Jump to content

Trucker's Convoy


West

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Thats not what the source says the one i gave you, but hey if you got another source then i would like to read it...

The Canadian Constitution - About Canada's System of Justice

You've been posting long enough here and know better than to just throw a link out without quotes or explanation.  Give us a quote and an actual argument to review otherwise it's pretty hard to respond.  You know better and you are better than most of the conspiracy clowns here.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, blackbird said:

If you had been watching the news, you would have seen the frequent reports of harassment, threatened violence, intimidation of residents and anybody wearing a mask in Ottawa.

Trucker convoy: PM says protesters have to stop | CTV News

Quote

“People of Ottawa don't deserve to be harassed in their own neighbourhoods, don’t deserve to be confronted with the inherent violence of a swastika flying on a street corner, or a confederate flag, or the insults and jeers just because they're wearing a mask. That's not who Canadians are,” the prime minister said. “These pandemic restrictions are not forever.”

well shit sir, those actions are unacceptable and well worth the penalties he has invoked. But where is the proof of the violence, and what is your definition of violence lets start there. verbal assaults/ getting your feelings hurt is not violence nor is it against the law.  physical assault is violence. and how many cases have been observed or reported...

Pandemic restrictions are forever, until the 3 rd world countries get vaccinated then more and more variants will arrive on our shores...Yes they may disappear for a few months, but they will be back...  and since we are not in a hurry to vaccinate them then it is pretty much forever.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

You've been posting long enough here and know better than to just throw a link out without quotes or explanation.  Give us a quote and an actual argument to review otherwise it's pretty hard to respond.  You know better and you are better than most of the conspiracy clowns here.  

I thought i did that the first time when i used the source, It is hard to respond to the actual constitution but it clearly spells out how laws are made and what each department is reasonable for them...MP's are often described as law makers why is that... and i don't mean to be an idiot but you just jacked up a few people on the constitution and i thought you could place the pieces together. 

Thanks for the compliment and you can call me out anytime for pushing any conspiracy's. I was just trying to make sure the correct info was being put out there more for me than you as it forces me to research it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

72% of Canadians are saying GO HOME. Start listening, the vast cohorts have abandoned you.

28% is a massive cohort, most insurgencies only need 5% to win

the insurgents don't need a majority to grind Canada to a halt, the Mohawks is a tiny cohort

Edited by Dougie93
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Not true, parliament makes and drafts the laws and approves laws.  it is the judges that interpret the law and how it applies to each case . nothing is unconstitutional until the minister of justice says it is so. 

 

28 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

You don't think the department of justice has any layers or ex judges in it... If it gets past the justice dept, it has been checked. 

Not so a judge could not just strike down say illegal's DUI, becasue he wanted to do a friend a favor...He can interrupt the law, but not throw it out it has a process to go through. 

You mean Lavin was not a perfect example of that, one minister refused on the grounds it was illegal for the government to influence her, and once replaced with a new minister those laws where struck down....

Sorry, but you don’t understand how democracy works. 
 

SCOC alone decides whether a law is constitutional not the elected politicians. The whole point of the constitution is to limit the power of elected politicians…..(notwithstanding clause notwithstanding). 
 

You also have the facts of the SNC Lavalin case wrong…no laws were struck down and nothing was found to be unconstitutional 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Army Guy said:

I thought i did that the first time when i used the source, It is hard to respond to the actual constitution but it clearly spells out how laws are made and what each department is reasonable for them...MP's are often described as law makers why is that... and i don't mean to be an idiot but you just jacked up a few people on the constitution and i thought you could place the pieces together. 

No the first time you used the source you just sort of outlined what the Ministry of Justice is responsible for.  As far as I could tell it didn't even touch on the SoC, which is the highest legal authority in Canada and where the buck ultimately stops for appeals and challenges.  The government and the Minister of Justice can draft and legislate all they want, but even with Senate approval the SoC can still strike down legislation it deems unconstitutional etc.  

1 minute ago, Army Guy said:

Thanks for the compliment and you can call me out anytime for pushing any conspiracy's. I was just trying to make sure the correct info was being put out there more for me than you as it forces me to research it. 

I'm not a lawyer but I did enough law and philosophy courses in university to at least have a basic understanding of how our legal system works, which unfortunately is not true for too many posters here.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

 

Sorry, but you don’t understand how democracy works. 
 

SCOC alone decides whether a law is constitutional not the elected politicians. The whole point of the constitution is to limit the power of elected politicians…..(notwithstanding clause notwithstanding). 
 

You also have the facts of the SNC Lavalin case wrong…no laws were struck down and nothing was found to be unconstitutional 

Maybe i don't so walk me through it...How would you interrupt the below statement, for me it is very clear, but as you say i'm wrong point me in the right direction, give me a source so i can research it......

Quote

The Minister of Justice is responsible for the Department of Justice, which provides legal services such as drafting laws and providing legal advice to the government and its departments. The department also develops criminal law and public law, as well as policies and programs for victims, families, children and youth criminal justice. The Minister of Justice is also the Attorney General or chief law officer of Canada

The below quote is refereeing to the SCOC or so i thought but no where does it say they have final approval, it says they INTERPRUT the law as it has to do with court cases 

Quote

 

Our Constitution also includes provisions relating to the judicial branch of government, composed of judges. The judiciary must interpret and apply the law and the Constitution, and give impartial judgments in all cases, whether they involve public law, such as a criminal case, or private law, such as a dispute over a contract.

The Constitution only provides for federally appointed judges. Provincial judges are appointed under provincial laws.

 

Then there is this comment below here it says the final approval comes from the GG , it also says royal assent is always given...

Parliament is the legislative branch of the federal government. Parliament consists of the Queen (who is usually represented by the Governor General), the Senate and the House of Commons. Bills are debated and passed by the Senate and the House of Commons. The Governor General must also give royal assent to a bill in order for it to become a law. By constitutional convention, royal assent is always given to bills passed by the Senate and the House of Commons.

And then there is this statement now i thought i was on the right track, so show me where i went off the rails...

The Parliament of Canada and the provincial and territorial legislatures both have the authority or jurisdiction to make laws. Parliament can make laws for all of Canada, but only about matters the Constitution assigns to it. A provincial or territorial legislature can only make laws about matters within the province's borders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Army Guy
I don't think you have a great understanding of the differences between Legislation and our Court system.  

Parliament drafts and implements legislation.  The Senate reviews and approves it.  The Governor General is mostly ceremonial and rubber-stamps the Legislation.  After that it's up to the Courts to decide on how these Laws are to be interpreted, enforced or struck down. 

The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest Court in the land and their decisions are the ultimate application of Canadian Law.  Parliament can write new laws, scrap old ones or update them if they want, and the Supreme Court would then have to interpret and then apply those new laws, but only insofar as they're Constitutional.  If the Supreme Court deems new laws or revisions violate the Constitution, they can strike them down, and that's it.  That's the end of it.  

The separation of Canada's judicial and legislative systems is a vital part of our society.  

Edited by Moonbox
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I added another source that spells it out step by step on how laws are processed....I may be wrong but i don't see the SCOC in there, did i miss anything...?

 

THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS

Legislation is a written law that provides rules of conduct. To become law, legislation must be approved by Parliament. Proposed legislation is introduced in Parliament in the form of a bill which provides the basis to amend or repeal existing laws or put new ones in place.

Canada’s legislative process involves all three parts of Parliament: the House of Commons (elected, lower Chamber), the Senate (appointed, upper Chamber), and the Monarch (Head of State, who is represented by the Governor General in Canada).

These three parts work together to create new laws.

 

How new laws and regulations are created (justice.gc.ca)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,722
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    phoenyx75
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • User went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • User went up a rank
      Contributor
    • User earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Fluffypants earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • User went up a rank
      Explorer
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...