Life without restraints

A fiery but peaceful posting.


“...for it is no marvel if those who receive no law, but what their own will and fancy dictate unto them, be deaf unto the voice of that law which is grounded upon reason.”

- Stephen Junius Brutus

Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos


We here at Mounties for Freedom have decided to start a blog.

Being that we belong to a somewhat cloistered profession we hope you will allow us some latitude as we move forward. Most of us, by nature and edict, are not prone to public discourse of the kinds we aim to engage in here. So, to use more technical language, things could get a little interesting.


Now, before that starter pistol fires and we're off, we need to be abundantly clear: We will never

condone clearly illegal behaviour. We believe in the rule of law (more on that in another post) and

that the current path forward is through the values of open civil discourse, a camaraderie of fellow citizens, and – when appropriate – peaceful non-compliance. If you do not believe in these values then you will not find us in agreement and we invite you to move on.


Furthermore, we are doing this precisely because we do not believe our officials have those first two values on their forward looking radar whatsoever. We believe the Canadian people are being abused and misled, and that we have an obligation to present a counter-narrative that is acutely absent from the wider conversation.


SARS-CoV-2?

We also want to be clear that we do not deny the existence of SARS-CoV-2, we do not deny that it

can be serious problem, and we do not deny the burden it has placed on certain professions, people, and institutions. We do deny that it is necessary to incinerate the social fabric of our nation to sufficiently control this situation.


We are neither pro nor anti-vaccination. We fully believe everyone has the right to make their own informed decision based on their individual circumstances. This also includes the right to make their own informed decisions regarding other health related interventions. Different individuals have different levels of risk tolerance. And while we should be considerate of those who may have a lower threshold than our own, a society cannot properly function if we are forced to communally maintain that lowest threshold. We do not seek to belittle or criticize anyone's personal decisions in these matters. We do criticize when these decisions are made for you.


How will the future look for us and our families?

Where this goes from here remains to be seen. This blog is not intended to always be full of serious official statements or messaging. At times we will take a serious tone, to be sure. However, there are already plenty of well-worded, thoughtful, and well researched open letters and statements out there. We're switching things up just a bit here. But we hope you will find anything forthcoming to be encouraging, have some humour (we need it these days), and induce some critical thought no matter what your stance may be. We also hope it will provide a glimpse to show that there is a diversity of opinion and rationale among front-line professionals. We have thousands behind us here.


That all being said; first, we should address the elephant stomping delicately about the room and on the toes of half the people in it: health and medicine via government edict.


“Politicians can do more funny things naturally than I can think of to do purposely.”

- Will Rogers


Man is born free, and everywhere he is wearing a mask

The goal here, and in subsequent posts, is not to throw case law, Charter sections, Constitutional

legal opinions, and Labour arbitration at you, dear reader, all hot and heavy. By now we've all heard and shared enough of that to make armchair lawyers of half the nation.


We want to appeal to your sense of fair and genuine liberty amongst your neighbors. And common sense.


Pretend, for a moment, if you will, that you are going about your life, partying like it's 2019, when

you suddenly find yourself - for completely mysterious reasons - run afoul of the cops. And, upon

being scooped by Johnny Law, you're more than a little confused to learn that you are a thief.


You protest (it's peaceful but your attitude sure is a little fiery) by asking what evidence they could possibly have to support such an accusation. Your attitude levels up like a “Street Fighter” character to “very fiery” (still peaceful) once you learn they do not actually have evidence you've stolen anything whatsoever or done anything wrong. What they have is merely a notion that you might steal something because people steal and you happen to be part of people-kind. After all, theft is a real curve in need of some flattening and if that means your rights get flattened along with it, you'll rest in the comfort of knowing we're all having them flattened together. They tell you it's no big deal and mumble something about two weeks. You suspect they're big fans of Philip K. Dick novellas and mediocre Tom Cruise films, take your paperwork, and walk.


Now, if you're already drawing parallels between this vignette and the past, roughly, 600 of 14 days, you're already thinking of an obvious objection. That objection probably says something like

“kleptomania isn't some respiratory disease so this is all an entirely different sort of thing. COVID

is an airborne virus that anyone can spread to anyone else.” And, if that's your objection, you'd

actually be right. But that's not the problem.


Being stripped of your rights and freedoms

The problem is the entirely new precedent being established and what follows from that. Do you

really want to live in a society where you're always assumed sick until proven healthy? Being

assumed guilty because you might do something wrong is no different in the real consequences it presents to your freedoms. There is absolutely no justification to treat all people as walking vectors of disease merely because the virus exists; and especially so when it is demonstrably of little danger to the vast majority of people. Is this, on any level, sustainable in a free society? Why are we continuing the same measures that research clearly shows did not work in the first place?


But here we are, going around in circles, doubling down harder than James Bond on a bad hand of blackjack, and just like his money, the money your fearless leaders are using to cover this asinine bet isn't theirs. They've long ago shovelled their chips to the center of the table saying “all in.” But you, Joe Taxpayer - you get the bill. It's waiting for you at the grocery store after work.


It's enough to make you want to drop your mask, buy an alcoholic drink-box, water-bottle sorta

thing, and drown your sorrows right there in aisle 11 – Properly social distanced, mind you, on the floor sticker since you're standing after all. You do know that number is entirely arbitrary, right? In some countries you could enjoy your drink-box sorta thing a whole three feet closer to another guaranteed case of COVID-19.


The truth is that the government has no real ability to protect you from this virus. Not without

flattening all of your civil liberties so horizontal that those will never stand a chance of achieving a second wave. Government mandates and policies have a real talent for overstaying their welcome. Just look into why you pay income tax.


You are being lied to!

Your fears - while understandable - are being exploited. Much of this is theatre and you are being coerced into playing a role on the promise they will eventually let you take off the mask, end the show, and go back to playing kick ball with your friends.


But that hissing sound you hear? It's not the drama teacher struggling to breathe through his three N95s that he only wears when he thinks you're not looking. It's him poking holes in all those red rubber balls.


Recess is cancelled, class.


And just like 2021's one dose return of your civil liberties, we'll keep this short and end here, for

now.

1,246 views

Recent Posts

See All