justme4567

Guns like drivers licences are a privileged NOT A RIGHT! Lets quit giving guns to physco's and drivers licences to drunks...seems reasonable.

u ladies still arguing semantics and b.s?.....gezzzz simple we dont and wont support part of society walking about with their faces covered....worse if it legal for 1 then it is legal for all. i was hopin all the chattering meant the stay happened, anybody got any info on that? i hate reading papers too

nah we r horrified by someone who insists on disrespecting our country...ya know it was tried in the states and they sent them packing. that and has it occurred to u that a ruling giving peeps the right to cover their faces. there's a whole if she can- we can thing happening..the bank must be shitting themselves. this is a very very bad ruling and not just for it's legal implications.

and 10 lawyers will argue it when it's signed...if it was oral the judge doesnt write it at all but the winning lawyer does and then sends it to the losing lawyer who can object to the wording 3 times before the judge will address it. gong show. ever word is open to the individuals interpretation. Interesting, do u know if the judge gave a written ruling? i am curious. If they mean business they usually write it down. If they dont it's usually a lawyers field day. The wording has to be killer.

ahhh they r getting a stay... look that up... and what do u mean color blah.....the ruling regarding all legal documents MUST be on blue paper is only a recent one. AND very very import since the inception of our legal system. Most Lawyers still send their emails in blue. It confused me for years but you can do thousands of hours of work on a single document and if it isn't to the letter and till recently on blue paper it wasnt legal. also 10 different lawyers will give u 10 different interpretation of any ruling if u pay them enough. and a Judge has to address it. our justice system is F*ed. pardon my french I am a Lady...ba ha ha ha

http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/rules2010/Rules_vol_1.pdf off hand i have this one...there are many many many..u will notice volume 1?.criminal, civil, provincial, federal blahblahblah....when u r done reading them...let me know andddd if it's an older version the documents no longer have to be on blue colored paper to be legal binding....

well considering the govt announced they would appeal it before the 60 days probably a good reference. and yes i do have a number of court rulings in my favor I either had to wait out or address it's the process of our court system....read the book. andd it's been fun chow for now .

oh the legal yes a single person and the legal wording is. I have knowledge in evidence or ...belief. it is purfectly legal to file such a claim and it is hard to comprehend what some people believe. LMAO

60 day appeal of any ruling, they can NOT address, change of modify it to suit their purpose. It's called "the process" nothing can over rule it. well maybe the govt but they shall follow proper procedure and r. ummm my writing well i had to produce legal documents to the courts for 5 years where top legal minds spent days going over.... every..... word. when i retired i promised myself i would NEVER write that crap again. i prfurr to babble. lolololololol..oh stalking, theft of govt documents andddd the right of any crazy person to file whatever they want in our courts. our civil process is a gong show. i dont ...do...spell check either....lmao...

Now who's being racist...i think your numbers r wrong with the 3% but most just want to BE CANADIANS! A small number that is growing rapidly are destroying the chances of others staying in our country. This crazy crap is shutting door fast and loud. And mostly for the abandoned woman, anybody who's sponsor has withdrawn are being told to pack their bags and go home. sad but true.

ahhh on the subject of alcohol there would be a great support from our own citizens on that one. Prohibition was in our lifetime...i was little...lololol beer drinkers r quivering. lmao.....

you r more than correct. The laws in other cultures are often punishable by death and they can ban hookers all they like here but in our country it's more of a suggestion...at least by the looks of the hooker presently standing on the corner across the street from my store...

what pivot....I've argued the legality from the beginning. All things considered a moot point presently as the govt is in court today filing the appeal AND the proper process. The ruling will go into limbo and at the end of the day what it really effects is all the other poor refuges who just want to come here and live out their lives as Canadians. oh the issue is..... the ruling that said the 60 days we must ALL must adhere to was to be waived so an individual could vote in 30 days...That is against the rules of the court. Try going into court and ask to have anything done...right now...lmao. and i am too a nice thing!!!!!! huh

And a single person and 3 unelected Judges over threw our court system. It is a process. I really aint political i am legal, All the racist ranting and political b. s. has zip to do with the FACT no Judge can over rules the process of the courts...... and I just think it's hilarious that the issue of where do our rights stop and others rights begin...appears to...beer. baaahhhhhaaaaa

http://100percentfedup.com/muslim-petitions-to-cancel-oktoberfest-in-germany-as-munich-police-plan-to-keep-refugees-and-revelers-apart/ no worries people, our laws can be adjusted to suit others beliefs and demands. Over rule the process on our courts?,,, no problem,,,,,,,but this is one of is THE prioritys of those that insist their beliefs be "respected"....baaahhhhhhaaaaa ya I think that's funny. U can mess with our laws and our customs but oh my mess with our beer drinkers and there will be trouble. Sadly when people wake up and smell the roses it will be too late. I don't drink but I support peeps right to, alot of our own citizens will support bans on alcohol.

Apparently. I have no idea if it's new I just got some updates on the petition and it had the citizenship process. They only have a few dates in the near future and they invite as dates come up. btw welcome to the country, way to go! I have helped new citizens study for that test and I couldn't pass it with out google.

ahhhh r u married to her????? lololol u seem invested in an individual. This has zero to do with a person. Once again read...she must be invited, has NOT been, isn't even on the list and anybody who likes their job aint touching this with a 10 foot pole till this matter gets settled. The only thing all this crap will actually do is making it thousands of times harder for any other potential peace loving immigrants to become Canadians.

We shall see but if you check around it's what is getting screeched. I do stand corrected it's 60 days and an issue Mr. Mckay is being asked to address. He has little power but he does have some say in that, it's called the process of the courts and the only function of our legal system.. Once an appeal is filed everything stops whilst legal minds discuss it blahblahblahblah Further she must be INVITED by the citizenship committee. Also people are screaming re the influx of immigrants and potential extremists threats. Hard to say if anybody's going to become a Canadian until each and everyone is investigated to their underwear. Wait lets go ask the citizenship committee re the qualification of potential candidates. Citizenship is NOT a right!

semantics, interpretation of our laws is what the legal community is all about. In terms of actual application one can not act until the 100 days is up and the right to challenge it has expired. When the ridiculous ruling is thrown out, hopefully along with the Judges that suggested such a thing, from a legal perspective the ruling never existed. semantics

oh to be clearer the ruling must stand for 100 days without an application challenging it. Any idiot can challenge it. how can this lady vote in 30 days when it's not even an actual ruling yet? The appeals ruling circumvents the process of the court or tries to...aint going to happen. The idiots who are challenging it is the govt and guaranteed to be in process for years and years. And when I say any idiot can challenge it , every one of us has the legal right to go down to the court house and file an application. It costs 250 bucks and a court must address it, it's OUR legal right...also a headache I dont recommend it and I think it give our politicians something to do.

and u r right so how come it aint before the courts like any other legal challenge? Obviously the people have spoken and the govt will file their own challenge which will be in courts for years and years..just very very odd that it got this far and so many people had to stand up and say....NO before our politicians saw their paychecks flash before their eyes.

yawn http://blackburnnews.com/bri-national/2015/09/16/feds-double-down-on-defending-niqab-ban/ all u arm chair quarter backs actually DO SOMETHING? I wrote to Peter Mckay as many many people did. Today this was announced and I shall continue to demand answers from the justice minister re the issue of judges subverting PROCESS. The demands the appeals court made re having the ruling in place by next month was deeply against everything our court system is based on..PROCESS. I havent even looked at the ruling so far but any other claim before the courts takes between 5 and 12 years....5 before a Judge can even look at it and probably 7 before a judge has enough authority to rule on much more than what time lunch is. And where are the Lawyers?????? they should be lined up round the block flooding our courts with applications and lining their pockets.....weird

crap i cant speak any slower than that...maybe find someone more your speed.

u can explain it till the cows come home and your cavalier risk to our children is insane. I dont need or want to know what their issues are, they are in MY country and will respect our customs and our laws or go home...easy peasy

i've been here for a day and assume i must talk down and speak slowly. Oh wait your the one betting children s lives on..it's probably not a bomb. But you probably r correct on the right place, I get updates on the workings of our justice system and i just got this one, it did seem relevant to the racial profiling conversation. meh whatever. did you write to Peter? then STFU...k