhaps the officer should consider a career with the YVR RCMP detachment...I hear they are hiring...you get a great pension...and a Taser.
  551. M. Pantouflard from Montreal, Canada writes: Certainly OTT behaviour on the part of the low-level police involved ... however, there is an article this morning in La Presse (major French language newspaper here in Montreal) that gives a bit more detail. There are signs at the entrance to the station requesting the handrail be held for safety reasons - this she did not do. The police asked her three times to hold on and she was pretty snitty with them, never a good way to react to police. They then arrested her NOT for failing to hold on the rail but rather for thrice refusing to obey a request - in other words the police had backed themselves into a corner and in order to save face made the arrest. Unforgivable, but that's what dumb people do when given authority ... nyway, my point is that the handrail was incidental, the arrest was for not reacting to a police instruction and that could happen anywhere on the planet.
  552. Rob b from moncton, Canada writes: yves couture from montreal, Canada writes: Rob b 'This is Canada'. Yes, Canada, a place where hundred of Quebecers were put in jail for no reasons in October 1970, a place where people are tasered, a place where first nations people are often treated like cattles and fill our jails... A place where a new Brunswick school administrator received death threats because he ended a 19th century chauvinistic habit of forcing children to sign the national anthem.... A place where legitimate protest by Tamouls, for example, is received by most citizen as if there sacred right to commute must preceed everything... Let's not be so rahrahrah about Canada.------------------------oh, you're one of those people are you? Reaping the rewards of Canada, but not willing to acknowledge it. Only the bad stuff you read somewhere. I bet you're not even old enough to appreciate that good people have died to give you the freedom you have today. All you can say about it is how pathetic this freedom is. How about comparing it to some other countries before making Canada sound like some kind of dictatorship. None of your examples, though, are what we are talking about here. We were talking about someone being arrested for disobeying a 'suggestion' to use a flipping hand rail. And yes, we ARE better than that in Canada. I don't care what kind of dirt you bring up, it's not part of the 'norm' to do these things here in Canada!....so RAH! RAH! RAH! Canada! We have a higher standard than the rest. That's why this is the best country in the world.
  553. Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes: This current trend towards mindless mass rebellion for the sake of rebellion, as demonstrated on this forum and others like it, is actually an incitement to increased police presence. So-called police states rarely, if ever, arise within a law-abiding populace but in response to anti-police agitators fomenting dissent. Check your history, if you don’t believe me. Those of us who respect the laws of the land and choose to air our grievances in court are actually keeping the police presence in check, while those of you who are unlawfully contentious and combative are creating a greater need for policing.

    You don’t like a particular law? Then go to court and contest it. We’re blessed here in Canada to have the right to do that. Can’t afford a lawyer? Apply for legal aid. Again, we’re blessed here in Canada to have such a system in place. It’s not perfect, but it’s better than letting disorder and chaos rule. Being rude to police officers because you don’t agree with a law is ill-bred, counter-productive and, quite frankly, childish.
  554. J Stratton from Canada writes: Of the 16 injured in a prior incident - how many of the 16 injured were holding the handrail. How many of those not holding the handrail were not injured.
  555. little bowpeep from Canada writes: Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes:So-called police states rarely, if ever, arise within a law-abiding populace but in response to anti-police agitators fomenting dissent. Are you sure about that. Canada currently has HRC (unconstitutional and a big kangaroo), Family and Marriage Act (unconstitutional and protected making them illegal kangaroo courts), may instances in which people can be fined and are not allowed to fight (kangaroo justice). Police who never lose their jobs no matter how far outside the law they are (kangaroo justice). And a social, political and monetary elite that never go to jail (kangaroo justice). Take you choice madam.
  556. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Again not condone the actions the officer who somehow sees it as his duty to authoritatively demand someone to who hold onto the handrail, if such a petty bylaw didn't exist there would have been no incident. It's trend towards more and more restrictions on innocuous behavior and actions that is most unsettling. Laws and bylaw keep getting added to books while few ever come off. Unfortunately, it isn't possible to legislate against death or enact laws that will eliminate all accidents, nor do I believe it desirable to try. We should be able to recognize the safety factor in a handrail bylaw, for instance, is really so miniscule that its existence is farcical. Yet we daily continue enact such laws and bylaws. Which one will be the straw on the camel's back that crushes our human spirit and makes our lives a joyless experience. Our freedoms and liberties are not things that magically appear or are magnanimously bestowed upon us by those who have held the levers of power in the past, but because we as a society have demanded and fought for them, often through acts of civil disobedience The danger in a country such as ours is not the police or military seizing power it's us giving them the power with one little seemingly insignificant bylaw or law after another.
  557. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Ms. Creamer, obey the police, period, appears to be your motto. Most of us appear to disagree.

    Because they have increased authority to stop and search us without cause. To extract our blood and breath. To entrap us into committing a crime we would not otherwise commit. To cause us harm with impunity. To publish our names upon release and on lawns. To keep secrets when they themselves are alleged to have abused authority.

    And on and on.
  558. Pierre-Yves P from Canada writes: .
    To One More Thing from Montreal, Canada :

    "Because bureaucracies can't reason, as Pierre-Yves P points out, those people entrusted with representing them must. That police officer didn't."

    Wishful thinking: bureaucracies are made of bureaucrats; a bureaucrat who dares reason, including a police officer, stands a good chance to land himself in trouble. But if he just follows the rules, however idiotic, he's safe. Better a disaster fostered by following the rules, than a minor inconvenience arising from thoughtful initiative.
  559. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Yves, you bring some excellent insight to this forum, written quite nicely. Though I think the threat to our liberties is much greater than you allow, if we continually quietly acquiesce to nonsensical demands of our authority figures
  560. L M87 from Calgary, Canada writes: Some of the bar bouncers are smarter than some of the cops I've met. Then again, some of the cops I've met are smarter than some of the bar bouncers. Maybe the only difference is that one of these guys gets to carry a gun.
  561. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Bureaucracies operate in the "corridor of relative indifference." Stray outside. like this PO did, and loook what you get.
  562. Bob M from Canada writes: A lot of these so-called "cops" are members of a notorious motorcycle club. They are setting up various extortion rackets. Free enterprise.
  563. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: A small thought...is it always possible when on an escalator to hold onto the handrail. Might we not be carrying bags , laptops, holding onto children...you know, like having both hands engaged. And no it's not always possible on a busy escalator to set things down. Do we really not a bylaw pertaining to how to use an escalator. Can anyone rationally make the argument we do?
  564. Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes: little bowpeep from Canada -- as I stated previously, our system isn't perfect, but I'd still choose it any day over lawlessness and chaos. Your references hardly qualify as "police state" conditions; if you're unhappy with the laws of the land or the governing elite or the police, take your grievances to court. My experiences with Canada's justice system have actually been quite positive and satisfactory. Simply labelling every legal decision or enacted law you don't agree with as being "kangaroo" will not get you anywhere.
  565. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Charlotte, can civil disobedience ever be considered a justifiable act of rebellion?
  566. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: mr Acute, I hope you're making your comments tuckered out from a successful round of golf
  567. Sassy Lassie from Canada writes: We the people tell our politicians what laws we want enacted, it's a science it's called "Criminology" alas the Nanny Nation lovers have hyjacked this country and instead of working for the unwashed masses they edict what we can and cannot do. We pay these people not the other way around, I will not cede my liberties to small minded over paid snivel servants, cops, meter maids, poiticians, revenue Canadastan etc. Give me liberty or give me death, I do not bow before my elite betters. Quote:==========geraldine veleti from MILAN, Italy writes: John Smith. VERY FUNNY hahahahahhaha. Maybe the government should hire police to make sure we blow our noses?? Or make sure we put clean clothes on every day. Make sure we take a shower when dirty? I could go on and on .............. End quote:----------------------------- Sadly that is exactly the kind of society the socialist left want to create, read some English newspapers from Europe your blood will turn cold. Freedom died there a decade ago and our liberties are being negated in the name of saftey, tolerance and ending hate on a daily basis. In England they want to remove over weight dogs and kids from their homes cause being fat is domestic abuse. I knew Quebec was on the path of to being a Socialist Utopia, fascism seems to appeal to the people. Bow before your Liberal Masters Quebec, you don't seem to mind Nanny turning your province into one giant "Victim" province. I wish the rest of Canada wasn't being forced to pay for your path to tyranny, I mean Liberal Utopia.
  568. Mark Donners from Toronto, Canada writes: Come on people, there is a solution to this. Everyone must refuse to hold onto the handrail. When the police come EVERYONE talks back to them. That's where the would be facists back down, paranoid as they are, they fail when the population refuses to cooperate like obedient slaves. Harper and his thugs are a gang of criminals and a throwback to facism. Harper was an ally of Bush and is the last remaining Bush clone. His gang of thugs are responsible for a environment and economy wrecking, self serving and corrupt, war mongering dictatorship which is destroying Canada on every level in their efforts to install a Nazi state. The population sinking into a submissive and bootlicking apathy is exactly what the psychotic Canadian government wants. Harper and company are students of Hitler's system to control and brainwash the German public in order to make facism take hold. The Canadian government should have every last MP and government official summarily thrown out of office and the government of Canada rebuilt from scratch.
  569. Arnold Zuckenheigerberger from Canada writes: If you really want to get inside their way of thinking, visit

    http://forums.blueline.ca/

    Register and start reading, make a critical comment and you are banned.
    Before that happens just look around on that forum.
  570. yves couture from montreal, Canada writes: Joh Ratte,

    I entered this discussion to add "another angle". Not to contest the obvious: that the police can use its power badly and that we should be wary of them.

    The other angle was that in my view too many people indulge in non-sense about Canada being a police State. We probably have more freedoms to act as we wish today as in most countries and most periods of history.

    But there is the nanny State thing. I agree with an earlier post: in this case, there should only be signs telling us it may be preferable to hold the rail, without making it mandatory. This way, no police would feel they have a duty to make the bilaw respected.

    This reminds me of a bilaw that I've read in a bus, in Paris. There were some seats reserved for "special" customers. The list was very precise and hierarchical :
    - war amputy ;
    - war veterans ;
    - pregnant women ;
    - blind people ;
    - the disabled ;
    - old people.
    Each time I read that I kept imagining what would happen if people of all six categories came at the same time for a seat... If the war amputy was any gallant, wouldn't he give his seat to the pregrant woman ? The blind man could doubt she is really pregrant and ask to touch... Knowing the French, this would make a nice farcical situation...

    Yes, the bureaucrats who imagines all that are rather silly. But more often than not, they just create rules for which there is a demand.

    The way I see it, the larger issue is only partially a case of the State vs us. It is also a case of us (our demands for security and well being) vs us (our liberal democrats impatience with any authority)

    Anyway... More than 500 posts... A sure sign of coast to coast poor weather.
  571. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Sassy Lassie, one rant too many.
  572. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Charlotte, A second question directed your way. Though your experiences have always been 'positive and satisfactory', can you envision and concede for others this may have not always been so? And as a corollary, If after your experience with the justice system you still felt aggrieved, would your position in this forum be different?
  573. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: The weather is sure lousy in the recession-proof nation's capital. A $1 billuion defence contract announced today (buildings and admin, no weapons).

    But I take the bus now and then. And I admire bus drivers who tell those sitting to give up their seats to older or pregnant passengers.

    Those are orders no one ignores or argues.
  574. Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes: joh ratte -- justifiable to whom? Civil disobedience that arises in response to situations that are, for instance, contrary to natural law (such as the state ordering the slaughter of all first-born children) or contrary to international law (such as the state contravening the Geneva Conventions by vaccinating people against their will) would, in my opinion, be occasions where rebellion against the state would be justifiable. However, civil disobedience arising from a woman's refusal to abide by a law that states she should hold onto an escalator handrail in order to protect both herself and those riding the on the escalator with her is, in my opinion, not an instance of justifiable rebellion.
  575. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Ms. Creamer, this is where you and the rest of the world part company. Enforcing a "hold on to the handrail' rule by handcuffing, interrogatingand detaining the transgressor is unjustifiable under any circumstances, and no matter how lippy she was.
  576. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Yves, again I agree with much of your post, the yammering cries of already this being a police state are over the top, and it may seem I'm part of this crowd, though I think I"m only being vigilant against the future possibility. I consider the possibility of any State slipping into a totalitarian one is always a very real one. Secondly, I'm not sure about the enacting of rules because there's a demand, I think the standard should be because there is a justifiable demand. Often rules are enacted because our elected official feel they need to be seen doing something, anything. I'd be happier if our politicians felt more comfortable resisting more of the demands of their more shrilled constituents
  577. matt s from Canada writes: yves couture from montreal, Canada writes: The other angle was that in my view too many people indulge in non-sense about Canada being a police State. We probably have more freedoms to act as we wish today as in most countries and most periods of history.

    -------

    Yves, I want you to try something for me. I want you to read the criminal code of Canada. Start at part 1, section 4 and read through to section 841. After that, read the civil code... Of course there is by-law and provincial law as well. Read those after, province by province, city by city. I'll check in with you in 2012 and see how you are progressing.
  578. Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes: joh ratte -- Whether my experiences with Canada's justice system were satisfactory or unsatisfactory, it would not alter the fact of the utterly trivial and peevish nature of this woman's complaint -- so no, my position on this forum would not change.
  579. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Richard, there isn't as many people on your (my) side as you think. And I don't think the line is always nor can be clearly defined.
  580. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Mr. Ratte, then I'll repost:

    You (Richard Sharp, from Gatineau, Canada) wrote: Questioning authority must never die out or we're done. If you are stopped and interrogated for no apparent or legitimate reason, ask all the questions you want. You can even be lippy to some extent.

    And the police response is to be courteous at all times. Never to use disproportionate force or take any other potentially harmful action without a damn good reason.
  581. yves couture from montreal, Canada writes: Matt s

    You're a bit of a sadist, aren't you ?

    More seriously, you raise an interesting topic : are laws limiting freedom or are they creating the conditions for everybody's freedom to be respected?

    I'll pass on this on for now !
  582. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Charlotte, we continue to disagee. I think by Ms. Kosoian action in this instance, not quietly and politely accepting this the officer's actions and with the ensuing hullabaloo, that very few people in the future will have to risk a $100 fine for the trivial infraction of failing to hang on the handrail. And the officer involved will probably become a more effective and professional agent of the law.
  583. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: If I don't hold on I can't keep my balance on the escalator. Clearly, this woman was doing some kind of balancing act while she rummaged through her bag.
    How should this situation been handled?
    The officers should have said "It is against the law NOT to hold on. Please do so"
    And if she said "no" they might say "we insist".
    And she says "I don't have three arms. Get lost".
    Now what?
    The officers say" "You have to do it"
    And she taunts: "No way... etc.....etc"

    So, do they just think "screw it" and let her be?
    I don't think it works that way. If someone flaunts the law and disobeys them, the officers have to act. If Bela had said "oh, yeah, ok", there would have been no issue.

    Otherwise, the officers could have ignored her. That would have been the alternative.

    The point is if officers SEE an unlawful act and they tell the person to STOP and the person says NO even after being asked TWICE they have no choice but to detain by force.

    Am I wrong? Isn't it how it works? You can't say no to them or you will be arrested.

    Didn't Bela know this when she was giving them back talk? She was skating on thin ice. Surely she should have known that.
  584. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: M. Couture, I think in terms of rights and freedoms. The right to be left alone. The freedom to do what you will.

    The kicker is they come with obligations. To stay out of other peoples' faces. To respect the (legitimate) exercise of authority.

    Generally-speaking, swearing and name-calling do not violate any of the above.
  585. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Yves, you've nailed the crux of the debate.
  586. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Ms. Morrow, you are obviously privy to far more about what happened than the rest of us. But, when you get down to it, the answer is yes, the officer could have realized his folly and moved on.

    Instead he got caught up in something way bigger than him. Like this thread.
  587. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Charlotte, do you get the impression Richard and I are a tag team?
  588. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: Repost. Quebec is extremely corrupt. In what other Canadian jurisdiction could two criminal gangs be able to hold a "secret" meeting in the basement of the Provincial Supreme court, in the Provincial Capital, to "settle" their differences and distribute turf? As happened with the Hell's Angels and the Banditos some years ago.

    This after many bystanders, including children as young as 5 years old, were killed during turf wars between these gangs. On school grounds, no less.

    Not to mention the assassination attempt on a journalist who was accurately reporting the situation.

    As bad as the RCMP in BC and elsewhere in Canada may be, nothing else in Canada matches what is considered routine police performance in Quebec. At any level.

    This performance is well and thoroughly documented. Over many years. And no whining about "racism" will refute this.

    Indeed, that whining about racism when political and police corruption in Quebec is raised is a severe form of denial of reality.

    Deleting my provable and documentable posts is lame and pathetic. Especially when every single thing I say is documented.
  589. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: I so very much enjoy humour in debate. Good on you, partner.
  590. Jake Smith from Canada writes: Yves,

    Sorry, my comments were objective opinion based upon your lack of outrage for a woman being handcuffed for not holding a handrail.

    Maybe a ticket since she broke a bylaw.

    In a free democratic society, we have police handcuffing for lack of manners and killing via taser for wielding a stapler.

    I can't believe you can't see something wrong with this. Moreover, many of us have crossed paths with cops that may have stopped us from speeding and their mannerism may clearly have been confrontational.

    I have met cops who are very polite and professional, and we have some in our family.

    However, like any other profession, there will always be bad apples. Regrettably, the police cover for each other, as opposed to dealing with them like any other citizen that is in conflict with the law.

    Then again, we have lots of white collar crime here in Canada, and a former PM that claims if you don't ask him exactly the right question, you can't accuse him of lying. If I was cross-examining Mulroney, I wouldn't mince my words. Nor would I mince my words with the police that killed the polish fellow with the taser.

    The law came down hard on the teenager that killed the cop's daughter, and the law should come down hard on others regardless of whether they are a former PM, RCMP officier or investment banker.
  591. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Mr. Ratte. meet Mr. Smith. I see a team forming!
  592. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: To join though, I think Mr Smith should have to agree to refrain from personal invectives.
  593. yves couture from montreal, Canada writes: Jake,

    The polite way to debate is not to question the IQ of people who do not share your views. I don't care personnally, since I find any reference to IQ rather childish.

    But you sure didn't help others to see you as an "objective" debater by questionning others intelligence. And I doubt geniune defenders of rights would go down using personnal attacks. Let's leave that to the Goebbels types.

    Orest Zarowsky

    Are you competing for the most absurd post ? You suggest that Quebec police routinely does far worst than what was done to this Polish man in Vancouver... I wonder what kind of "worst" thing you're thinking of...

    As for organised crime, yes, the situation was terrible. It improved a lot, though. And the last time I check, Quebec had among the lowest level of crime in North America, including Canada. Check your numbers, you could have some surprises. Toronto, for exemple, is a much more dangerous city than Montreal, nowadays... As for Vancouver, better not say anything.
  594. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Aaaah. Rules.

    1. We believe in the sancity of life. Thou shalt not kill (except fetuses at some unknown point).

    2. We believe in the sanctity of the person. This dude is free to do what he wants, as long as he doesn't harm others or, to some degree, himself.

    3. We believe in the sanctity of property. No matter how ill-gotten, you get to keep it, and pass it on to your criminal kids.

    k. Maybe my heart isn't in no. 3.
  595. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Yves, this time I'm in complete agreement with your post. To Mr Smith's credit he did apologize. I say clean slate.
  596. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Ms. Morrow, you are obviously privy to far more about what happened than the rest of us. But, when you get down to it, the answer is yes, the officer could have realized his folly and moved on.

    Instead he got caught up in something way bigger than him. Like this thread.
    --------------------------
    No, it doesn't work that way. When a cop tells you to do something and you don't you get arrested. That's it.
  597. George BrownIII from Christmas Island writes: These uniformed idiots would make the waffen ss or gestapo feel like underdogs.
  598. matt s from Canada writes: Yves, the comment is rhetorical. I have questioned on several occasions how it is reasonable to expect average Canadians to follow the law in it's entirety. Just going over case law regarding one instance can be a herculean task, let alone having a grasp of the whole thing. Laws in this country are in desperate need of simplification. This kind of knit-picking is atrocious.
  599. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: I should have added , let's save the invectives for those in authority who are abusing their positions, consequences be damned.
  600. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Hey matts, you are looking for solutions. In Quebec they have a civil code (like in France and lots of other places). There's a rule for everything and it covers the private sector.

    It is no secret that the private sector prefers (Anglo) common law, where money almost always wins.
  601. matt s from Canada writes: I am no expert on Quebec civil code but I can say this for sure. The law is being economized. The more laws you can create the more tickets you can hand out, the more jails you can build, the more prison guards, judges, cops you can hire, of course there is all that admin staff you need. In the end you get a fattened GDP. And as a politician, rosy GDP numbers result in re-election.
  602. Pierre-Yves P from Canada writes: .
    To yves couture from montreal, Canada :

    "More seriously, you raise an interesting topic : are laws limiting freedom or are they creating the conditions for everybody's freedom to be respected?"

    The freedom of not holding the guardrail cannot go without full responsibility for the possible consequences of that choice. If one accepts not responsibility, then one accepts to have their freedom limited. It's a package deal. And this is why a nanny-state will always end-up a totalitarian state.
  603. yves couture from montreal, Canada writes: Matt,

    I khow you were being rhetorical... I was being ironical, with my sadist remark.

    Your last one rings true. Reminds me of those judges, in the US, who had interests in private jails consortiums. The more sentences, the more $...
  604. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: "the law is being economized"...what a well worded phrase and so succinctly accurate a description of what is occuring. Matts I will using it in the future
  605. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: If you took away our spending on military, police and security, border guards, rent-a-cops, prison guards, etc. and all of the infrastructure costs associated therewith, we'd be left with many thousands of in-betweeners who do nothing and a ew befuddled scientists trying to take care of the nation's health
  606. tip finlay from St. John's, Canada writes: Can't believe this thing is still going. Can't believe people like Creamer are still taking up space trying to convince us that black is white. She could be a troll, a cop relative or simply someone who has lived under the thumb so long that she no longer feels comfortable unless someone is telling her what to do. Makes no difference. She's wasting her breath. The other 95% of posters appropriately see this as just another example of the threat that sees Canada sliding unchecked toward a true police state. It may be a less egregious example of abuse of power but intelligent people will understand that any time citizens are accosted by police for no compelling reason, things take on a life of their own and the outcome can be tragic. Some like Marshall have asked what, if anything, can be done to slow the loss of civil liberties and the rise of arbitrary police behaviour. Unfortunately it often takes tragedies like Vancouver airport before people become angry enough to really want to do something. Nor is it easy to reign in a culture of abuse of police power. Two suggestions - others may have better ones. One is to cut-out this story or make a copy, sign it and send it to MP Ed Fast who is the new chair of the parliamentary standing committee on Justice and Human Rights. The other is to take out membership in the Canadian Civil Liberties Union.
  607. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: And this one too.

    http://www.aclu.org/
  608. matt s from Canada writes: Pierre-Yves P from Canada writes: The freedom of not holding the guardrail cannot go without full responsibility for the possible consequences of that choice. If one accepts not responsibility, then one accepts to have their freedom limited. It's a package deal. And this is why a nanny-state will always end-up a totalitarian state.

    --------

    Oy...don't remind me! Consequences dunks my head in the toilet of responsibility constantly!!!!
  609. Red Arrow Crossing from Canada writes: yves couture from montreal, Canada writes:
    As for organised crime, yes, the situation was terrible. It improved a lot, though. And the last time I check, Quebec had among the lowest level of crime in North America, including Canada. Check your numbers, you could have some surprises. Toronto, for exemple, is a much more dangerous city than Montreal, nowadays... As for Vancouver, better not say anything.

    Yves, you should check your numbers again. The lowest level of crime in canada is in big bad ontario. Toronto is one of the safest cities in Canada. I know it seems surprising, what with all the sensationalizing of gang murders here (I'm not against said sensationalization - the public should be constantly alert), but to recent statistics ( http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/03/04/the-most-dangerous-cities-in-canada-overall-crime-score%E2%80%94by-rank/ ), Toronto overall is safer than Calgary, Hamilton, Montreal, St. John, Halifax, Victoria, Vancouver, Edmonton and Winnipeg. That's not to say we can't do better to sweep the scum off the streets...
  610. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Yeah, Red Arrow, get those scum off the streets. You mean Bay Street and Wall Sreet, right?
  611. Tony B. from Vancouver, Canada writes: Kam So from Victoria, Canada writes: The women should just hold the rail and not show attitude. Problem solved.

    I don't really agree with Kam about holding the rail, but i do agree with not showing attitude.
    If it was me (i never hold the rail for hygienic purposes) i would have respectfully stated that with all due respect i refuse to get bugs off the rail.
    I accept a full amount of responsibility if injure myself or others. If they wanna use taser gun on me for being such a danger and nuisance to society then let it be.
    But, before i go down i would make sure at least one of them goes down with me and make it an international headlines. Just imagine "Tragedy Over Handrails" or "Citizen Tasered to Death over Handrails".
    I agree with most people here who think that our police force have taken it too far. We citizens can only take this much of abuse, time will come when masses of protesters will hit the roads and burn the buildings, cars and go crazy when the tolerance towards injustice reaches its full saturation.
    Use tasers on red necks who show bad attitude and refuse to cooperate. But at the same time take all red necks police officers out of the force in order to save the peace and promote mutual respect.
    No place for red necks in our police force!!!
  612. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: Mr. B., that says it all. Our police must be respectful of our rights at all times. They're the ones doing the intruding.
  613. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Tip, she could just be genuinely thankful for life that has turned out wonderfully, truly appreciative of the country where this happened to occur that she can't begin to fathom how anyone could be justified being insubordinate to an officer of the law. Frankly a little too Pollyanna-ish and inward looking for me, but I can't begrudge her the ideal existence if this is indeed the case. Though I do think we can only help the evolution to a more just and free society by vehemently and successfully debating her position and converting the Charlottes of the world (whom there are many more than you accredit) over to our side of the debate. It's the good people, who are perhaps a little too submissive to those wielding power that we need to join us in the never ending battle for freedom to ensure our descendants do not live a totalitarian nightmare.
  614. little bowpeep from Land of the legal idiots, Canada writes: Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes: if you're unhappy with the laws of the land or the governing elite or the police, take your grievances to court. And exactly how do you take a protected people or an unconstitutional law (which can't be appealed) to court, not even a magician can do that. Besides none of this really effects me, since I am always super polite to the police, in fact, if I were issued this kind of ticket (being that I don't live in Quebec) I would have simply found the nearest garbage can.
  615. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: We are passing on debt to our kids and theirs. We are also passing on lost rights and freedoms, due to our timid acquiescence to the wars on crime, drugs, terror, illegal immigration, money laundering, whatever...
  616. Pierre-Yves P from Canada writes: .
    To Yves Couture from Montreal:

    "Yes, the bureaucrats who imagines all that are rather silly. But more often than not, they just create rules for which there is a demand."

    Excellent Yves! You amaze me tonight.
  617. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: George BrownIII from Christmas Island writes: These uniformed idiots would make the waffen ss or gestapo feel like underdogs.
    -------------------
    Don't be ridiculous. These officers in Laval did not MURDER anyone or take part in GENOCIDE. Get things in perspective.
  618. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ yves couture: You may recall the incident in Sherbrooke where two carpet-layers were killed by the SQ in a case of mistaken identity. And nothing was done to them. That secret meeting between the Hell's Angels and Banditios was more recent. As was the assassination attempt on the journalist reporting on the bikers.

    I don't need to make this up. It's all thoroughly documented.

    Quebec's police are out of control.
  619. Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada writes: tip finlay -- you claim to care about civil rights, and yet you cannot even be civil to other posters on a public forum -- what does that say about your sincerity? Yes, by all means, lead the 95% down the path to mindless, conformist civil disobedience solely for the sake of civil disobedience... it's clear to anyone with "intelligence" that forcing people to hold onto a handrail so as not to injure themselves or others is a clear violation of their collective and individual civil rights, and that the very existence of such a law indicates that Canada has slid head-first down the slippery slope into police state territory, next stop full-on facism, with everyone being rounded up and forced to wear lime-green Crocs from three summers ago -- OH, THE HORROR, THE HORROR!... Why not organize a million-man march along the Gardiner Expressway to demand that all handrails be removed from the nation's escalators to preclude any future potential possible civil-rights-violating-handrail-holding laws being passed? LIBERATE ESCALATORS NOW! LIBERATE ESCALATORS NOW! DOWN WITH FASCIST HANDRAILS!!! I'd love to march along with you, but I don't have a stroller, let alone a baby to put in it as a human shield, and you know how we 5% types are always so busy taking up space on public internet forums....
  620. Richard Provencher from Truro, NS, Canada writes: What a terrible thing to occur. Drop the charges and tear up the unnecessary tickets. And send that policeman to good behaviour school.
  621. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Charlotte, touche. I admire your persistence and willingness, even as the underdog on this forum, to engage in civil debate.
  622. Anarandan Ananda from Vancouver, Canada writes: I crossed Osborne street in Winnipeg in 1982. It was the 22nd of December. I went ot the Safeay of River st. The cops stopped me. I was dressed in a man's winter coat and had a man's felt hat. The cops asked for my ID. I was so scared I barely could say anything. I kept quiet. they grabed my purse, got my ID and gave me a Jay walking ticket for not responding their question. Coming from a country as a refugee, having to deal with policemen, at that time, was very frightening. For me 30 dollars was a lot of money then.
    I never understood why they stopped me, why a jay walking ticket. Later I came to realize that black woman and foreigners are fair game.
    Cops have been abusing their power with the collusion of the legal system for a long time. It just keep getting worse. The oligarchy has desigened that way. Cops need to be getting criminals off the street not harrassing people.
    Wake up Canada this is becoming a police state.
    Time to wake up.
  623. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Charlotte, do you think laws such as forcing someone to hold a handrail and others in a similar vein are a tangible benefit to society, and if so, at what point should we consider that we've covered all threats to our safety that we no longer need to enact such laws? Finally, at that point, would we have a vibrant joyful society?
  624. Political Agnostic from Canada writes: Sorry to say I've never read such a load of gibberish in my life. According to the article, the Laval police force, which was apparently responsible for the farce, have not yet provided an explanation.

    Perhaps the explanation if/when it is produced might shed more light on the matter and save yet more unenlightened rhetoric by those who are unaware of all the circumstances.
  625. Zoe Morrow from Canada writes: Anarandan Ananda from Vancouver, Canada writes: I crossed Osborne street in Winnipeg in 1982. It was the 22nd of December. I went ot the Safeay of River st. The cops stopped me. I was dressed in a man's winter coat and had a man's felt hat. The cops asked for my ID. I was so scared I barely could say anything. I kept quiet. they grabed my purse, got my ID and gave me a Jay walking ticket for not responding their question. Coming from a country as a refugee, having to deal with policemen, at that time, was very frightening. For me 30 dollars was a lot of money then.
    I never understood why they stopped me, why a jay walking ticket. Later I came to realize that black woman and foreigners are fair game.
    Cops have been abusing their power with the collusion of the legal system for a long time. It just keep getting worse. The oligarchy has desigened that way. Cops need to be getting criminals off the street not harrassing people.
    Wake up Canada this is becoming a police state.
    Time to wake up.
    ----------------------
    Yeah, Bela does look like a refugee. Maybe that was a factor.
  626. joh ratte from not TO anymore, Canada writes: Charlotte, your opinions expressed indicate a profound trust in the motives of those we entrust with the power to ensure a just society. As you can see more trust than the large majority on this board. To me that indicates an exceedingly pure heart. My view point from the history I've read and my experiences I've had are that level of trust you possess have frequently not been warranted. I think we must always be vigilant against gradual losses of liberty lest end up with too few, which is why I believe the logic behind such laws, followed closely by the officers initial actions are the problems underlying this incident. I consider Ms. Kosoians reaction including her uncivil tone, though not pragmatic, entirely humanly natural and completely justified and as I posted earlier will go a long ways to ensure others do not end up in a similar situation
  627. ss dd from Vancouver, Canada writes:
    Montreal powers-to-be must be truly desperate for money.

    What a bunch of losers...
  628. The Three Faces of Steve from Canada writes: Guess we'd see these jokers in court before paying any fine - could they prove that the woman wouldn't pick up some contagious disease if she'd held onto that moveable public germ-carrier? Do you have to have an extra-low IQ to be hired nowadays by the enforcement agencies? It appears to be the sole qualification.
  629. Luke Ploski from Ontario, Canada writes: Just wanted to add my voice to the need for increase of accountability for cops.

    But definitely NOT just a Quebec issue . . . The Peel region cops (Ontario) are downright disgusting. A bunch of 20 year old punks that couldn't get into university - no class and power-hungry . . . actually one of the reasons I moved my family to Halton.
  630. Levap K from Canada writes: So many irritated commentators! I just wonder, if they know what they are talking about. Those escalators are probably very steep, as some of them are. Most of the commentators probably have in mind just mall escalators.
    649 comments and still open. G&M gallore. No legal liability could come from this.
  631. A Canadian from Cole Harbour, Canada writes: I guess this is way we have a rule about holding the handrail. See the following link

    http://www.edgarsnyder.com/defectiveproducts/elevator/

    LOL
  632. Mike Barton from Masterton, New Zealand writes: whistler fan from Sechelt, Canada: Cubby . from Ontario, Canada: Charlotte Creamer from Halifax, Canada:
    Has Canada become such a sad place that you need to carry ID where ever you go. If I'm driving I carry my drivers licence and if I'm hunting I take my firearms licence but apart from that I never carry any ID.
    I must admit there could have been more detail in the article but there was enough for me to decide that the cop did not handle the situation at all well and the force would be better off without him.
  633. Mike Barton from Masterton, New Zealand writes: Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada
    I'm afraid there are some pretty stupid things done here in NZ too but I haven't come across anything quite as bad as this story.
  634. yves couture from montreal, Canada writes: So here we go again...

    I have to agree with courageous Charlotte Creamer at least on a central point.

    People who pretend to defend individual rights against the State, the police and bureaucrats, but who can not discuss such issues without personnal insults to others, or without the argument that the majority here has spoken so others with "minority opinions" should shut up, those people do not sound sincere.

    Individuals must be protected from abuses from the State and the police, but also from abuses from the majority. One can not be a real rights defender without understanding this basic fact.

    Unfortunately, it seems that many here, as usual, only want to win an argument at all costs, for self pleasing reasons. Any discussion, and society, for that matters, could do without those angry self proclaimed champions of rights. (The Tip Finley type...)
  635. The Mckenzie Brothers from Canada writes: Love to hear comments from the Star's international readers. Come on guys! POST
  636. Alan Savary from Burlington, Bolivia writes: Girl,you are so lucky you didn,t get beat up by at least 9 and then charged with assault. I have a friend who was driving a car the same color as one that was stolen and he was stopped in his driveway told to turn around,and was beat up big time.When he came to and felt his face and said no in a faint voice he was attacked by 8 others.When they realized the car was the wrong one,they charged him with assault called the fire dept to hose away the blood.No Evidence!He is facing 4 mths for that .Consider yourself lucky
  637. marv aberegg from United States writes: “it is forbidden for all persons to disobey a directive or a pictogram posted by the Société.”

    Translation =
    "it is forbbidden for all persons to disobey a directive or a pictogram posted by the Nazi Gestapo"

    That is one of the most chilling sentences I've seen outside of a history book. I thought we were losing it here in the US with all of our stupid "directives" but the Canadians seem to be going for the first place trophy.
    It makes me think I should sell my land near Larder Lake (30 miles w. of Kwebeck) before they make me put handrails up on all the trails.
  638. John Savard from Edmonton, Canada writes: This incident is regrettable, but if people refuse to obey orders from a police officer, they are asking for trouble. She was given a warning, but not only did she not take hold of the handrail, she then failed to cooperate with the officer in her arrest.
  639. Alan Auerbach from Waterloo, Canada writes: Public spaces, especially related to transporting people, are full of advisory and informational signs. "Move to the Back of the Bus." "Do Not Speak to the Driver." "Keep Your Arms Inside." Whatever.

    Who was responsible for passing a law, an actual LAW, meaning that not holding an escalator handrail could lead to legal charges and use of force? And who was responsible for informing the public that this notice or pictograph was not advisory but legally mandatory? Both these groups have a lot to answer for.
  640. TERRENCE O'BRIEN from Canada writes: She is lucky,she could have been tasered!!
  641. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: NKVD and GESTAPO. My family has direct experience with both. Both groups have murdered members of my family. And this incident is classic performance typical of both. Those of you here who are defending this performance haven't got a clue.

    Police work for the public. The public is NOT supposed to kow-tow to the police. Defending and encouraging the police in their abuse of power and authority is not in anyone's interest.

    Not the police. Not the public. And certainly not the politicians who enact really stupid bylaws.
  642. marlene stobbart from High River, Canada writes: This country has become more rule ridden then every before and I wonder where it will end. We have more government with more clerks to think up more ways to justify their jobs. In this case I have to question whether there was an ethic or sexist difficulty as it seems far too heavy handed. Holding a hand rail doesn't always make one safer . As for catching germs - we all need to start wearing gloves- the reason they were made in the first place was to keep hands clean (and warm)
  643. PeterMichael Kor from Canada writes: The police have become goon squads. Sociopaths now work there. No common sense as what their real jobs are, protecting the public.
  644. PeterMichael Kor from Canada writes: It reminds me of an incident 4 weeks ago. The police were on a seat belt blitz, they had to meet a quota of tickets. He had pulled some one off the road. I drove by. The policeman got into his care and chased me. When he got me. I did not know why he was pulling me over. He raged at me. I was shaking and in tears. I did not know that I was to move totally to the next lane when there was a squad car off the road. They apparently passed this law several years ago but did not advertise it. I was shaking for the rest of the day. He kind of realized that he went way overboard in his behaviour with me. I am an old woman. It was not intentional or dangerous.
  645. The Trudeau Salute from Canada writes: Every user in the metro should give cops and security the finger.
  646. M Sakel from Hogtown, Canada writes: Ah, to be reassured that in la belle Province at least, the laws are respected. If only the Toronto Mayor would take a positive page from this incident and police the subway system in a similarly no-nonsense fashion! Why did this incident escalate to such ridiculous proportions? The young woman surely could have been more CO-OPERATIVE with the police in this situation. I cannot understand why she did not comply with such a reasonable request? Of course, the explanation is that she is taking International Law courses and, no doubt, coming from a repressed state, she thought she was free to "lord it over" the Law! This attitude is all too prevalent these days and not necessarily restricted to a particular segment, although young "potential thugs" are more likely to aggressively assert their "rights" to infringe upon the rights of the public. Ms Kosoian is fortunate to have immigrated in this country--and not New York,U.S., where Maria Besedina was yelling for help, while being raped, in full view of two N.Y. Transit workers! Ms Besedina decided to go public after the Court tossed out her negligence suit against the two cowardly subhuman transit officials! Kosoian should get a transcript and start counting her blessings!.... Would the Montreal police/transit workers please take a bow!
  647. David Fermor from Calgary, Canada writes: it's hard to know where to begin. But I know one thing. In future, if I'm riding the Montreal metro I'll be sure to do so with a unilingual English parrot on my shoulder. The authorities will go after the parrot for violating the language laws and I'll be left to continue on my way.
  648. MacGregrrrr The Terrierrrr-st from Rrrrollin' up the rrrrim!, Canada writes: Thank God she wasn't a Tamil immigrant, or the cries of racism would have fuelled this thread for days ... oh, wait ... it's still running hot, isn't it? ... and without any racist accusations ... hmmm ... Well, thank goodness she wasn't a Tamil immigrant and the police weren't Sinhalese immigrants ... or she'd be dead, eh?
  649. roger von kesselner from Canada writes: Actually, there's never a shortage of these types of incidents in Canada, from police departments all across the country, and for many years. There has been a long-standing attitude in this country held by police that somehow the law does not apply to them. They've gotten away with it too because we have cowardly judges sitting on the bench.
  650. joshai destardi from Chicago, United States writes: M Sakel from Hogtown, Canada writes:
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    You are disgusting. Nevermind the fact that "we do not give fines for not holding onto a rail".

    I suppose you would defend any authority lying on an official police record, if it "teaches those young thugs a lesson"?

    Oh, you know not what you do. See: Germany/Hitler, and all of those "good" Germans...because surely "good" people would never do such things?

    naive authoritarian minded stupid head.
  651. Ben Skott from Atlanta, United States writes: I know mnay of you liberals and left wingers will have a hard time understanding this, but the actions of this policeman are a direct result of nanny-state initiatives, laws based on political correctness instead of freedom, and hate-crime legislation.

    All of those items leave police not sure where they stand, they can no longer depend on right and wrong being the same as legal and illegal, and citizens are in the same boat.

    Laws should go back to being based on guaranteeing freedom, and not protecting us from those we don't need or want protection from.
  652. Alex Harry from Canada writes: Hence, the reason she is a single. The woman's got an attitude and won't listen to direction. This whole situation could have been avoided if she took measures to be safe and hold onto the handrail.
  653. Tim Bryson from Claresholm, AB., Canada writes: Ben Skott...how is this sort of regulation a result of political correctness? Your last sentence makes no sense whatsoever.
  654. Fap Fap from Tampa, United States writes: Awww Canada, the New Britain Nanny State.
  655. cuzzo grande from Trail, BC, Canada writes: for a crime as serious as she committed it should be jail time she should consider herself lucky that she only recieved 2 fines.
  656. Douglas Hicton from Trahna, Canada writes: Something that should have made it into the article is the name, address, and telephone number of the arresting officer, so we could leave our comments directly with him.
  657. Richard Sharp from Gatineau, Canada writes: And, oh yeah, how come the police can speed, pull u-turns, park and pull you over anywhere, including where endangering AND get unbelievable overtime deals? lol
  658. Steve French from Windsor (Flint, North), Canada writes: At least she didn't get electrocuted to death with one of those cattle prods the oinkers so love using on us.
  659. Viva la Lance from Alp d'Huez, Canada writes: Tell me you saw her on the news? She should've been locked up and jailed with the clown who the US customs guys busted a month or so back when he asked for a 'please'.

    When did people begin treating the police with such disrespect?
  660. gra gor from Canada writes: |
    | /Oh Canada
    |

    Only 697 comments so far...

    I wonder if this would be ticketed then..
    Cute Blonde Escalator Spin Trick
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTdVo-bqSOI
  661. Fake Name from Canada writes: How does one say "fascist" en francais?
  662. Fake Name from Canada writes: "M Sakel from Hogtown, Canada writes: This attitude is all too prevalent these days and not necessarily restricted to a particular segment, although young "potential thugs" are more likely to aggressively assert their "rights" to infringe upon the rights of the public."

    Which member of the public's rights are infringed because she had her hands full and couldn't hold the rail?

    Right, nobody's.

    kthxbai
  663. Robert Marshall from Canada writes: Welcome to the world we have created people ... this is what happens when personal responsibility is overtaken by a state which is allowed to enforce rules which really should just fall under the laws of common sense.
  664. Robert Marshall from Canada writes: Welcome to the world we have created people ... this is what happens when personal responsibility is overtaken by a state which is allowed to enforce rules which really should just fall under the laws of common sense.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top