From the people who brought you covid lockdowns, All people banned from wilderness (now with snitch line!)

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

No one here is framing anything of the kind, you're trying to change it into that because you know you can't argue what they are saying.

What is there to argue, governments have the authority to tell you how to behave and to follow instructions if and when it deems it necessary for you to do so.

In other words it can force you. But of course you people are as hung up about the word force as you are the word lie so it's no wonder you can't think straight.

 

[CdnFox]

Just now, eyeball said:

What is there to argue, governments have the authority to tell you how to behave and to follow instructions if and when it deems it necessary for you to do so.

Not really. Governments are bound by the charter and very frequently the government loses court cases about what it can and can't do. Speaking of traffic laws go ask for it about bike lanes and tell him all about how the government can do whatever it wants

You already lost this argument kid.  Now you're just playing in your own poo. 

[eyeball]

52 minutes ago, User said:

Who, what specific comment are you talking about, because this has nothing to do with your comment I was responding to. 

Yeah it did. You people are famous for your disdain of government authority, unless it's about deporting immigrants or something, then you can't get enough of it.

58 minutes ago, User said:

Yes, you laugh at your own straw man creations. 

So you're not a law and order right winger?

Bullshit.

[eyeball]

59 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

the establishment of an agreed upon system is what allows us to use the roads effectively.

Precisely. It what allows us to govern ourselves civilly.

And following that we agree to follow the rules that governments are responsible for both making and enforcing.

It's why most people, especially law and order people don't say fùck it if there's no other vehicle in sight and drive thru a red light. They wait and do as they're expected to, like everyone else that agrees with the same system.

Whether it's as mundane as a traffic law or as dramatic as a public order.

If on the other hand you disagree to the point you feel you have the right to ignore the laws you don't like we might as well all go back to nature.

[eyeball]

50 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Not really. Governments are bound by the charter and very frequently the government loses court cases about what it can and can't do.

Sure but until such time as that process can unfold governments are still authorized to act, especially in situations that have an immediate potential to impact the safety of the public.

If anything governments should be just as liable for failing to act.

[Goddess]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

governments have the authority to tell you how to behave and to follow instructions if and when it deems it necessary for you to do so.

In other words it can force you.

Is there anything a government could tell you to do that you would refuse to do?

Or you just believe no matter what the government says, you would obey?

I've long suspected that you are the type of person who would do the most heinous thing and it wouldn't bother you, as long as someone in a safety vest told you to do it.  It seems like you have no moral or ethical codes.

[eyeball]

6 hours ago, Goddess said:

Is there anything a government could tell you to do that you would refuse to do? 

Or you just believe no matter what the government says, you would obey?

Of course not, I wouldn't obey an order to harm another person. I'd treat others the way I'd want to be treated. 

6 hours ago, Goddess said:

I've long suspected that you are the type of person who would do the most heinous thing and it wouldn't bother you, as long as someone in a safety vest told you to do it.  It seems like you have no moral or ethical codes.

That's because you're a loon.

[Shady]

13 hours ago, eyeball said:

What is there to argue, governments have the authority to tell you how to behave and to follow instructions if and when it deems it necessary for you to do so.

In other words it can force you. But of course you people are as hung up about the word force as you are the word lie so it's no wonder you can't think straight.

 

That’s not true.  They have as much authority as we allow them to have.  Regardless, it’s funny watching you defend fascism and authoritarianism again.  When did you become a fascist?

[User]

15 minutes ago, Shady said:

That’s not true.  They have as much authority as we allow them to have.  Regardless, it’s funny watching you defend fascism and authoritarianism again.  When did you become a fascist?

They have always been the authoritarians. 

They don't have to be "fascists" to be authoritarians. 

 

[Barquentine]

37 minutes ago, Shady said:

They have as much authority as we allow them to have.

That's right. And those powers we grant them allow them to do reasonable things like temporarily banning woods travel during times of extreme fire risk brought on by extreme drought.

Have you seen what's happening across the country?

Now NB has announced a ban on any forest activity, while NFLD has had to declare an emergency in one area. They even had to pull fire fighters out from one fire because it's too dangerous!

These temporary bans are right and sensible!

Edited August 10, 2025 by Barquentine
grammar

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Shady said:

That’s not true.  They have as much authority as we allow them to have.  Regardless, it’s funny watching you defend fascism and authoritarianism again.  When did you become a fascist?

When I became a voter I guess. Or was it a liar?

In any case when did you become such a scofflaw?

[suds]

14 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Not really. Governments are bound by the charter and very frequently the government loses court cases about what it can and can't do. Speaking of traffic laws go ask for it about bike lanes and tell him all about how the government can do whatever it wants

You already lost this argument kid.  Now you're just playing in your own poo. 

That's basically the way the system is designed to work. If you don't like the Nova Scotia ban (or even certain parts of it), or if you believe your rights have been violated, or the government has overreached with its authority,  you have the right to challenge it in the courts as some individuals and groups have already done. And that's about it. 

Edited August 10, 2025 by suds

[Venandi]

32 minutes ago, suds said:

if you believe your rights have been violated, or the government has overreached with its authority,  you have the right to challenge it in the courts as some individuals and groups have already done. And that's about it. 

I think that's why the fine is so high, you have to be charged to fight it... I think they think they'll lose so they want to make any attempt at seeking justice more costly than the average person can afford. 

 

 

[Venandi]

6 hours ago, eyeball said:

I'd treat others the way I'd want to be treated. 

No you wouldn't and no you don't... you couldn't even stick to your own line of BS in the very next sentence.

Which reads:

6 hours ago, eyeball said:

That's because you're a loon.

 

Edited August 10, 2025 by Venandi

[eyeball]

30 minutes ago, Venandi said:

No you wouldn't and no you don't... 

Prove it or fúck off.

31 minutes ago, Venandi said:

you couldn't even stick to your own line of BS in the very next sentence.

You don't know goddess very well do you?

[CdnFox]

15 hours ago, eyeball said:

Sure but until such time as that process can unfold governments are still authorized to act, especially in situations that have an immediate potential to impact the safety of the public.

 

To a degree. Again a number of churches took the gov't to task immediately and got wins. 

Where the gov't tends to win is when they're picking on people who are vulnerable and not orgnaized, where they can go after them one by one.  Once they scared the unions off that meant employees, average people, young people, anyone who could easily be repressed and have their rights trampled. 

And that's what happened.  I say that's bad. You say 'yay team'.  

[Venandi]

12 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Prove it or fúck off.

That's twice in the space of two sentences... how much proof do you need?

[Venandi]

Yo Fly-baby... that's all ya got eh? 

[Chrissy1979]

We have had wilderness travel restrictions in times of drought for decades. It’s nothing new. It lessens the risk of fire and of needing to risk first responders’ lives doing search and rescue.

 

You can certainly tell who never leaves their basement if they think this has never happened before.

[Army Guy]

18 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

Where and when did the Carney government ever talk about dismissing our covid experience?  Quite the opposite when he wasn't in office, where he gave us low marks because we were ill prepared like you noted.  I'd also be floored to think or know that our medical and other experts haven't learned from the pandemic. 

Maybe my life is too simple, but I wouldn't lose a lot of sleep about my rights being infringed if I was ordered to stay out of the woods for a short period of time to error on the side of safety. 

 

No I can't.  Can you show me where it didn't?

 

Hindsight is great isn't it...  Of course there were mistakes. We've never experienced this.  I'll also assume you're good to see our taxes increase to pay for all the shortcomings you mentioned.  

The only thing that has changed about the liberals is Justin is gone and carney is in, for the most part Justins MP are still in place...What have they learned, certainly nothing about the logistics portion of this whole thing, that we are terribly unprepared for the next one, .....So we what is it they have learned...and it is one thing to learn a lesson, it is another to do something to make sure we don't follow that same route...

Today NB just followed NS example no one is allowed in the woods, nothing like overreacting.......all in the name of public safety....other than covid, this is the first time they have banned people from the woods...it's not public safety it is plain overreacting...this is government telling the public you can't be trusted so stay away.... 

I gave you an example young teenagers getting the cerg while living at home with parent making more than 150 k all this was a huge money give away...even working CRA members were collecting CERB while working...i mean come on..saving lives through massive spending....what a joke...But then again it is just public tax dollars why should we be worried....spend , spend spend...do you run your household like that ? 

There was not just a few mistakes it was one big goat rodeo, a perfect example of what not to do...And we have done this plenty of times through our history, massive well run vaccination programs for all kinds of virus, polio, measles, chicken pox...

Is that what your basing your augment on, it cost to much so we won't be fixing anything, a lot of these measures we learned were short or non existence will effect almost any other emergency action required by emergency planning and preparation....part of DND...I guess the government answer would be it cost to much to protect Canadians and throw their hands up...thats what your saying right now...    

 

[Army Guy]

8 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

We have had wilderness travel restrictions in times of drought for decades. It’s nothing new. It lessens the risk of fire and of needing to risk first responders’ lives doing search and rescue.

 

You can certainly tell who never leaves their basement if they think this has never happened before.

The last one NB had was during covid, because you might be a spreader of the virus while enjoying the great outdoors....ya that one made sense as well ,Not once that i can remember or find on goggle has NB banned people from the woods over fire concerns....now maybe if your from some high Forrest fire areas, but here in NB not so...

thats all you got is is broken opinions and slogans maybe give us a source...

[Chrissy1979]

Try and learn to write in English and I might be able to understand you. 

[Army Guy]

3 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Try and learn to write in English and I might be able to understand you. 

Your another poster on here that has got nothing of any real value to contribute, other than trolling everyone's remarks...and we got a full section of people that does that, and they are not hiring any more opinionated columnist. I type that out really slow so you could understand it... 

[eyeball]

 

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

To a degree.

What degree though? Clearly more than just one during COVID and now in NB which is probably why we see our governments wielding such authority only rarely.

That said, the degree to which you people have lost your shit over it has resulted in you now regarding things like road side safety checks as fascism and imagining society is filled with people who would happily pull out your fingernails for shits, giggles and the Liberals.

Yes, your shit really is that lost. Get a fúcking grip.

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, Chrissy1979 said:

We have had wilderness travel restrictions in times of drought for decades. It’s nothing new. It lessens the risk of fire and of needing to risk first responders’ lives doing search and rescue.

 

You can certainly tell who never leaves their basement if they think this has never happened before.

In select areas especially areas of actual fire.  Not preemptive blanket province wide bans.