[Brenda]

Along the high ways? HELL YES.
There aren't THAT many high ways through BC anyways, and they are all remote. It's needed.

[Tricks]

Cell phones are a privilege not a right.

[Yogi]

Unless a cell phone is 'necessary ' for work purposes, then it is just a luxury toy. Totally not needed by most peeps! And I even question my own statement 'necessary for work purposes'.
To that end I have a simple 'telephone'. It doesn't have a key board. Texting is disabled. Doesn't have a touch screen. No apps. If I want to contact someone with it I actually have to push the #'s one at a time. Sometimes as many as eleven #'s in succession! When I am out of a service area I can't call anyone, and they can't call me. When I get back into a service area, and check my phone log it shows as 'missed call-view now' if someone did try to call I can call them back, or not!. Works for me. Already we are paying the highest rates in the world for cell service, and 'you' want to pay even more for marginally improved services?

[Brenda]

Tricks Tricks:

Cell phones are a privilege not a right.

So are food, water, shelter, education etc. Your point?

[Tricks]

Brenda Brenda:

Tricks Tricks:

Cell phones are a privilege not a right.

So are food, water, shelter, education etc. Your point?

Oh I wasn't aware you needed a cell phone to live.

My mistake. Carry on.

[Gunnair]

Brenda Brenda:

Tricks Tricks:

Cell phones are a privilege not a right.

So are food, water, shelter, education etc. Your point?

I kinda think they are rights.

A parent denying food to a child results in prison time. A parent denying a cell phone does not.

[Brenda]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Brenda Brenda:

Tricks Tricks:

Cell phones are a privilege not a right.

So are food, water, shelter, education etc. Your point?

I kinda think they are rights.

A parent denying food to a child results in prison time. A parent denying a cell phone does not.

That's the funny thing. They are not rights. The government is not obligated to provide you with any of those if you don't want to do it yourself.

If you want to move to the Sahara, no one is obligated to get you water. Or shelter.

[Brenda]

Tricks Tricks:

Brenda Brenda:

Tricks Tricks:

Cell phones are a privilege not a right.

So are food, water, shelter, education etc. Your point?

Oh I wasn't aware you needed a cell phone to live.

My mistake. Carry on.

I think it is pretty necessary when you get off the road and end up folded around a tree, about a meter above a freezing river (like what happened to me last year), that someone can call 9-11.

So not necessarily a cell phone (or service), but emergency phones along the highway would be nice. Which is what I tried to point out from the start of this thread, forever ago.

The fact that you need "things" to live (including food, water and shelter), does not make them a right. Just sayin'.

[Yogi]

][quote="Brenda ][quote="Brenda:

Cell phones are a privilege not a right.

So are food, water, shelter, education etc. Your point?[/quote]

I kinda think they are rights.

A parent denying food to a child results in prison time. A parent denying a cell phone does not.[/quote]
That's the funny thing. They are not rights. The government is not obligated to provide you with any of those if you don't want to do it yourself.

If you want to move to the Sahara, no one is obligated to get you water. Or


shelter.[/quote]



Parents (or guardians) are responsible

for the care and safety of their children.

(See next page for how the law defines a

child or parent.)

This means that, as a parent, you are

responsible for taking care of your child’s

physical and emotional needs until they

reach the age of 19. It includes making sure

your child has enough food every day, has

clothing, shelter, and health care. It means

giving a child the emotional care and support

they need to grow up safely.



http://www.publiclegaled.bc.ca/pdf/english/...

[Brenda]

Why is this all of a sudden a thing about children? As a parent, you have obligations. That still does not mean that food, water and shelter (and (secondary) education) are rights for adults.
The government does NOT step in when an adult cannot or will not provide themselves with enough food or water or a roof over your head. They will for children. I doubt many children are walking along the highway by themselves a lot

[Tricks]

Brenda Brenda:

I think it is pretty necessary when you get off the road and end up folded around a tree, about a meter above a freezing river (like what happened to me last year), that someone can call 9-11.

So not necessarily a cell phone (or service), but emergency phones along the highway would be nice. Which is what I tried to point out from the start of this thread, forever ago.

The fact that you need "things" to live (including food, water and shelter), does not make them a right. Just sayin'.

So what happened 25 years ago?

Also, you're wrong.

http://www.srfood.org/index.php/en/right-to-food

$1:

The right to food is a human right recognized under international law which protects the right of all human beings to feed themselves in dignity, either by producing their food or by purchasing it.

To produce his or her own food, a person needs land, seeds, water and other resources, and to buy it, one needs money and access to the market. The right to food therefore requires States to provide an enabling environment in which people can use their full poten¬tial to produce or procure adequate food for themselves and their families. To purchase food, a person needs adequate incomes: the right to food consequently requires States to ensure that wage policies or social safety nets enable citizens to realize their right to adequate food.

[Brenda]

You mean when we were NOT obligated to wear seat belts?

Cool! So welfare recipients can sue the government to give them food, since that is a right. And since welfare is not enough to live on, the government is responsible. AWESOME!!!

(what happened to (clean) water and shelter? AND secondary education? OH, here is what happened to clean drinking water. THANKS Canada!! Water is NOT a right here.)
http://thechronicleherald.ca/thenovasco ... ten-denied

[Tricks]

Brenda Brenda:

You mean when we were NOT obligated to wear seat belts?

Have had to do that since the late 70s in both our province. Do you even check things before spouting off?

$1:

Cool! So welfare recipients can sue the government to give them food, since that is a right. And since welfare is not enough to live on, the government is responsible. AWESOME!!!

Live on? No. Get food? Yes. Not to mention the many thing that are set up to allow for distribution of food to the poor.

$1:

(what happened to (clean) water and shelter?OH, here is what happened to clean drinking water. THANKS Canada!! Water is NOT a right here.)
http://thechronicleherald.ca/thenovasco ... ten-denied

Remote areas are the only time that is an issue. These are the same types of places we saw earlier misappropriating funds and screwing around with money while their shelter fell into disarray. Shelter that was provided by the government. I agree it's terrible, but what do you suggest gets done? We send them shipments of water? When they refuse to leave and help themselves? And spend their money foolishly? Does that really help any one?

$1:

AND secondary education?

Well considering it's law (at least in ontario) that you go to school until the age of 16 (soon to be raised to 18 from the sounds of it). I'd say that's about as close to a right you can get. It may not be declared as a right, but no one gets denied it.

[Brenda]

Tricks Tricks:

Brenda Brenda:

You mean when we were NOT obligated to wear seat belts?

Have had to do that since the late 70s in both our province. Do you even check things before spouting off?

Who cares?

$1:

$1:

Cool! So welfare recipients can sue the government to give them food, since that is a right. And since welfare is not enough to live on, the government is responsible. AWESOME!!!

Live on? No. Get food? Yes. Not to mention the many thing that are set up to allow for distribution of food to the poor.

Hey, YOU came up with "a cell phone is not a right". I guess enough food to live on is not either.

$1:

$1:

(what happened to (clean) water and shelter?OH, here is what happened to clean drinking water. THANKS Canada!! Water is NOT a right here.)
http://thechronicleherald.ca/thenovasco ... ten-denied

Remote areas are the only time that is an issue. These are the same types of places we saw earlier misappropriating funds and screwing around with money while their shelter fell into disarray. Shelter that was provided by the government. I agree it's terrible, but what do you suggest gets done? We send them shipments of water? When they refuse to leave and help themselves? And spend their money foolishly? Does that really help any one?

Don't twist things. Clean water is NOT a right. It is that simple.
What do we do to "help them"? The same as we do to help the people who cannot reach 911, because in those modern times, it is too damn hard to put an extra tower at some places. Let them rot.

$1:

$1:

AND secondary education?

Well considering it's law (at least in ontario) that you go to school until the age of 16 (soon to be raised to 18 from the sounds of it). I'd say that's about as close to a right you can get. It may not be declared as a right, but no one gets denied it.

Having access to it and something being a right is so not the same. But hey, when you are hanging on for life, hoping that someone sees where you went off the road, and it takes another hour to get in reach of a phone, I guess that is as close as "not getting denied it". Right?

[Tricks]

Brenda Brenda:

Who cares?

Well clearly you did, until it didn't fit your agenda.

$1:

Hey, YOU came up with "a cell phone is not a right". I guess enough food to live on is not either.

Read what I wrote. Welfare provides enough funding for food.

$1:

Don't twist things. Clean water is NOT a right. It is that simple.

You're right. It isn't. It's still easy to get access to.

$1:

What do we do to "help them"? The same as we do to help the people who cannot reach 911, because in those modern times, it is too damn hard to put an extra tower at some places. Let them rot.

They don't have to put the tower up. Don't like it? Pay for it. No company needs to lose profit for you. The government does not need to provide a fucking cell phone tower for you. Get over yourself.

$1:

Having access to it and something being a right is so not the same.

You're right, it is different, but why go through the bureaucratic red tape associated with altering the Charter just to put something in that is already a law? It's unnecessary and a waste of time.

$1:

But hey, when you are hanging on for life, hoping that someone sees where you went off the road, and it takes another hour to get in reach of a phone, I guess that is as close as "not getting denied it". Right?

Stop making this personal. If you want to have constant access to emergency services, get a fucking SAT phone.

Each cell phone tower costs about 150 grand. Plus having to get permission to put it on someone's land, which they generally have to pay for as well. To cover all of BC, with no overlap, would cost about 50 million dollars. One province. Not to mention the danger of building these things.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/tel ... le4197888/