Would've been cheaper to let the kids rampage the city

Discussion in 'Economics' started by peilthetraveler, Jun 27, 2010.

  1. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100627/ap_on_re_ca/cn_world_summit_protests

    Security was being provided by an estimated 19,000 law enforcement officers drawn from across Canada, and security costs were estimated at more than US$900 million.

    Police said they have arrested more than 560 demonstrators

    So basically it cost them over $47k dollars for each law enforcement officer to do security that day. I thought law enforcement was supposed to be underpaid.:confused:

    Or it cost approximately $1.6 million dollars for each person they arrested.

    Might have been cheaper to just let them rampage the city, and reimburse owners later for all the damage.
  2. there is more than 50% chance most violence was initiated by undercover police

    anyway, we live in police state, just another confirmation
  3. global research.ca has photos of the montebello G7 event in 2007. They have closeups of the boots, all were military / police issue and worn by the "perpetrators". The block group supposedly responsible for the ruckus has a funny name akin to the bloc quebecois...
  4. Its not that black and white and you know it. When you let people take advantage it snowballs out of control. I was talking to my good friend a native of Toronto and he was pissed the cops showed so much restraint. I agree they should have shot them with rubber bullets. You can't let people burn police cars and smash store fronts throwing firebombs. Those arrested were what I believe to be professional anarchists not a bunch of kids. I am alot more liberal than most on this forum but I have seen first hand when you let violence go unchecked it feeds on itself.
  5. BINGO!
    Dan is exactly right. Pros. Even true believers of anarchy hire pros.
    Sonic deterrents, rubber bullets, and that micro-wave heat thang should do the job.
    Light 'em up!
  6. I just dont understand...$900 million dollars for security? Almost a billion dollars!?! We could've started an invasion of N. korea with that kind of money. We could've drilled a few hundred oil wells with that kind of money. How much does tear gas cost anyway? Probably could've had helicopters dropping it like fire retardant, for less than $100,000. Or could've brought one of those ray guns in that cause pain for cheap.

    <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/J1w4g2vr7B4&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/J1w4g2vr7B4&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
  7. The reason I mention it as after the G-20 meeting in Seattle the found a lot of those arrested had been arrested many times before for violence and civil disobedience. Even Whale Wars which I believe in has highly trained pros to battle the fisherman. I am actually in favor of protest and against Bilderberg types but my point is that you can't just allow people to run rough shot it becomes mob violence. Protest one thing rioting no. Or if you want to riot understand that you may be injured or killed don't cry to the ACLU after you start a riot.
  8. :D Your conspiracy theories never cease to crack me up!
  9. I completely agree. I'm all for free speech and peaceful demonstrations, but some of the fuckbags in Toronto last weekend were only there to cause shit. I would have liked to see the cops arrest more of some of these douchebags. They are the reason the city was basically shut down all weekend.
  10. How dense are you? An invasion of North Korea for $900 million?! Get a grip. When you have the leaders of the top twenty countries all in the same place at the same time, the situation is ripe for a terrorist attack. You're the type of person that would be bitching they didn't spend enough on security if something crazy did happen to break out.
    #10     Jun 28, 2010