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

281–290 of 318 posts

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

#281

Post by erenyeager »

justinclift wrote: post #136
erenyeager wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still shows what a police state the UK is, this lady is arrested and she was not causing any disturbance. Do we really want to live in a society where people who did not commit a crime are locked up?

> ... she was not causing any disturbance. Sounds like she was definitely disturbing the clients of the abortion clinic. Intimidation is a thing after all, thus the protection order, which she knowingly violated.

How is standing there causing disturbance? The real disturbance is apparent in what the police did to her.

I really want you and people who hold these views to reflect on what the implications are if someone standing quietly by themselves on a street corner constitutes intimidation. She said she was not part of a protest.

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

#282

Post by ck425 »

erenyeager wrote: post #281
justinclift wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... she was not causing any disturbance. Sounds like she was definitely disturbing the clients of the abortion clinic. Intimidation is a thing after all, thus the protection order, which she knowingly violated.

How is standing there causing disturbance? The real disturbance is apparent in what the police did to her. I really want you and people who hold these views to reflect on what the implications are if someone standing quietly by themselves on a street corner constitutes intimidation. She said she was not part of a protest.

She said she wasn't but she was clearly linked. The anti-abortion protests that lead to the law in the first place commonly claimed to be "prayer vigils" and she went into the buffer zone, outside an abortion clinic to pray.

I can see where you're coming from but at the same time it was a clear attempt to get as close as possible to protesting without breaking the law.

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

#283

Post by ChoGGi »

olliej wrote: post #217
djha-skin wrote: post #211

No one should get arrested for expressing their opinion. That being said, just because you can give someone the finger, doesn't mean you should .

You should read the ruling. If anyone deserves the finger it would be this dude and his family. After one of them assaulted the victim, multiple threatened to hit their kids, they accusing his flipping the bird at them as being a death threat with a "throat slitting" gesture.

He first gave the finger, then I'm guessing gave him a two fingered chin flick. At least when they had the jack hammer confrontation.

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

#284

Post by jpambrun »

version_five wrote: post #154
jpambrun wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This charter and the constitution was imposed unilaterally, and adopted at night without the presence of Quebec representatives. So.. can't really blame us for not being in love with it..

Can't blame Quebec for disagreeing that people are entitled to basic freedoms? (I'd encourage people to read the charter and Quebec's concerns, Quebec objects to it because it doesn't allow them to discriminate against foreigners, there's not some legitimate concern) Some background https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/28/quebec-ca...

Unbound rights means french will disappear along with a culture. For long and still today, french speaking citizens in Quebec earn less than the English minority. The plan was always to assimilate us, and it's mostly working, but you can't blame us for pushing back.

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

#285

Post by jpambrun »

bawolff wrote: post #205
jpambrun wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This charter and the constitution was imposed unilaterally, and adopted at night without the presence of Quebec representatives. So.. can't really blame us for not being in love with it..

It was adopted without quebec, but its not like it was done in secret. Quebec was present for the negotiations.

In secret, during the night, when the Quebec representatives were sleeping.

https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuit_des_Longs_Couteaux_(Qu%...

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

#286

Post by jpambrun »

rhaway84773 wrote: post #160
jpambrun wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This charter and the constitution was imposed unilaterally, and adopted at night without the presence of Quebec representatives. So.. can't really blame us for not being in love with it..

An alternative way of stating this is that the Quebec government was unilaterally required to give its citizens rights. The people of Quebec may be unhappy with the mechanism but surely the principle of protecting people from government overreach should not be in dispute.

The Quebec gouvernement is limiting some individual right to protect the culture and language. It probably hard to understand form outside when you are not seeing your culture completely swallowed by Canada and America.

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

#287

Post by Natsu »

denton-scratch wrote: post #273
Natsu wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's actually addressed in the article if you read deep enough. The judge praises the prosecutor for cutting the case off halfway and asking it thrown out after they heard from the defendant. They did have a video of a guy giving both middle fingers and making a motion that could ambiguously look like throat slashing. Now it wasn't that and the guy had a credible explanation of why and his neighbor is both a bad dr…

> which makes me believe they must not have known that earlier. But why not? The evidence that was presented to the court was the complainant's evidence. The case failed on the prosecution evidence. The prosecutor should have known it wouldn't stand up.

I mean, you're right that there's a good case that they should have known if they'd done things more thoroughly, but the fact that they simply did fold tells me they probably didn't actually know (even if they really should have!) because otherwise, why embarrass yourself in court like that?

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

#288

Post by klyrs »

freetime2 wrote: post #280
klyrs wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did I, with any authority, say GP can't repeat Republican FUD? Or did I merely have a critical response? Republicans love to point to other countries as boogeymen, "they're coming for your freeeeedoms" all the while: through fear and scapegoat and boogeymen and "religious conviction" they fight tooth and claw to take freedoms away.

You also seem to be assuming the parent is a Republican, and holds a certain set of beliefs and political opinions beyond what they have stated above.

I assume nothing of the sort. Their profile identifies them as a resident of the US, so I called 'em a Yankee. That they're spreading Republican FUD doesn't make them Republican. Anybody can repeat Fox "News" talking points. Hell, I'm sure I have at some time or another. Doesn't mean they necessarily agree with every single thing that comes out of Fibbin' Tucker's lying mouth.

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

#289

Post by matbilodeau »

sheepscreek wrote: post #266
walrus01 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you like well written Canadian legal decisions, check out the decision in Meads. v. Meads on sovereign citizens.

Thanks for the reference. I am Canadian and only just discovering this! If anyone else wants to read Meads vs. Meads: https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012a...

Thanks for the amazing read.

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

#290

Post by freetime2 »

klyrs wrote: post #288
freetime2 wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You also seem to be assuming the parent is a Republican, and holds a certain set of beliefs and political opinions beyond what they have stated above.

I assume nothing of the sort. Their profile identifies them as a resident of the US, so I called 'em a Yankee. That they're spreading Republican FUD doesn't make them Republican. Anybody can repeat Fox "News" talking points. Hell, I'm sure I have at some time or another. Doesn't mean they necessarily agree with every single thing that comes out of Fibbin' Tucker's lying mouth.

Why do you assume they were influenced by Republican FUD for warning about the dangers of Incrementalism? I have heard many such “slippery-slope” arguments from people of all political persuasions (even though it is considered a logical fallacy).

Saying they are “repeating talking points” also implies they have not thought deeply on the issue and considered multiple points of view before arriving at this conclusion - or simply arrived at this position from their own judgment - which of course we have no way of knowing based on what they said.

Post reply on HN