The cornerstone of human rights protection in Canada is the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Charter forms part of Canada's Constitution and came into being on April 17, 1982, with the signature of the Constitution Act, 1982.
I think there must be any number of analytical comparisons between the Canadian Charter and the U.S. Bill of Rights to be found online: here's the first one that I found:
"The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the United States Bill of Rights: A Comparison" Paul Bender, for the McGill University Law Journal; September, 1983. https://lawjournal.mcgill.c...rights-a-comparison/
Which reminds me of a sophomoric joke I used to hear frequently from someone of a certain temperament; to wit:
quote
Knock, Knock. Who's there? Bender. Bender who? Bender over and kiss my ass.
That's neither here nor there, but if I were a Canadian, I wouldn't give much credence to this "gaslighting" from certain Pennock's forum members who are to the south of Canada's southernmost borders with the United States. Especially from the one that over a period of the last "umpteen" years has used this forum to reveal himself as an online voice having about the same intellect and probity as a rabid dog. I would look in other directions for specifics on this line of inquiry. Including my own experience—if I were a Canadian.
So that's "one" Paul Bender, almost 40 years ago, in 1983. This is how he ended:
quote
As with other basic questions about the meaning of the [Canadian] Charter, answers here must await the course of future Canadian judicial decision-making. That process of constitutional interpretation through the judiciary has taken place in the United States over a period of almost two hundred years. It is unlikely... that the process will ever be fully completed.
The U.S. Constitution is a constantly evolving document—a feature that is a source both of great strength for U.S. constitutional principles, and of continuous controversy. Although the evolution of basic constitutional human rights principles may proceed somewhat more swiftly in Canada (which has the experience of the U.S., other nations and the international community [to look upon,]—as well as its own experience with national and provincial civil rights legislation. The process seems almost certain to be one that will be evolutionary in nature over a substantial period of time.
[Ergo,] the adoption of the Canadian Charter represents the beginning, rather than the culmination, of a system of developing constitutional rights that will likely be an important feature of life and government in Canada for many years to come.
Where this Paul Bender said "The U.S. Constitution is a constantly evolving document...", I read it as the understanding of the U.S. Constitution is subject to evolution over time, and has demonstrably evolved already in the more than 230 years since it was adopted in 1789.
I'm only offering up this "Paul Bender" as an example of what could be found online. If I were going to enlarge my efforts, vis-Ã -vis this particular topicality, I would look to more current and recent sources, as sustenance for any further ruminations and bloviations of this kind.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 03-26-2022).]
The cornerstone of human rights protection in Canada is the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Charter forms part of Canada's Constitution and came into being on April 17, 1982, with the signature of the Constitution Act, 1982.
I think there must be any number of analytical comparisons between the Canadian Charter and the U.S. Bill of Rights to be found online:
I wouldn't give much credence to this "gaslighting" from certain Pennock's forum members who are to the south of Canada's southernmost borders with the United States.
That's exactly the kind of ignorance and dipshittery we have come to expect from LEFTISTS.
How about an "analytical comparison" like a MONARCH signing her proclamation / permission for Canada to even have rights.
Now tell us all what king or queen granted their permission for the United States to have a Constitution.
Tell us all why the United States Constitution begins with WE THE PEOPLE.
Then tell us all why HER MAJESTY'S 1982 PERMISSION for Canada to have a "Charter" says:
"ELIZABETH THE SECOND By The Grace Of God Of The United Kingdom, Canada And Her Other Realms And Territories, Queen, Head Of The Commonwealth, Defender Of The Faith."...
Our Loving Subjects and all others whom these Presents may concern are hereby required to take notice and govern themselves accordingly.
By Her Majesty's Command...
Tell us all why that Canadian Charter's very FIRST article says that Canadians have only those rights as the government allows them:
"The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
The depth of ignorance of you Leftists, even on the most rudimentary and basic civics issues, is truly astonishing and pathetic.
Maybe you'll find another worthless cut & paste article from another Leftist whack-job to make false comparisons and then you can "Bender over and gaslight" yourself.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 03-27-2022).]
How many restrictions (laws or "policies") does the USA have in contravention of the 2nd amendment ? Nowhere do I read "Right to bear arms except...."
How many on free speech ect (1st amendment) ?, again nowhere do I read "except....."
4th amendment ? What a joke....There is that "except" again...
Face it, there IS no freedom or rights anywhere in North America, we are nothing but free-range slaves on a tax farm, just with some more inclined to resist than others.
[This message has been edited by MidEngineManiac (edited 03-26-2022).]
Kind of irrelevant, though. Yours seems about as useless as tits on a boar.
It's NOT a right anymore, it's a privilege so long as you have paid the tax stamps, taken the courses, done the right paperwork, jumped through the hoops and passed the "right-think" background check, and only want "approved" items. THEN sit back and wait for permission. Oh, and dont try and by-pass any of that by getting somebody else to buy it for you.
Doesn't sound like a "right" to me.
You can call it "The Federal Government" or call it "The Crown". Same **** . Same stink. Different place for the pile is all.
In fact, in that area we have slightly more "freedom" here. Anything legally an "antique firearm" has no restrictions. Buy, sell and trade like base-ball cards if you want. No licences, no checks, no nothing.
[This message has been edited by MidEngineManiac (edited 03-26-2022).]
Kind of irrelevant, though. Yours seems about as useless as tits on a boar.
It's NOT a right anymore, it's a privilege so long as you have paid the tax stamps, taken the courses, done the right paperwork, jumped through the hoops and passed the "right-think" background check, and only want "approved" items. THEN sit back and wait for permission.
Doesn't sound like a "right" to me.
You can call it "The Federal Government" or call it "The Crown". Same **** . Same stink. Different place for the pile is all.
In fact, in that area we have slightly more "freedom" here. Anything legally an "antique firearm" has no restrictions. Buy, sell and trade like base-ball cards if you want. No licences, no checks, no nothing.
You have very serious misconceptions about U.S. gun laws.
Absolutely NOBODY in my state of Florida, or in the vast majority of all U.S. states, has to "pay tax stamps", get a license, take a course, or "pass a "right-think" background check".
We can walk into any of thousands of gun stores, purchase a pistol, rifle, shotgun, (all of them semiautomatic), and buy all the ammunition we wish to and the only requirement is that we clear a background check to make certain that you aren't a convicted felon or non-citizen which is lawfully prohibited from owning a firearm.
THAT'S IT
There are no state or federal lists of citizens that own firearms or what firearms they own, (except in a very few Leftist controlled states and cities).
We can also "pay a $200 tax stamp", it's actually a real stamp on a form that has a stamp that resembles a postage stamp and it has a cancellation mark imprinted over the stamp. I know this because I have TWO of them, and you pass a short criminal background check and then legally own a fully automatic weapon....a/k/a "MACHINE GUN" if we wish to.
As for "antique firearms" we have them available in pawn shops, thrift stores, rummage sales and every other venue imaginable without restriction.
We aren't forced to play around with children's toys like BB and pellet guns and slingshots like Canadian subjects...
....and we don't have Canadian style "hate speech" courts / tribunals....
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 03-27-2022).]
We aren't forced to play around with children's toys like BB and pellet guns and slingshots.....
....and we don't have Canadian style "hate speech" courts / tribunals....
[/i]
Hate speech tribunals, you are right. We got them, not that I give a rats ass about them. The truth is they are limited in scope and the "hate speech" has to fall within certain parameters for them to have any jurisdiction. Let 'em try.
As for the rest, we do to. We can go get a PAL (Possession and Acquisition Licence) any time we want. BUT, there is a sheet-load of "terms and conditions" attached to them (think California), and they have to be renewed every 5 years. Restricted permit required for handguns and SOME "assault"-style guns.
I made a personal choice to let mine lapse and stick with non-regulated target plinkers simply because I was tired of the hassle (and expense) for something that seldom got used. The regulations have made it as onerous as possible to go shooting with a powder gun. OTOH, there are few restrictions on unregulated air. In fact I am setting up an 10-meter pistol range right in the apartment this summer for air pistol. Place is big enough. Try THAT with a .22 short (even though the pellet is louder and in some cases hits harder) and you are headed for a cell. Never mind I can buy an air pistol over-the-counter just about any hardware store and walk out with it, and go shooting the same day. A .22 short would take about a year of paperwork hassles and background checks to get. For poking holes in a piece of paper in a trap, against a concrete backdrop which makes more sense ?
It's not a matter of "forced", its logically examining the available options and using the one that fits best.
Hate speech tribunals, you are right. We got them, not that I give a rats ass about them. The truth is they are limited in scope and the "hate speech" has to fall within certain parameters for them to have any jurisdiction. Let 'em try.
As for the rest, we do to. We can go get a PAL (Possession and Acquisition Licence) any time we want. BUT, there is a sheet-load of "terms and conditions" attached to them (think California), and they have to be renewed every 5 years. Restricted permit required for handguns and SOME "assault"-style guns.
I made a personal choice to let mine lapse and stick with non-regulated target plinkers simply because I was tired of the hassle (and expense) for something that seldom got used. The regulations have made it as onerous as possible to go shooting with a powder gun. OTOH, there are few restrictions on unregulated air. In fact I am setting up an 10-meter pistol range right in the apartment this summer for air pistol. Place is big enough. Try THAT with a .22 short (even though the pellet is louder and in some cases hits harder) and you are headed for a cell. Never mind I can buy an air pistol over-the-counter just about any hardware store and walk out with it, and go shooting the same day. A .22 short would take about a year of paperwork hassles and background checks to get. For poking holes in a piece of paper in a trap, against a concrete backdrop which makes more sense ?
It's not a matter of "forced", its logically examining the available options and using the one that fits best.
So as you admit, "going down those roads" of 1rst and 2nd Amendment Constitutional rights of Americans as compared to what you Canadian subjects are allowed by your government was a VERY SHORT ROAD that ended precisely where I said it does.
Look, I get. I really do.
You and a lot of other people around the world wish that you had the same rights and freedoms that we have here in the U.S. and believe me, I wish you did too.
Many years ago I even put on a "green leisure suit" raised my right hand and swore an oath to protect and defend my Constitution and my country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. My duties to uphold that oath even extended to me fighting to help other people around the world gain the same rights and freedoms that we Americans have, or as close to them as possible.
The hard reality though is that you don't have the same rights and freedoms that we do and the masses of people from all over this planet that are trying to get into my country, legally or illegally, are NOT doing so because they think we have fewer rights and freedoms here than where they want to leave......and that includes leaving Canada...
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 03-28-2022).]
So as you admit, "going down those roads" of 1rst and 2nd Amendment Constitutional rights of Americans as compared to what you Canadian subjects are allowed by your government was a VERY SHORT ROAD that ended precisely where I said it does.
This is really a significant truth that everyone should understand. The United States Constitution, at its core and from inception, was created following a revolution with the emphasis on the fact that the people are in charge. That they've assigned government duties to the government to manage for us collectively, but that their power is derived directly from and by the people. The majority of the bill of rights were written by our founders, TO the government, to let them know that we can rescind these rights any time we want.
This is a fundamental difference in law that I've tried to make sure my daughter fully understood since she was about 5-6 years old. Every other Constitution in this world is written from a different perspective, that the rights are granted down to the people BY the government ... and the government being those representatives.
Yesterday, I bought my daughter her first gun. I actually don't even own a gun... but I bought my daughter one. A pink Ruger 10/22 rifle. I asked her if she knew what the first amendment was. And she said... "Uhh, daddy... I think you mean the second amendment?" and I said... "No, what is the first amendment?" so she said... "The right to free speech, religion, and freedom of the press," so then I said... "correct, and how is that right protected?" ...and she said, "With the second amendment?"
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: This is really a significant truth that everyone should understand. The United States Constitution, at its core and from inception, was created following a revolution with the emphasis on the fact that the people are in charge. That they've assigned government duties to the government to manage for us collectively, but that their power is derived directly from and by the people. The majority of the bill of rights were written by our founders, TO the government, to let them know that we can rescind these rights any time we want.
This is a fundamental difference in law that I've tried to make sure my daughter fully understood since she was about 5-6 years old. Every other Constitution in this world is written from a different perspective, that the rights are granted down to the people BY the government ... and the government being those representatives.
Yesterday, I bought my daughter her first gun. I actually don't even own a gun... but I bought my daughter one. A pink Ruger 10/22 rifle. I asked her if she knew what the first amendment was. And she said... "Uhh, daddy... I think you mean the second amendment?" and I said... "No, what is the first amendment?" so she said... "The right to free speech, religion, and freedom of the press," so then I said... "correct, and how is that right protected?" ...and she said, "With the second amendment?
BINGO...
Well said.
[This message has been edited by OldsFiero (edited 03-28-2022).]
