ExFlyer

More old old stuff. Talk about a troll. You are the person that keeps on with old useless irrelevant stuff. LOL

I suspect the dippers and libs that hated Ford disliked their own leaders more so they stayed away.

Only about 40% of the Ontario voters turned out. I believe the Conservative voters came out and voted for Ford but the dippers and libs had such lousy leaders and campaign, their party loyalists did not vote. Both libs and dippers promised so much even their own did not believe them. So both leaders bailed. Horwath a 4 time complainer and loser is gone and the Del Duca/McGuinty/Wynne libs may have finally died. Sure a big change from when Ford won the first time. The outrage and the claim that Ontario is finished. Now they wanted Ford

You explained diddly squat. You admitted it was not used. "The fact that they didn't need to use it to press charges, since those charges are covered by existing laws only" RCMP were already on site as they are responsible for NCC property and Parliamentary District. No EMA needed for them to be there.

That is my entire point. You guys keep playing games with the Emergency Measures Act and finally you agree it was not used. That has been my point all along. There are lots of laws and rules and regulations out there that are rarely or ever used but, they are there, if needed. So, the Emergency Measures Act was there if needed but, fortunately not used. I am glad you come to realize that is was not used....as I have been saying.

I am talking about the BS that Infidel Dog is slinging. "During a May 27 press conference in Uvalde, Director Steven McCraw of the Texas Department of Public Safety confirmed the gunman was not one of the individuals arrested in 2018."

so old, so boring, so B move BS.

Holy crap man, you could be a script writer for very bad B level movies LOL

2018 press release. Very old news. The official said that the shooter was not one of these 2. You have no idea what happened to these 2 after 2018. No point to even bring that up. No point at all. Not even a good try at trying something LOL

As the official said, neither of those 2 kids were the guy that did the shooting so, point is moot. You have no idea what happened to those 2 other kids.

The police forces have drones. OPP has drones as do the QPP, all were called in to help. As for freezing 260 accounts, the police have the authority to seize assets of identified suspects. Why did the police wait so long is a question the people of Ottawa want to know as well. When the police chief finally quit, the new guy started to enforce existing and local laws. Tow truck operators were asked why they did not tow vehicles and they basically said they were afraid of repercussions. When the new chief got the support of the province and the operators were told of the consequences of not complying with police requirements (losing police contracts and operating licenses), they did what they were told.

What two kids? The shooter was one 18 year old. Your link is meaningless, it identifies one event and an old one at that. No consequences. The statement even says the shooter was not one of the ones back 4 years ago. Not sure what your post is supposed to mean?

Are you speaking and "seeing and noticing the obvious" that it is the EMERGENCY MEASURES ACT, which has been around since 1988?? Pretending stupidity is more in your case or maybe, you are not pretending? L(L

You people are clearly fools and feed off each others BS. There was no one charged under the EMERGENCY MEASURES ACT. All those of the truckers debacle that were charged were charged under previously existing laws. If you have evidence and proof of any charges that were laid under the EMERGENCY MEASURES ACT, provide them. You cannot because there aren't any. Fools living in each others BS pool LOL Oh and, if you know there is no war measures act, why eat that BS? Are you7 really one of those fools??

War Measures Act is not the same as Emergencies Measures Act. The Emergencies Measures Act has been in existence since 1988. While invoked, it was never used during the truckers debacle. The threat of use is what scared the truckers off and the ones insisting it was used, they are very wrong. Using proper terminology is important if one is trying to make a point and be credible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergencies_Act

"95% of you", Ahhh democracy, at it's finest "what is wrong with this picture"? Nothing, in a democracy Majority wins. And there will always be sore losers.

What "war measures"? The one in your imaginations?? LOL Oh, the drama, the drama LOL So tiring to be so dramatic LOL

Like I said before, hindsight has 20/20 vision. What a person did or said 4 years prior is meaningless. Anyone and everyone has said things in the past. Like I also said, you cannot just accuse and take arbitrary action. In the US especially, there would be a lot of legal hoops and ladders before being declared mentally incompetent. If you just took action against everyone that said something stupid or made threats the facilities would be overflowing . What is an empty threat because someone is pissed and what is a real threat? Are all those folks that are anti government or anti establishments and making threats mentally ill and be institutionalized? It is easy to say things like you say but you cannot jail someone for speaking their mind.

Maybe but can PP bring Maxime Bernier back into the main conservative fold? I don't think he is willing to lose being a leader on his own and being second fiddle in the conservative party again. Yeah well, unfortunately the liberals have 3+ years to win back the hearts of all those loyal GTA folks and promise enough to others. Even you staunch Trudeau haters will have mellowed out by then

Duhh?

Does not change my point. I am not afraid to tell you anything. I am telling you that whatever you think, you cannot call a person crazy and take away their freedoms or rights without a long trial. As I said,hindsight has 20/20 vision. This happens all the time. Check the person out after they do some outrageous thing. Trying to accuse or identify them as mentally ill before they do something will never (or extremely rare) happen. What are they going to say...that the person may do something bad?? Anyone can be accused then.

who would have said he was mentally ill? Who would have stopped him from buying guns? All great in retrospect but the point I am making is that he was free to do what he wished without restrictions. How would you enforce red flag laws? You would have to have clear evidence and present it in court and by then, he could have done the damage. The US is so litigious that there is no way you can stop anyone form buying guns. As they say, hindsight has 20/20 vision. In the US,foresight has to be proven in court

On the contrary. When someone does the mass killings clearly (?) he/she has mental illness. Or do they? The pro gun people are quick to say we should not let people with mental illness have guns, but it is OK for normal people. How can you tell the difference before they commit the sections?? Nothing simple about it but it is simple to say mentally ill should not have guns.

How are you going to determine who needs mental health care until the do something?? There is no crazy person thermometer. So, if I kill someone, I get life in prison but if I kill 3, 4, 10, I have a mental problem. Hollywood?? Huh?? Teachers not doing their jobs? Police not doing their jobs? Exactly what jobs are not being done?

No you did not. You said "If they'd simply legalize all drugs and more importantly their production by qualified producers and distributors" Are you saying pharmaceutical companies and distributors are working against existing laws?