Because, Canada

[R011]

14 minutes ago, R011 said:

No one ever gets the maximum save first degree murderers and then only because there's no discretion in the penalty.  It's very likely she'll end up with a fine and time served or a couple of months in a provincial jail.

The media here always reports the maximum sentence as if it's a possibility  because it's easier and more dramatic than guessing at a realistic one.

And that also assumes she's found guilty and loses on appeal.

[glenn239]

4 hours ago, Tim the Tank Nut said:

are we really going to say that supporting the truckers is a fringe position?

Probably running 70/30 against the truckers at this point.  Parliament passed the emergency measures but the vote was along party lines.  The NDP supported the Liberal government not because they agreed with Trudeau, but because they are so weak they did not want to trigger an election with a non-confidence vote.    Public support for emergency measures going forward looks weak, and I don't think there's much appetite for too severe a punishment of the leaders of the protest.   

This is very much still a crisis in motion up here  - Trudeau has largely failed to provide adequate reasoning for his actions, and as time passes attitudes towards punishing the protestors are quickly fading.   Opinions were clearly against their actions, but the depth of feeling does not appear to be that deep - already there are some concerns that this is a power grab.

[Ivanhoe]

 

 

 

 

[NickM]

On 2/21/2022 at 8:58 AM, BansheeOne said:

Yeah well, that's one way to frame it. Another would be stressing how the Ottawa protesters actively inconvenienced and even harrassed local residents and businesses, while OWS only occupied a privately-owned park. Of course as noted the latter's owners actually reconsidered their first eviction notice, and the police action including horses was directed against people protesting same on Times Square. So in either case, the crowd was interferring with public order; sanitary conditions didn't play a role on either scene.

Again, everyone's always condemning police acting against mostly peaceful protesters they agree with. And there's no shortage of videos proving "unprovoked attacks" when you google for it. Usually nobody except direct sympathizers cares, unless someone dies (on that note, it seems the Ottawa stroller lady recovered from being trampled to death).

 

 

 

 

I'm looking at the VERY BOTTOM story:

Wait...after riots that caused hundreds of millions of dollars and killed dozens of people across the US for 4 years, we have a conviction of somebody who attacked somebody with a hammer?

Edited February 23, 2022 by NickM

[rmgill]

That was actually my link that I was posting as a contrast between the violence of the BLM/Antifa Riots and the violence of words by the Truckers in Canada. Banshee and several others were seemingly confused as to why I'd be fine with cops going around effecting arrests off the streets for folks who were involved in that sort of deliberate deadly weapon assault and less sanguine about the arrests in Canada for mischief with the same sort of aggressive tactics. 

[sunday]

Do not forget the freezing of accounts without court orders, either.

[rmgill]

I suppose I should be surprised that those that are unhappy with my debating technique are seemingly very studious in stepping around that particular point, along with the fact of the delineated valid reasons in Canadian Law for the Emergency powers not being satisfied in and of itself. 

[DB]

18 hours ago, rmgill said:

Evidence from....?  Authority? 

Open ended questions with no relevance...? Designed to draw someone in so they can be mired in more pointless diversions from the moonbattishness of the content that you, and people like you, seem unable to filter with any sort of common sense?

Every time you type, you suck more life out of the forum. A vampire bat with a tinfoil hat with nearly as much time on his hands as Stuart.

[rmgill]

Ad Hominem fallacy because I called out your appeal to authority fallacy. 

You view it as soul sucking because my heterodox and stubborn views conflict with your world view and that causes you some measure of pain. 

The fact is the "fringe" position is what the governments are moving towards based on actual evidence. They pitch it as changed science, it's not. 

The over arching fact is that folks are tired of being told one thing while the 'elites' who implemented the policies do another, and with more examples of the elite being caught doing what they say we cannot do, it's clear that the policies are crap. And those who were defending the policies the whole time were full of it. 

Piling on asset seizure to make their demands to respect their authority does nothing but show them for the petty tyrants they are. That folks here defend that is astonishing. As to quality of content. We thank you for your idea of direct rule by the queen, however juvenile that is, and for your input on how common petrol cans are. 

Edited February 23, 2022 by rmgill

[R011]

54 minutes ago, DB said:

Open ended questions with no relevance...? Designed to draw someone in so they can be mired in more pointless diversions from the moonbattishness of the content that you, and people like you, seem unable to filter with any sort of common sense?

Every time you type, you suck more life out of the forum. A vampire bat with a tinfoil hat with nearly as much time on his hands as Stuart.

Stuart, at least, doesn't lie about what other posters have said.

[Tim the Tank Nut]

assuming the facts are accurate and only 30 percent of the Canadian population supports the truckers then that is a pretty big fringe. 

How many supported the American Revolution when it happened?  Hint, less than 30%.

The problem, as always is that once someone's positions are "unacceptable" then there is no limit to what can be imposed.

Do those of you supporting Trudeau's action honestly not have a sense of how chilling the word "unacceptable" is when uttered by a Prime Minister?

[rmgill]

10 minutes ago, R011 said:

Stuart, at least, doesn't lie about what other posters have said.

I beg your pardon. Did I misread your posting about bicycles being thrown? Or Perhaps of scooters being driven into horses? Or perhaps about someone being too stupid to get out of the way when horses came _BY_. Your points on this was like watching artillery being over/undered but never actually hitting the target. 

Mind you, one of the things that happens on a discussion forum is expression of ideas. Often times I frame rebuttals as a question, open ended so as to offer the person I am rebutting, the opportunity to explain further, clarify or otherwise modify their point. If my question frames what you didn't intend, then feel free to man the hell up and explain further.

Getting butt hurt that I lied about what you said when you're quite patently lying or more charitably, utterly confused about events as we can easily see them represented in video and still imagery is silly. 

 

Edited February 23, 2022 by rmgill

[glenn239]

1 hour ago, rmgill said:

I suppose I should be surprised that those that are unhappy with my debating technique are seemingly very studious in stepping around that particular point, along with the fact of the delineated valid reasons in Canadian Law for the Emergency powers not being satisfied in and of itself. 

This is a good background (Conservative) piece on how things are seen at the moment.  Give it a read,

Matt Gurney: Unless Trudeau can explain what the emergency is, he is abusing his power (msn.com)

 

[R011]

27 minutes ago, Tim the Tank Nut said:

assuming the facts are accurate and only 30 percent of the Canadian population supports the truckers then that is a pretty big fringe. 

How many supported the American Revolution when it happened?  Hint, less than 30%.

The problem, as always is that once someone's positions are "unacceptable" then there is no limit to what can be imposed.

Do those of you supporting Trudeau's action honestly not have a sense of how chilling the word "unacceptable" is when uttered by a Prime Minister?

The people actually protesting really are a fringe, especially the self appointed leaders and nearly all the YouTube video makers being cited.  There's some sympathy for them, but not a lot of actual support and a lot more who think they should have been removed.  Many of the people who are sympathetic believe that even so, they should not have occupied downtown Ottawa and blocked border crossing for so long.   That's the unacceptable actions being opposed.

As for those of us supporting Trudeau's action, which action are you saying we support?  Removing the blockades?  Yes.  very much.  Imposing the Emergencies Act?  I don't think anyone here has done that. 

Note too that while only about a third of Americans actively supported the Patriots, no more than that were Loyalist.  Were two thirds of Americans Loyalist instead of less than half that, the Revolution would have failed.

 

[glenn239]

38 minutes ago, Tim the Tank Nut said:

assuming the facts are accurate and only 30 percent of the Canadian population supports the truckers then that is a pretty big fringe. 

Keep in mind trucker support would have been higher if they'd not overstayed their welcome.  RO11 is correct narrowly that the majority are against the truckers currently, but it's sure as hell not a 'fringe', and Trudeau's support is brittle going forward. 

[MiloMorai]

Well the truckers won't have to worry about being quarantined when returning from the USA. The won't be allowed into the USA because of a criminal conviction.

[R011]

2 minutes ago, MiloMorai said:

Well the truckers won't have to worry about being quarantined when returning from the USA. The won't be allowed into the USA because of a criminal conviction.

Most of the charges laid ware not serious enough to bar entry to the United States.

[glenn239]

23 minutes ago, MiloMorai said:

Well the truckers won't have to worry about being quarantined when returning from the USA. They won't be allowed into the USA because of a criminal conviction.

Sure, if the Democrats win.  If Trump wins, same idea but a different list.

[bojan]

2 hours ago, R011 said:

Stuart, at least, doesn't lie about what other posters have said.

He did, multiple times.

[MiloMorai]

Meanwhile in Ontario,

Eliminating licence plate stickers

Ontario is eliminating licence plate renewal fees and the requirement to have a licence plate sticker for passenger vehicles, light-duty trucks, motorcycles and mopeds, effective March 13, 2022.

All licence plate sticker fees paid between March 1, 2020 and March 12, 2022 for vehicles owned by individuals will be refunded.

[rmgill]

2 hours ago, glenn239 said:

This is a good background (Conservative) piece on how things are seen at the moment.  Give it a read,

Matt Gurney: Unless Trudeau can explain what the emergency is, he is abusing his power (msn.com)

 

I've listened to a number of fringe legal experts and a few Canadian Senators who outlined how the powers as claimed don't seem to fit any sort of emergency. 

I guess the idea of limited powers of government being clearly defined by law and only those powers is now a fringe concept. 

[rmgill]

1 hour ago, glenn239 said:

Sure, if the Democrats win.  If Trump wins, same idea but a different list.

We're not in a war to the knife yet. But the Left keeps pushing it. 

[glenn239]

2 hours ago, rmgill said:

I've listened to a number of fringe legal experts and a few Canadian Senators who outlined how the powers as claimed don't seem to fit any sort of emergency. 

I guess the idea of limited powers of government being clearly defined by law and only those powers is now a fringe concept. 

Actually, and surprisingly, Trudeau has cancelled the emergency measures this afternoon.  Bank accounts are going to be unfrozen.  This avoids a hot potato for the Liberals going forward, but now people are wondering why they were insisting on calling the measures into force when they obviously were not required.

Edited February 23, 2022 by glenn239

[rmgill]

I wonder why. 

I wonder what sort of legal recourse that the folks affected by the heavy gauntlet of Trudeau will have from a violation of civil rights perspective? 

[Mikel2]

2 hours ago, rmgill said:

I wonder why. 

I wonder what sort of legal recourse that the folks affected by the heavy gauntlet of Trudeau will have from a violation of civil rights perspective? 

People in liberal democracies ought to look at emergency laws and the activation thresholds very very closely.