g_bambino Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 (edited) I don't know if you can be classified as a winner if you are obliged to pay thousands of dollars in legal costs and take many days of your time to defend yourself agsinst frivolous charges, without choice, recourse or payment. I somewhat knew the response to me would be a redefinition of the word "win". Well, okay, even if we run with that, then I raise the names of Marise Myrand and Ian Martin. Granted, their cases were heard by the Quebec and Ontario human rights organisations, respectively, not the CHRT. [correct] Edited September 12, 2011 by g_bambino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 (edited) Rather than just whining about the mechanism in place, can anyone suggest better processes?Require that the complaint pay if the case is not upheld. The current system rewards people who file friviously complaints betting that their "victim" (i.e. the one accused) will pay up instead of fighting it. Edited September 12, 2011 by TimG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 I somewhat knew the response to me would be a redefinition of the word "win". Touche ! Wait, youre not white are you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fellowtraveller Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 Rather than just whining about the mechanism in place, can anyone suggest better processes? Narrow the mandate of the tribunal to exclude anyhting to do with hate crimes. Legislation already exists in the Criminal Code regarding hate crimes. Require the same rules of procedure and evidence required in other courts, or greatly restrict the Courts scope if they are unwilling to do that.I somewhat knew the response to me would be a redefinition of the word "win". Then why would you use Steyn as an example, knowing that what was required of him as a defendant was so less onerous than what was required of the complainant? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 Then why would you use Steyn as an example, knowing that what was required of him as a defendant was so less onerous than what was required of the complainant? Because Steyn both is "white" and won the cases against him before various human rights councils/tribunals, in the sense that the accusations laid upon him were shown to be untrue. That he still had to pay for lawyers and travel, etc., is an incidental loss, not a fomal one imposed upon him by ruling because he failed in his defence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 So if Ezra were black or tan , he would not have faced the same? No, I really don't think he would! And the fact that he is Jewish didn't help him, either. I'm convinced that the HRCs are really just politically correct Star Chambers. They're like the Spanish Inquisition, in that if they float then they're guilty and if they sink and drown they are buried in church soil, with full ceremony as innocents. I find the fact that the accusers get to launch a suit for free, with didleysquat to help the defendants, telling. How on earth could anyone believe that this setup is unbiased? In the world of the politically correct, all whites are secretly racist bastards who deserve to pay for their sins against visible minorities! They make wonderful straw men! They burn beautifully! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 Narrow the mandate of the tribunal to exclude anyhting to do with hate crimes. Legislation already exists in the Criminal Code regarding hate crimes. I do agree that all hate crimes should be treated as criminal offences. What about discrimination in employment, housing and other services? Personally, I'd like to see perpetrators of these offences against society be treated as criminals as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fellowtraveller Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 Because Steyn both is "white" and won the cases against him before various human rights councils/tribunals, in the sense that the accusations laid upon him were shown to be untrue. That he still had to pay for lawyers and travel, etc., is an incidental loss, not a fomal one imposed upon him by ruling because he failed in his defence. I see. You selected Steyn because he is white and can afford to pay to prove himself innocent. If he was not middle class, he could not mount a defence because the various commissions and tribunals do not allow for any type of legal aid. He is a winmner in your example because he has money, not because he was not guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fellowtraveller Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 I do agree that all hate crimes should be treated as criminal offences. What about discrimination in employment, housing and other services? Personally, I'd like to see perpetrators of these offences against society be treated as criminals as well. Wow, you are missing the point entirely if you think crimninal offences belong in front of any quasi human rights tribunal or commission. Any Candian accused of any criminal opffence should have an absolute right to due process, and that just does not happen in the HR commissions. If they are charged with crimninal offences, they should be in a court, a real court where they are presumed innocence and have the full range of services available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 Personally, I'd like to see perpetrators of these offences against society be treated as criminals as well.What about people who scream racism whenever they don't get their way? Jail time for them too I hope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 No, I really don't think he would! I doubt it but that for another day. I find the fact that the accusers get to launch a suit for free, with didleysquat to help the defendants, telling. How on earth could anyone believe that this setup is unbiased? I have never defended the HRC's except as a dispute mechanism to free the court backlog. So, not that you are, dont paint me as one who thinks they are great. In the world of the politically correct, all whites are secretly racist bastards who deserve to pay for their sins against visible minorities! The problem with that statement is that 48% of all section 13 complaints...................have come from a white guy. What now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 (edited) I doubt it but that for another day. I have never defended the HRC's except as a dispute mechanism to free the court backlog. So, not that you are, dont paint me as one who thinks they are great. The problem with that statement is that 48% of all section 13 complaints...................have come from a white guy. Ya? Who was that ... Bob? Seriously, tell the pathetic idiots to quit being a burden on the public purse and get a friggen job! It's just the white supremists who are beating a path to the CHRT to whine and moan about their fate for political purposes. Their attitude is what prevents them from getting jobs: They don't have what it takes to work in Canada today. Do YOU want to hire them? Does ANYBODY want to hire those pathetic twits? A young neighbour of mine didn't like the supervisor's way of organizing the workplace, and started railing on the "camel jockey" about how things are done "in Canada". He got his walking papers and thinks he was discriminated against for being white. Duh! Edited September 12, 2011 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 You selected Steyn because he is white and can afford to pay to prove himself innocent. I selected Steyn because someone asked for one example when a white person had ever won in a CHRT case. That's all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 It isn't a "debate." If you would take the time to get to know what the CHRC actually does, you will see that they act on legal "complaints" of violations of the Canadian Human Rights Act. They act on complaints from people who are offended or angry at someone. And they assist that person through the process, including proving legal assistance and monetary support. I have already provided you with a link to a specific part of the CHRC FAQ explaining they do not supply lawyers. Except when they supply lawyers, of course. Any "legal services" that they do supply, is in accordance with any other legal complaint alleged against someone in practically every other jurisdiction. I'm not even sure if that's English or if you used some computer translator to create it from Farsi. So I'll just mark it off as meaningless gibberish and ignore it. You don't think the police supply "legal" advice to complainants and victims of crime? Indeed, and the system also supplies legal services to the accused. What was your point again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 So if Ezra were black or tan , he would not have faced the same? I think the claim being made is that the HRCs will not act _on behalf of_ a white man unless he is gay or disabled or is a member of some other protected group. That is fairly easy for the defenders of HRCs to disprove. Merely find a case where the HRC acted on behalf of a straight, ordinary white man against someone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 If we stand in opposition to discrimination by race, religion, etc in employment, housing, etc., does it it not follow that we must have mechanisms in place to investigate and rule on such issues? Rather than just whining about the mechanism in place, can anyone suggest better processes? If you don't like the service or attitude, go somewhere else. There. That wasn't so hard, now was it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 I somewhat knew the response to me would be a redefinition of the word "win". Well, okay, even if we run with that, then I raise the names of Marise Myrand and Ian Martin. Granted, their cases were heard by the Quebec and Ontario human rights organisations, respectively, not the CHRT. [correct] I don't suppose it occurred to you that both of those cases were utterly absurd, and tended to overwhelmingly support those who want human rights commissions to be shut down? No, I guess not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 The problem with that statement is that 48% of all section 13 complaints...................have come from a white guy. Warren, you mean? He's a wack job who used to work for the HRCs and sees Nazis under his bed. And he's profited nicely from his many complaints to his friends on the HRCs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted September 13, 2011 Report Share Posted September 13, 2011 I don't suppose it occurred to you that both of those cases were utterly absurd... Whether I thought (or think) that or not was (and is) entirely irrelevant to the request I was fulfilling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted September 13, 2011 Report Share Posted September 13, 2011 Warren, you mean? He's a wack job who used to work for the HRCs and sees Nazis under his bed. And he's profited nicely from his many complaints to his friends on the HRCs Richard Warren, yea thats him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodyminded Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 (edited) .......... Edited September 14, 2011 by bloodyminded Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 It's not about thinking derogatory slurs are a good thing. Clearly, they're ugly and disgusting. It's about whether there should be legal remedies against them. If someone insulted me, I wouldn't pursue litigation unless there were some kind of real measurable injury.The point you're missing is that hate speech/inciting violence against a protected group is not an individual insult. It encourages an environment where an entire segment of society is dehumanized and threatened for something beyond their control, in this case skin colour. It creates social harms against the entire group in ways that go beyond a single person having their feelings hurt. Keep in mind that the CHRC isn't there to bring charges against someone that's bumped into by a black person on the street and turns around to call them a racial slur of choice. It's designed for public denouncements of protected groups and calling people to arms against them. You can't be a public figure or in a position of authority and call on people to be violent against these protected groups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 Funny how they bragged about having a 100% win record, then ezra evant showed up ,with the resourses to take them on and won. You look at some of thier cases and it just makes you shake your head.You look at the guy that orderd a sprite on air canada and got a 7 up, made a language complaint out of it and was awarded 12000 bucks , now this same fellow is taking on a the busline in ottawa because the driver said hello in english to him. That case wasn't spurious. Air Canada is required by law to provide service in both French and English as a condition of it being traded publicly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 It's hardly surprising that a bunch of middle-class white men have a problem with the Human Rights Commission. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 It's hardly surprising that a bunch of middle-class white men have a problem with the Human Rights Commission. I nominate this as understatement of the year! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.