Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

citoyens.soquij.qc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 318 posts

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#231

Post by unmole »

bawolff wrote: post #197
refurb wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment is exactly why we need Charter Rights the government can't easily suspend. The utter lack of understanding of why these protections are needed is astounding. I wonder what they are teaching the kids in school. The government (and voters) won't hesitate to call the opposition "terrorists" and claim donating $5 to a cause is "supporting terrorism" and freeze your bank account so you can't pay rent or buy f…

From what i understand, a significant portion of those people would have had their bank accounts frozen from civil lawsuits anyways. So even without the emergencies act it was likely to happen anyways. > This time it's the other side, next time it's you. First they came for the violent criminals, and i did not speak up because i wasn't a violent criminal... oh wait i'm actually totally ok with that.

Blowing horns is a violent crime? No, wait. Donating to people blowing horns is a violent crime?

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#232

Post by eyelidlessness »

hackernewds wrote: post #173
belval wrote: post #8

If you look past the headline, this story is almost "basic sanity". The guy's neighbour didn't want the accused's kids playing in the street (in the suburbs) because they have a yard. To "prove" his point that it was dangerous he drove recklessly around the kids in the street. The accused flipped him off and (allegedly because he denies it) threatened him. Now frankly, I don't see why this would be hackernews-worthy,…

It's newsworthy because Canada has taken a stance as being the arbiter of free speech in other regards, such as misgendering pronouns https://www.them.us/story/canadian-court-rules-misgendering-...

That seems irrelevant but consistent. In both scenarios they’ve affirmed that people have a right to just exist without duress against their existence. Seems obvious to me, but I’m just a he/them who doesn’t want to be hit by asshole drivers being assholes and who freely gives them the finger when they’re dangerous.

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#233

Post by unixgoddess »

jakear wrote: post #80
unixgoddess wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

doesn't the noise from basketballs hitting concrete/asphalt drive you guys nuts?

It's not nearly as bad as the sound of children laughing.

for many people there's nothing beautiful in a child's laughter, especially if they don't have children of their own, so they are only getting the annoyance of noise without the good parts.

moreover, in my experience, when children play, 80% of their interactions is ugly insult-throwing, not laughter.

Also, why should the wishes of a group (children) be more important than those of another (those who wish to enjoy some quiet in their own home)?

In this case, it would be easy to reach a compromise. You want to play basketball? go to a proper public park. You want to sing your lungs off? go to a proper karaoke place. And so on.

Also, what's the beauty of a laughter achieved at the expense of others' pain?

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#234

Post by cleanchit »

gameman144 wrote: post #225
cleanchit wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not using proper pronouns is putting mental strain on a mentally ill person. Imagine blowing smoke in the face of an asthma patient.

Just to be clear, is this your actual position? In other words, it should be illegal to cause mental strain on a mentally ill person?

It should be illegal to finger someone's wound

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#235

Post by bawolff »

unmole wrote: post #231
bawolff wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what i understand, a significant portion of those people would have had their bank accounts frozen from civil lawsuits anyways. So even without the emergencies act it was likely to happen anyways. > This time it's the other side, next time it's you. First they came for the violent criminals, and i did not speak up because i wasn't a violent criminal... oh wait i'm actually totally ok with that.

Blowing horns is a violent crime? No, wait. Donating to people blowing horns is a violent crime?

If the horns are loud enough to cause permenent hearing loss, than yes (these weren't just car horns). Allegedly they were significantly above that threshold, even from inside buildings.

There's also mental torture aspect of doing it 24/7 (literally a tactic used in war to break troops).

Additionally people living in the area reported experiencing significant harrasment from protestors.

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#236

Post by bawolff »

refurb wrote: post #215
bawolff wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what i understand, a significant portion of those people would have had their bank accounts frozen from civil lawsuits anyways. So even without the emergencies act it was likely to happen anyways. > This time it's the other side, next time it's you. First they came for the violent criminals, and i did not speak up because i wasn't a violent criminal... oh wait i'm actually totally ok with that.

A donation to a cause is now a "violent crime"?

It doesn't seem like anybody who donated had anything happen to them.

However, generally speaking people who give money to someone in order to further a criminal act are comitting a criminal act. This is hardly a new concept.

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#238

Post by matbatt38 »

hackernewds wrote: post #174
freetime2 wrote: post #75

Here’s the specific “God-given right” passage from the ruling. So satisfying: [168] To be abundantly clear, it is not a crime to give someone the finger. Flipping the proverbial bird is a God-given, Charter enshrined right that belongs to every red-blooded Canadian. It may not be civil, it may not be polite, it may not be gentlemanly. [169] Nevertheless, it does not trigger criminal liability. Offending someone is no…

> Offending someone is not a crime except when in Canada, you do not acquiesce to calling someone by their chosen gender pronoun https://www.them.us/story/canadian-court-rules-misgendering-...

Are you done complaining about other people's rights? Why would you bring that up?

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#239

Post by mod50ack »

zemnmez wrote: post #169
EntrePrescott wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

leaving aside the show of incompetence of that specific "crown prosecutor", what I find even far more shocking is that in 2023 there still is such a thing as a "crown prosecutor". I'd say it's high time to gain full independence and throw the English "crown" out of Canada.

“the crown” is an idea stemming from english constitutional law representing “the state”, i.e. the legal entity constituting the country. It doesn’t have a lot to do with the physical monarch except in metaphor. It looks like, based on some Googling, that Jamaica, which is a republic (canada is not) still uses the term “crown” in this sense: https://www.mof.gov.jm/careers/crown-counsel-mlss-legal-serv...

Jamaica, like Canada, is not a republic.

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#240

Post by brailsafe »

belval wrote: post #8

If you look past the headline, this story is almost "basic sanity". The guy's neighbour didn't want the accused's kids playing in the street (in the suburbs) because they have a yard. To "prove" his point that it was dangerous he drove recklessly around the kids in the street. The accused flipped him off and (allegedly because he denies it) threatened him. Now frankly, I don't see why this would be hackernews-worthy,…

The suburbs are ironically, but not so surprisingly filled with crazy assholes that feel like the world belongs to them, or otherwise have some absurd levels of entitlement. They feel like they own the sidewalks, or if there's no sidewalks, they own the street and everything on it or not on it in front of their house, they feel like they should control whether or not a marginally higher density building should be built down the street or whether a neighbor can paint their house a different colour. When there's no land left, they want more cul-de-sacs built for them because it's the suburban dream and fuck wetlands anyway, and when there's no social services left, they want new ones built for them at everyone else's expense and they don't really want to be part of a community; they want to be by themselves, on their fat asses, in front of their fucking TV, the only quality of which they understand is how big it is.

I absolutely loath that world and never want to return.

Post reply on HN