News:

SMF - Just Installed!

 

The best topic

*

Replies: 11482
Total votes: : 5

Last post: Today at 03:24:53 PM
Re: Forum gossip thread by Brent

Go home haters

Started by RW, August 26, 2017, 07:32:13 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RW

Too high to care too :D
Beware of Gaslighters!

Angry White Male

Quote from: "RW"Too high to care too :D

OK.



I won't start an argument, nor a discussion on this matter now.



I have to be up in a few short hours, to build new services for the new Chinks that buy their way here.



It is what I do!



We'll talk maybe tomorrow!  Rest well.

Harry

Quote from: "RW"Too high to care too :D




 :laugh3:

Odinson

Quote from: "RW"And stupid AntiFa idiots attacked people at Berkeley.  Police seem to be standing aside.



Extremism FTL!  :t1929:



[img]https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/21105881_1112319442204070_1952542400662677169_n.jpg?oh=757966ca6be2f58f9eecbb92b06b82ad&oe=5A2EE670">https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/ ... e=5A2EE670">https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/21105881_1112319442204070_1952542400662677169_n.jpg?oh=757966ca6be2f58f9eecbb92b06b82ad&oe=5A2EE670[/im]


Why is he carrying her?



Looks like she could walk on her own.

Odinson

Walk yourself.. Its not like its a real flood.

Anonymous

Quote from: "realgrimm"Why don't you pretend like it doesn't exist .. maybe spend time on issues that really need addressing , starvation,clean drinking water , catastrophes .. after all media spins these issues by covering the same topics to steer the masses.. You'd be foolish to think this is the #1 issue the US is facing

It's not an issue at all for most Americans. The media loves it.

realgrimm

Quote from: "Harry"
Quote from: "RW"Too high to care too :D




 :laugh3:
:shok:  :laugh3:

Blurt

Quote from: "RW"Okay, so unbeknownst to most of us, we already have these laws in Canada:



The Canadian Parliament introduced Bill C-309, which bans the wearing of masks during a riot or other unlawful assembly. The bill became law on June 19, 2013. Those convicted of it face up to 10 years in prison.



The Canadian Criminal Code Section 351(2) covers "Disguise with Intent", whereby "Every one who, with intent to commit an indictable offence, has his face masked or coloured or is otherwise disguised is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years". With some exceptions, an indictable offence in Canada is one that is subject to a fine of greater than $5,000 or imprisonment of more than six months.



So they've put it in place, but as I suspected, "The Canadian Civil Liberties Association has said that the bill contradicts the Constitution of Canada, and expects that it would not survive a constitutional challenge."

Yeah, Montreal's P-6 died last year, after the courts struck it down. It had been in effect for about four years.



All hail Anarchopanda!



http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/quebec-court-rules-p-6-law-barring-masks-requiring-itineraries-of-protests-is-illegal">Quebec court rules P-6 law barring masks, requiring itineraries of protests is illegal
Aimin\' to misbehave.

Anonymous

Quote from: "RW"Okay, so unbeknownst to most of us, we already have these laws in Canada:



The Canadian Parliament introduced Bill C-309, which bans the wearing of masks during a riot or other unlawful assembly. The bill became law on June 19, 2013. Those convicted of it face up to 10 years in prison.



The Canadian Criminal Code Section 351(2) covers "Disguise with Intent", whereby "Every one who, with intent to commit an indictable offence, has his face masked or coloured or is otherwise disguised is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years". With some exceptions, an indictable offence in Canada is one that is subject to a fine of greater than $5,000 or imprisonment of more than six months.



So they've put it in place, but as I suspected, "The Canadian Civil Liberties Association has said that the bill contradicts the Constitution of Canada, and expects that it would not survive a constitutional challenge."

That's too bad..



I know many in law enforcement support a ban on disguises at demonstrations and protests.

RW

Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"Okay, so unbeknownst to most of us, we already have these laws in Canada:



The Canadian Parliament introduced Bill C-309, which bans the wearing of masks during a riot or other unlawful assembly. The bill became law on June 19, 2013. Those convicted of it face up to 10 years in prison.



The Canadian Criminal Code Section 351(2) covers "Disguise with Intent", whereby "Every one who, with intent to commit an indictable offence, has his face masked or coloured or is otherwise disguised is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years". With some exceptions, an indictable offence in Canada is one that is subject to a fine of greater than $5,000 or imprisonment of more than six months.



So they've put it in place, but as I suspected, "The Canadian Civil Liberties Association has said that the bill contradicts the Constitution of Canada, and expects that it would not survive a constitutional challenge."

That's too bad..



I know many in law enforcement support a ban on disguises at demonstrations and protests.

Until such challenge comes down the pipe, it stands, which I agree is a good thing.
Beware of Gaslighters!

Anonymous

Quote from: "RW"
Quote from: "Fashionista"
Quote from: "RW"Okay, so unbeknownst to most of us, we already have these laws in Canada:



The Canadian Parliament introduced Bill C-309, which bans the wearing of masks during a riot or other unlawful assembly. The bill became law on June 19, 2013. Those convicted of it face up to 10 years in prison.



The Canadian Criminal Code Section 351(2) covers "Disguise with Intent", whereby "Every one who, with intent to commit an indictable offence, has his face masked or coloured or is otherwise disguised is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years". With some exceptions, an indictable offence in Canada is one that is subject to a fine of greater than $5,000 or imprisonment of more than six months.



So they've put it in place, but as I suspected, "The Canadian Civil Liberties Association has said that the bill contradicts the Constitution of Canada, and expects that it would not survive a constitutional challenge."

That's too bad..



I know many in law enforcement support a ban on disguises at demonstrations and protests.

Until such challenge comes down the pipe, it stands, which I agree is a good thing.

I was surprised about this and perhaps the police do not enforce it..



But, I do remember my brother once saying he doesn't know any policeman who doesn't support banning disguising one's identity at these demonstrations..



But, his detachment is in rural Manitoba which doesn't get many demonstrations.

RW

The Criminal Code is Canada wide so it would apply in Manitoba :)
Beware of Gaslighters!

Anonymous

Quote from: "RW"The Criminal Code is Canada wide so it would apply in Manitoba :)

I know that, but that's not what I'm saying..



I mean he hasn't likely been called out to provide safety at demonstrations in rural Manitoba.

realgrimm

#43
Quote from: "RW"The Criminal Code is Canada wide so it would apply in Manitoba :)


Can I get a victim  :MG_216:

RW

Quote from: "realgrimm"
Quote from: "RW"The Criminal Code is Canada wide so it would apply in Manitoba :)




Wrong again, Criminal Code is provincial unless it's a FED charge..   :MG_216:



Legislation is different in each province

Wrong.  



"The criminal law of Canada is under the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the Canadian federal government. The power to enact criminal law is derived from section 91(27) of the Constitution Act, 1867."



Again, try being correct.
Beware of Gaslighters!