ExFlyer

Points what out?? Some employers gave employees the options of following the guidelines or leaving. Not just covid mandates but the health and safety rules and regulations. Stop and think about it. Would you, as an employee want to work with someone that was infected and could pass covid on to you? Do you think that an employer should keep paying the worker that refuses to protect their co worker for as long as it may take for the pandemic to be over? What I am saying to you and everyone, is that employers have far more obligations to their employees than you trying to make a covid restriction. They have had to make safe working environment long before covid. I did not support the mandates because I too was adversely affected. Thing is I am being adult about it and looking at it from all perspectives, not a narrow and closed minded an simplistic point of view. I have a very good overall point of view and do not rest on just a few situations.

All small segments of time, no beginning, no middle just and end result which in no way is indicative of the event. Never ever said it didn't happen, just that there was way more than the snippet you proclaim to be the entire event. "poopyhead"?? Wow, how feeble LOL

OK, and what is your comparison and to what and when? Holy shit man, you really do deflect a lot when you have nothing to say of any value LOL

Never said there were no mandates (which were provincial, not federal). You are making stuff up .... again. I said and am saying that employers already had many rules, regulations and laws to abide with to protect their employees health and safety. That all precluded any government mandates and it was up to the employer to ensure and do what was necessary to protect all employees. Resorting to calling anyone a liar without you knowing what the rules, regulations and laws are only indicated a severe lack of knowledge on your part.

You are wrong about the order of things. The Labour Code, Occupational Heath and Safety, Canadian Labour Standards, Human Rights Act, and existing contracts as well as any Provincial and municipal requirements etc have all precluded any government general health announcements. Which you seem to stupid to realize and understand. It's OK, you must be a worker and not knowing how much your employer has to do to keep you safe and healthy. Don't feel bad, most employees are not aware of all the rules and regulations employers must follow to have the privilege of having you work for them

You don't understand that the employer has a legal and moral and contractual requirement by labour code to ensure the employees are safe, regardless of government edict. If there is an outbreak of any disease/sickness/contagion within the employers working environment, they have to do something to protect the workers. I am not siding with anyone, just laying out facts and responsibilities of the employer. Best do some research instead of proving you are uninformed. A little help https://www.ohscanada.com/features/roles-rules-responsibilities-workplace-health-safety/

Yes, for sure you can compare but you need to make sure you are comparing equal or very similar situations. You cannot compare Canada and it's geographical size and diversity and population with Sweden or New Zealand (just as an example). Retaining walls, LRT, Salary software has nothing to do or even related to a world wide pandemic involving billions of people.

Peon - day labourer or unskilled farm worker. Anyone that does not understand what is required and demanded of an employer is an uninformed peon. Must include you too

Clearly you are a peon that has never been in charge of or responsible to other workers. Let alone for an entire workplace. You haven ever had to be concerned about labour laws, health laws union contracts etc. You can only make totally uniformed comments.

I think in the case of Vizi, you ar misguided and believe only a small fraction of what happened. Like I said, beginning ,middle and end. just the end, explains nothing. And truly, you are saying a facetime video is your valid source?? Just goes to show how easily you can be manipulated.

Ha, Ha,Ha, Ha, yeah, sure. fling poo?? Oooo how subtle LOL No trucker debacle, no WestConMan. So,... zero or at best a caricature of, well, nope, just a one trick pony.

Oh. ?

Give it up Dude, You are one trick pony. When trucker debacle goes away, you have nothing. Back to being a zero.:)

Your interpretation of genocide. I am saying killing people occurs in all those situations and are they all genocide??

"And each jurisdiction controlled it differently based on the spread and situation in that area. " To make comparisons you need to look at each area/district.jurisdiction/country etc and base it on that. As well as the policy of all those places. All were different. You cannot generalize.

Your argument of genocide is nonsensical. By your interpretation, every war/battle/skirmish/fight/insurrection/coup/overthrow by all peoples all over the world any time throughout history would be genocide.

You are correct. My mistake. ( It was meant for Yzermandius19.

Huh???

You said "Section 7 of the Charter gun rights exist in Canada too" and "guns certainly qualify as part of personal security Section 7 has nothing to do with guns, let alone indicating you can have or carry or use them.

Once again ""Sections 7 to 14 set out rights that protect Canadians when dealing with the justice system. " "?

There is no indication or mention of weapons and the intent of loss of liberty is for imprisonment not weapon ownership. "Sections 7 to 14 set out rights that protect Canadians when dealing with the justice system. " "7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. Section 7 guarantees the life, liberty and personal security of all Canadians. It also requires that governments respect the basic principles of justice whenever they intrude on those rights. Section 7 often comes into play in criminal matters because an accused person clearly faces the risk that, if convicted, his or her liberty will be lost." https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/how-rights-protected/guide-canadian-charter-rights-freedoms.html#a2e .

Not sure what you are trying to convey. The link you provided indicates Switzerland is quite safe and has very good gun control measures. Your link says "Switzerland still has one of the highest rates of gun violence in Europe, and suicides account for most gun deaths in the country." but does not provide any statistics. Far form mass shooting and crimes involving guns. It also says "In 2016, the country had 47 attempted homicides with firearms. The country's overall murder rate is near zero."

Decades ago a fictional TV character named Archie Bunker said he had the solution to airplane hijacking that was occurring at the time. He said, when you issue a boarding pass, you issue a gun too because then a potential hijacker would have to think twice about what he was going to do

Really? What "right" is that?

Why would you even take is as an answer? (read: do your own research)