pfbmgd
Well-known member
It was to raise money for WWI or WWII . A temporary measure to support the war .
|
|
|
Riding during stay at home order.
- Thread starter ACsurge
- Start date
Nikola Tesla
Well-known member
Me and two riders here went to forks and hockley yesterday, exact same observation, very few riders and no cops at all!
All the MPP's at Queen's Park need to vote to invoke the notwithstanding clause to allow these measures to be enforceable on private citizens. Measures against businesses don't need the same level of approval however.
It's not the ticket that is the problem, is the post-ticket process that is going to cause problems for police forces. If everyone does what they should and fights them, if Crown Attorneys refuse to dismiss them all, then police officers are going to have to attend court. Think of the thousands of trials, just to have any sane and reasonable judge agree that without invoking the notwithstanding clause, the tickets are constitutionally illegal.
The $750 ticket, won't lead to increased revenues, won't lead to any meaningful enforcement, and for anyone with any knowledge of the law, they know this is just a scare tactic, and none of the parties at Queen's Park have it in them to invoke the notwithstanding clause.
AllistonGT
Well-known member
Don’t think the notwithstanding clause will Trump our charter of rights and freedoms.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There are two parts to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms that are applicable to restricting your freedoms. Section 1 that allows general restrictions, such as restrictions on hate speech are normally done using this section. Which is a higher bar, and leads to Supreme Court decisions, which any COVID offense would be an uphill battle for the government to fight.
Then you have section 33, the "Quebec Clause", that allows a province to invoke the notwithstanding clause. Which is in effect to American terms, declaring "martial law", and can ignore the majority of the charter.
Which allows provinces to restrict, quite a bit actually, and would allow these actions by not only Ford but other provinces to be deemed legal.
- Section 2(a) – Freedom of religion
- Section 2(b) – Freedom of expression
- Section 2(c) – Freedom of peaceful assembly
- Section 2(d) – Freedom of association
- Section 7 – Life, liberty and security of the person
- Section 8 – Search and seizure
- Section 9 – Arbitrary detention
- Section 10 – General
- Section 10(a) – Right to be informed of reasons for detention or arrest
- Section 10(b) – Right to counsel
- Section 10(c) – Habeas corpus
- Section 11 – General: legal rights apply to those "charged with an offence"
- Section 11(a) – Right to be informed without unreasonable delay of the specific offence charged
- Section 11(b) – Trial within a reasonable time
- Section 11(c) – Protection against testimonial compulsion
- Section 11(d) – Presumption of innocence
- Section 11(e) – Right not to be denied reasonable bail without just cause
- Section 11(f) – Trial by jury
- Section 11(g) – Retroactive offences
- Section 11(h) – Protection against double jeopardy
- Section 11(i) – Lesser punishment
- Section 12 – Cruel and unusual treatment or punishment
- Section 13 – Protection against self-incrimination
- Section 14 – Right to an interpreter
- Section 15 – Equality rights
The courts have already found that certain restrictions of the Charter of Rights were acceptable in our current health emergency, IE the inter provincial travel ban which was challenged and dismissed.
Just for the record.
Just for the record.
The CCLA is in the process of appealing that decision, because the judge screwed up. The legal requirement for reasonable restrictions places the burden on the government to prove it. The judge however placed the burden on the accused, both during the trial and in his judgement. That's going to be an easy win for the CCLA at the Federal Supreme Court.
You are never going to get rid of COVID. This isn't a slow never changing virus like polio or smallpox. We will be living with COVID for the foreseeable future. This notion of "we will get vaccinated and get out of this", is window dressing for the masses. Even the CDC is planning on multiple shots, beyond the initial vaccine roll out.
Hack
Well-known member
Last edited:
The morons that are refusing to follow the guidelines are responsible for the high numbers. That is why we are where we are with covid.
Dumb? Yes!
Then the federal government could activate the emergencies act which does have yet another level of teeth.
People should be careful what they wish for.
They aren't trying to get rid of covid. They are trying to slow down the death toll.
Highest infect rate is in Brampton. Maybe you should drive there with a bullhorn and yell out moron at them?
AllistonGT
Well-known member
People paid the ultimate price for those “freedumds”
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you want to play that game, conscription to administer vaccine to win war against virus seems a lot gentler on the population than sending you to your death.
Last edited:
Other than government data being spotty at best, as they can't find a link for the vast majority of cases. The ones they do find a link to, to justify lockdowns, and measures on businesses is freely available data. ( Ontario COVID-19 outbreaks data - Ontario Data Catalogue ). Grab that 3rd spreadsheet, a quick Pivot table, and group similar things together. And you end up with this.
Personal care services, which includes hair salons, nail salons, etc, which not only have been forced to completely close, they have been closed the longest of any industry, has had a grand total of 103 cases. You are over 5 times more likely to get COVID going to your doctor's office then getting a haircut. Yet here we are.
pfbmgd
Well-known member
Data to many people means nothing . I posted the link many times . Yet people refuse to look at the data .
The problem lies with places of work. There's too many employers (possible morons?) who won't cover a couple days pay for employees that are sick, and should be homebound, or in quarantine.
These are folks who CAN'T afford to take a day off because of the sniffles.
AllistonGT
Well-known member
We are considered essential. We shut down for 2 months starting last march. Just myself and partners stayed working. Our competitors didn't shut down. A client of ours even threatened to get their lawyer involved as she knew we should be running. Not all companies have a choice. We have to stay running. We at work, owners included, wish they would shut ALL manufacturing DOWN.
I know, people who resort to ad hominem attacks very rarely have read facts and came to their own conclusion. They'd rather use feelings and place trust in others to make their decisions for them.
|
|
|
|
|