Agreed . . . but the sedition laws are not among them. I also advocate for a "Sunset clause" on all legislation. If a law is not used/enforced for ___ years, strike it from the books.
Agreed . . . but the sedition laws are not among them. I also advocate for a "Sunset clause" on all legislation. If a law is not used/enforced for ___ years, strike it from the books.
Is 40 years not enough... We have to learn to be more flexible in our laws and beliefs. Too many of us are to rigid in our beliefs to the point where we can't see the other sides points of view. All people advocating for Quebec autonomy are not guilty of sedition, or at least my understanding of what sedition means.
In law, sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that tends toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority.
In law, sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that tends toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority.
Pretty sure that covers the BQ mandate.
As I said, I understand what the term sedition means, I can look it up as well you know.. Do you really think that applies with the PQ today? I'm not even sure it did then (at least for a majority of the people) and I was already an adult at that time. You are making your decisions on others opinions. The Quebec crisis was a political issue not necessarily a criminal one although there were certainly criminal acts at the time.
Why DOES it have to be so black and white with you?
In law, sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that tends toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority.
Pretty sure that covers the BQ mandate.
Isn't this the exact reason most given for owning guns?
As I said, I understand what the term sedition means, I can look it up as well you know.. Do you really think that applies with the PQ today? I'm not even sure it did then (at least for a majority of the people) and I was already an adult at that time. You are making your decisions on others opinions. The Quebec crisis was a political issue not necessarily a criminal one although there were certainly criminal acts at the time.
Why DOES it have to be so black and white with you?
BQ advocates the break-up of this country in order to create their own. While they do not call for direct violence in achieving their stated goal, there have been such acts in the past. I will stipulate that the main objective at the moment seems more about squeezing every last dollar possible from Ottawa, but that does not change my belief that their long term desire is seditious. The reason I feel it is B&W is because that is how these things are decided . . . by the black and white text of our laws. I am simply saying that I would like to see the legality of the BQ's position tested under those laws. If the interpretation favours the BQ, so be it, but I think it would be a sensible starting point for the "pro-Canada" side to explore. Otherwise, you cede the initiative to the Separatists, and playing defence sucks.
Isn't this the exact reason most given for owning guns?
Mark
In the States there are lots of folks who will tell you that ownership is to protect themselves from the possibility of an over-reaching Government, not so that they can break up the country. A better attempt might have been to suggest that folks in Quebec might want to stock up on firearms if they are loyal to Canada, but whatever . . .
Otherwise, you cede the initiative to the Separatists, and playing defence sucks.
You not a sports fan? Defence wins championships... If you give it legitimacy by pressing the issue you risk arousing sleeping dogs... Don't make a mountain out of a molehill for heavens sake.. There are more colors than black and white...
Not his father's Liberal Party any more . . . from "the State has no place in the bedrooms of the Nation" to, "we'll decide how you can discipline your kids" in one generation. And using the cover of the TRC sham to do it, too.
Gonna bump this one time... So how has everyone's opinion of Trudeau (the younger) changed in the past few months? Mine certainly has. I really thought he was too young and inexperienced to hold his own on the world stage. My opinion has definitely changed. Still a little concerned about deficits and the like but willing to give him the benefit of time..
Mostly agree, Jeff. Right now, most of his actions have been undoing decisions taken by the previous government. Lets see how his government's policies take shape. Things like OAS eligibility dropping back down to 65 might be popular on it's face, but how will it be funded (EI raid? MORE deficit?). Or, how he seemed to be against the TPP while running, but now seems prepared to (quietly) sign on to it after all.
We are likely to see this Province's first assisted suicide this weekend and, while I agree with the notion in principle, I think the proposed legislation from the government goes too far in it's application.
Trudeau being young and inexperienced was not a concern of mine in the election. Yes he is young and yes he is "inexperienced" due too his young age. Not a concern though.
Nor should it be, as he tends to be a consensus style Leader as opposed to a vision one. Eisenhower was similar ly inclined and was likely the best President of the 20th Century.
Comments
Oh come on, that's a little 70's thinking isn't it? I remember those days very well but the current climate is way different.
Legit lol
But ya election is over guys
(Goooooo kwsteve)
IF you are going to have a law on the books, you had best be prepared to enforce it. Sorry, but I think sedition is an appropriate charge.
milo, you say the strangest shit sometimes. do you have any idea how many old, outdated and stupid laws are on the books still?
Dumb Laws in Canada. Crazy Canada Laws. We have weird laws, strange laws, and just plain crazy laws!
Pretty sure that covers the BQ mandate.
Why DOES it have to be so black and white with you?
Isn't this the exact reason most given for owning guns?
Mark
BQ advocates the break-up of this country in order to create their own. While they do not call for direct violence in achieving their stated goal, there have been such acts in the past. I will stipulate that the main objective at the moment seems more about squeezing every last dollar possible from Ottawa, but that does not change my belief that their long term desire is seditious. The reason I feel it is B&W is because that is how these things are decided . . . by the black and white text of our laws. I am simply saying that I would like to see the legality of the BQ's position tested under those laws. If the interpretation favours the BQ, so be it, but I think it would be a sensible starting point for the "pro-Canada" side to explore. Otherwise, you cede the initiative to the Separatists, and playing defence sucks.
In the States there are lots of folks who will tell you that ownership is to protect themselves from the possibility of an over-reaching Government, not so that they can break up the country. A better attempt might have been to suggest that folks in Quebec might want to stock up on firearms if they are loyal to Canada, but whatever . . .
You not a sports fan? Defence wins championships... If you give it legitimacy by pressing the issue you risk arousing sleeping dogs... Don't make a mountain out of a molehill for heavens sake.. There are more colors than black and white...
Cracks starting to show in the lovefest?
Instead, we are told, the key is to keep the debt-to-GDP ratio going down. Which just happens to allow for deficits as high as $25 billion.
odds? 10-1 on Trudeau..
Trudeau is the consumate politician, Trump more the consumate buffoon..
We are likely to see this Province's first assisted suicide this weekend and, while I agree with the notion in principle, I think the proposed legislation from the government goes too far in it's application.
We are going to still be paying this off by the time Justin's kids become Prime Minister...
:bs:
Harper's debt has already disappeared into the Ether never to be heard from or spoken of again.