I can't believe the mounties were sent to raid this person's house...

Why is the government so insistent on saving this law? After all, it's archaic. Maybe it made sense in 1938 when it was enacted. But is a law prohibiting the dissemination of information even enforceable in this age of the Internet? Mr. Kingsley risks becoming a cyberspace version of King Canute, vainly ordering the waves of Internet information to cease. (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040614/COKINGSLEY14/TPComment/TopStories)

Well, it could have something to do with the fact that the guy, knowingly and with intent, broke a federal law prohibiting the dissemination of election information...

Funny you should mention this, people are being robbed and told to contact the insurance company without law inforcement so much as visiting their homes. I wonder how many officers were interupted from serious crime fighting for this.

I don't believe the RCMP handles routine break-and-enter assignments, so likely no officers were diverted from serious crime fighting.

I'm sure you get my point eljay. This person's sacrifice is also contributing to upholding our rights and should be given a meddle in my opinion. According to the court's view, it also proves that unjust laws should and can be fought.

tomale, I do get your point, but the fact that the guy was arrested for purposely breaking a federal law is neither surprising nor medal-worthy.

If he wanted to see the law modified or repealed, he could have used legal means at his disposal to lobby for a change.

When faced with insurmountable obstacles such as taking on the system, sometimes the little guy's disobedience is all he has going for him as this case clearly shows.

Nice sentiments, but I suspect you're selective about which plights you'd consider noble and behind which you'd throw your support.

Well of course as I'm sure Paul Bryan chose to pursue the values he held dear. Unfortunately Canadians are accustomed to standing on the sidelines and no person alone can take on all issues of prejudice.

Paul Bryan and some Canadians may hold those values dear, but other Canadians do not. That does not make him a hero and other Canadians apathetic. It's all relative...

I completely agree with your first paragraph. However, comparing the Latimer issue with the Bryan case is somewhat overshadowing the significance of the later don't you think? Like comparing suicide bombers to political protest rallies that slightly get out of hand.

Sorry, I deleted the Latimer comment, but I find the only difference between the two to be one of degree. Both cases are about people doing what they think is right in overt defiance of established laws, and then fighting the good fight against the system and its inflexibility. In both instances, some people will see it as a matter of "doing the right thing" while others will see it as an illegal activity that merits punishment (fines/jail time/etc.).

I guess that depends on the issue and who the significant others are. Do you honestly think a majority of Canadians (citizens that is) would agree Bryan deserves imprisonment over this or that families deserve to be financially ruined and imprisoned for subscribing to satellite TV? These are minor issues I assume most wouldn't be bothered to ponder where as the Latimer case deserves deep analysis. Just an opinion.

I do agree with you that if most Canadians were aware of the issues involved in the Bryan case and regarding signal theft, they would probably agree that the punishments do not fit the crimes.

I suspect, however, that most Canadians would also agree that lawbreaking is not a justifiable method of effecting change and that lawbreakers should be punished to some extent for their actions.

Classic Robin Hood I guess :)

I think since Rosa Parks stood up in the front of the bus that civil disobedience is sometimes the only catalyst for change so kudos to Mr. Bryan.

but

Elections are what legitimize democracies and placing rules on when and how the information can be diseminated is not a bad thing.

Personally I think polls should close at the same time across the country and that results should not be published until ALL polls are closed.

I also think that people who engage in civil disobedience should be prepared to suffer the consequences otherwise what's the point of having civil laws?

I'm not sure what satellite signals have to do with this but I think that people who sell devices to defeat encrypted satellite signals should be thrown in jail. I don't see how stealing satellite signals is an act of civil disobedience like Mr. Bryan engaged in. In my humble opinion, buying HU loaders and reprogramming cards in an act of stealing which is a criminal act.

Huh? Who is referring to stealing satellite signals? I also don't think this is an act of civil disobedience either although I'm sure some people think subscribing to foreign providers is one in the same.

Y'know, I understand using civil disobedience to bring about equality and to ensure the universal application of human rights, but I really don't get how the courts have managed to confuse the human right of freedom of expression (the right to say/write/draw/paint/film whatever you want) with the consumer desire for access to television broadcasts.

The current laws unfortunately appear to lump subscription to foreign providers into the same category as other forms of signal theft, but consumers do have legal avenues they can pursue to try to have these laws changed.

As for Bryan, his point may be well-taken but, because he willfully broke the law, he should face some sort of punishment for his actions. And I agree with Hugh that access to poll results should be controlled since they can bias the remaining electorate and skew the outcome.

The current laws unfortunately appear to lump subscription to foreign providers into the same category as other forms of signal theft, but consumers do have legal avenues they can pursue to try to have these laws changed.
And what would those legal avenues be, a Charter challenge with broadcasters' wallets stacked up against whoever dares try? How equal is that?

No one ever said change would be easy... :P