blueblood

Personally, I don't care if people go on my land. I've only put up one trespassing sign in my life and that was due to a dispute concerning water drainage (he would come on and plug up a drainage ditch, had to go to court for that one and won), that field had roads surrounding it and I was allowed to post. I also have a road allowance going right through the middle of my cattle pasture. I cannot post that piece of land due to the road allowance, I just hope whoever goes through it closes the gate. There is a few No Trespassing signs in my area and that is actively enforced. There are roads all around the fields, so they can't pull the whole easement thing. I also said that things are different wherever you go. Then there's the whole crown property thing. I'm wondering if that's the case at your lake if your guys actually own the property, or it's a crown lease.

No, when I pop up a no trespassing sign and I see someone trespassing I can call the cops and they get charged. I can't do that to planes though. Mineral rights haven't been for sale since the early 1900's. It is too much of a money maker for the provincial government to be given out to people, I think that's malarkey but that's the law. Mind you things would be done differently in the cities as far as owning land goes for obvious reasons. In Canada we don't have a complex and sophisticated methods to define property rights, we have none.

Nope, the gov't can pay any price it wants. The 100 billion paid to the natives over the years is payment enough.

I'm wondering if that's not what we should have done in the first place by making booze and smokes illegal to start with. Sure prohibition was a failure, but I think people were having too much "fun" with booze than to get into a cocaine habit. I don't know what the difference is between habit forming and addictive, I think they are the same If smoking pot doesn't hurt anyone, then I guess I should be allowed to burn purple when in the city, not pay taxes, poach, run an RCA dish again, take the mufflers off all my trucks, commit insurance fraud, sell my wheat from somebody other than the wheat board etc. Rules are rules, we all have to follow them whether we agree with them or not.

This land claim fiasco is ridiculous. The government can call whatever it did expropriation, and if the natives want land they can buy it like the rest of us. If they get their land claims, then I should get my mineral rights.

It's not trespassing unless the land is posted. And by posted I mean there are No Trespassing signs around. That covers the ground. Air is wide open, spray planes buzz the ground pretty close. A person has no right to airspace above their land. But I don't think a toy helicopter hovering over the ground argument would hold up in court. It's like mineral rights, most landowners don't have them unless it was willed to them or they are geriatrics.

How are the rights even allowed in the first place? The majority gives them out and the majority can take them away. Those principles are written in ink, not stone. Those principles are also an idea. In reality the majority is accountable only to itself, that's the way it works. Some of the greatest tragedies and triumphs throughout history have been dictated by the will of the majority. It is up to each individual person to exercise his say in the grand scheme of things wisely, so that nothing too outrageous happens. To limit that with "principles" that say the majority of people want this but since it's on paper their vote isn't worth spit is completely ridiculous. If we are all to follow the charter as blindly as you suggest without changing it, why have a democratically elected government, we can all follow the charter like a cult. Mob rule might be primitive, but in the grand scheme of things it is the most fair.

In the majority mindset, the majority is always rational, that's why they are the majority, and it's T.S. for the minority. The majority can make whatever decision it wants. In Canada the majority of people decide to respect human rights, in Saudi Arabia the majority of people don't respect human rights. That is why oppressed people living in countries with a tyrannical majority are leaving their country because the majority rules and if they don't like it it's T.S. for them. Likewise a minority of extremely wealthy business people are settling elsewhere in the world because the majority of Canadians decided that we should pay heavy taxes to fund massive social programs. A country belongs to the majority of it's citizens and they have the right to run the country how they see fit. Oh and how do you appeal a supreme court decision. Who is a supreme court justice accountable to? Can a supreme court justice be fired?

I have a huge problem with a forced buy Canadian Act. The ag sector has its complaints with shoddy Candian companies. Canadian built farm machinery is utter crap, the Americans build better machinery that's why they are on top there. Candian fertilizer is a rip off, they gouge us and they sell it to the Americans at a discount. Some people have to send semi's down to the states and truck it up here to save a few bucks which eats up a lot of time and diesel. But to buy the exact same thing up here we get gouged for some reason. I hope the russkies flood the market with fertilizer and put Agrium out of business for running a crooked fertilizer gig. It's the same thing as the Bombardier deal, just without the penalties. A bigger rip off than the Bombardier sleds is the Bombardier parts. To buy a drive belt for a MXZ 800 is $167.00 Goodyear makes the same drivebelt for $50.00 Buy Canadian hah. The only thing good that comes out of this country is Grain, soldiers, Blackberry's, oil, and minerals

Ever hear of NORAD???

The Canadian Charter of Rights can be changed by the will of the majority of the people. It's a real pain in the ass but it can be done. The American Constitution can also be amended, it's also a pain in the ass. Nope Pure majority still rules in Canada and the States. Where are the checks in the judicial branches? I'm stunned you think people are too stupid to think for themselves. True Democracies allow their laws to be changed. Take away the will of the people, then democracy does not exist.

1) It was T.S. for the slaves in those days. It was acceptable in those days dictated by the majority of people. The majority of people changed their minds for the better. 2) Your view of democracy is that democracy is a powerless figurehead in a dictatorship led by some parchment. In your view people should follow that parchment blindly and it can never be changed. That is dangerous, my idea of democracy has more freedom than yours. Democracy is literally about saying T.S. to the minority, that's the whole principle of it ---> what most of the people want is what most of the people get, it's simple logic. There is a country which follows your idea of democracy, it's called Venezuela, how free are the people there??? 3) If principles enshrined in documents override the will of the people, there is a major problem, and a definite lack of freedom. Ultimately that is the slap to the face of democracy. Principles are variables and can be changed, what if slavery was an enshrined principle? 4) And who is the court heirarchy accountable to? They're judges themselves, so they are accountable to no one, they cannot be fired. That is dangerous as well. The majority bullying the minority is what democracy is. The majority of people decided stealing was wrong for example, should the minority thieves be allowed to steal then? You would rather have a dictatorship run by an elite who are accountable to no one and have a set of laws that can never be changed. You say you believe in freedom, I say your a hypocrite. If a minority of people do not like what the majority does, it's time to go.

No don't worry about it because at the end of the day, Canadians aren't that fickle. This episode brought Pakistan's half assed military to the woodshed of public opinion. Dion would be advocating that action immediately (agree with) and at the same time wants us out of combat in 09 (which I don't agree with) I'll pose this question, if we are going to be fighting an enemy with our hands tied behind our back and not make significant process, why are we there?

Who cares if he upset Pakistan, I in fact have more respect in Dion for doing so. Pakistan should be taken to task for doing a crappy job. Pakistan asked for it. Sounds like Dion is learning from Harper, atta boy.

There are some people saying that this should be taken to court. Incest is illegal, a judge overturning it would make it legal. Judges do this from time to time. Also a judge is accountable to no one, whereas a politician is accountable to the voting public.

So I take it you are in agreement with U.S. Secretary of Defense Gates then?

I saw Dion's interview on TV, and all I interpreted it as was that he figured that we can go into Pakistan chasing after insurgents that were just flushed out of Afghanistan. Dion wants to get the job done and done right, i'll give him that. Don't worry there isn't enough tea in China to make me vote Liberal.

Majorities have also decided that slavery was not ok because they said so. I'd say the level of thinking of people is always evolving. Democracy is still the most fair way of doing things, one is free to decide which way they want their vote to go and right now, incest is still illegal. Having laws written by an unaccountable judge is a slap in the face to democracy.

Your wrong about the sprayer, a good used one runs around 60-70K, 30K gets you ancient junk. No roundup ready wheat availible yet. Also the city slicker does not buy a case of roundup that has to be mixed with water like we do. They go to the hardware store and buy a spray bottle of pre-mixed roundup which is pretty weak in itself. DDT was responsible for almost eradicating malaria, with it banned we have a malaria problem again, damn murderous hippies. Other than that well said.

This is ridiculous. We in a Democratic society have decided that incest is to be illegal. It is the will of the people. If some people do not like the laws the majority has laid out, don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. Maybe in a few decades or so the majority of people will decide that incest is okay and it won't be illegal anymore and it's T.S. for the other side. This is about setting rules and following them and we have done so in the most fair way possible by a democratic government run by the people for the people. It is much more fair than being held hostage to some parchment.

Dion is not suggesting we go into the Capital of Pakistan and plant the maple leaf in their parliament. He is suggesting we do what the turks are doing in Iraq to maintain their security, no big deal. Dion will want the troops gone in 13 months, he's also saying we shouldn't be tied down. Big deal if we piss off Pakistan, they don't give us anything, and we supply their food. If anything they shouldn't piss us off. If they want to have an international incident, they can starve then. Oh my God I'm defending a Liberal, Hell froze over.

No everyone is poorer, the Californian's are poorer for giving their stuff away, and the Canadian tomato farmer is forced out of business due to market glut and won't be able to buy other things which hurts the other Canadians. If we traded some oranges for the tomatos, then we'd be better off.

BUt did the Americans go into North Vietnam??? How about in Korea, they didn't go into China But Chasing the Taliban to the border and then turning around on a technicality is no way to fight.

This is one of the rare times when Dion is right, and this coming from a CPC supporter. He makes a valid point, why should we fight the taliban with one hand tied behind our back. The americans ran into this snafoo in Vietnam, we should not repeat that same mistake. If Pakistan has a problem with foreign soldiers operating in their country, they are more than welcome to attempt to do something about it and face the consequences. Dion moved up one notch in my book, he is now at notch one.

Nope, they're both as pious as each other. Accept them both or don't accept any of them. None of this picking and choosing malarkey. Like I said, Stockwell can believe what he want. He has the right to be wrong, and the right to express himself. Would it make people feel better if Stockwell believed people came from cats?