So, a conviction was handed out to a man involved in a "nippertipping" incident that occurred in 2007. This altercation lead to a car chase that concluded with a car crash that left one man, ironically non-Asian, permanently mentally impaired. The CBC has the story here.
I don't know the exact details of the event but the actions of Trevor Middleton is indefensible.
From what I have read attacks on Asian anglers have been ongoing in the area for several years, so often in fact it developed the name "nippertipping". The attacks have more to do with humiliating the angler than to cause real bodily harm. The attack was typically characterized as being pushed into the water fishing-tackle and all. Trevor Middleton took it further by escalating it to a car chase.
It may be a turf war where local anglers who "don't take too kindly to outsiders" are trying to be as impolite as possible to keep people away. This may be why non-Asian anglers have also complained about being attacked and why the authorities didn't consider the attacks racially motivated.
However race is a factor. Or is it? I have read comments by some locals who were not necessarily defending "nippertipping" but were describing the actions of the Asian anglers that would invite the negative attention they were receiving. To the point, they were, well, jerks. They were over-fishing, fishing illegally, fishing commercially, fishing all night and leaving garbage and human waste lying about, as well as crowding out locals and crossing fishing lines at popular fishing spots and then responding by saying "don't speak English". If this is true then you were pretty much asking for a fight but even so you are still not justified in pushing people in the water no matter how badly they deserve it.
However what happened in Georgian Township just north of Toronto got me thinking. What is a town to do if it rejects multiculturalism? What if it does not want the demographically changing effects that mass immigration imposes? What if it likes its white bread traditional character and wants to keep it that way?
There is little it can do. In Canada we have freedom of movement. People can live anywhere they want (except on native reserves). It can do what the people of Hérouxville, Quebec did by adopting a code of conduct but beyond that there is little.
They do not have the natural defenses that Canada's ethnic colonies have. These "communities" have linguistic, racial, and cultural barriers that invite in people who look, talk, and act alike while repelling those who differ. And no one complains because, in reality, no wants to live with them anyways. If they do it is mostly not by choice but by circumstance.
As much as Canada is self congratulating at being an inclusive society in practice people of differing ethnic origins do not care to live with each other preferring instead to cluster in areas that either start with the word "little" in front of it or ends in the word "town" (and they all end up spelling colony in the end). Talk is cheap and actions speak louder than words and what Canada's immigrant communities are saying via settlement patterns is loud and clear. It is that they want to live among their own and they have the means to keep it that way.
Canadian towns and communities do not have that luxury. They have nothing at their disposal to preserve their character. The Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms compels them to accommodate those who willfully refuse to integrate. If they complain their names will be dragged through the muck with accusations of bigotry and racism. At worst, individuals will be hauled before a Human Rights Commission and financially ruined. It is multiculturalism or else.