CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 28180
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:29 am
 


And it was the Opposition parties and the CBC who decided that embarassing the existing government was more important than respecting the judicial process of a close Canadian ally and trading partner. And for projecting the idea that a Canadian who commits fraud and larceny in another country is automatically exempt solely be being a Canadian citizen from any consequences that the other nation sees as fitting the crime.

William Sampson. Martin. Smith. Khadr. Sampson was clearly the only innocent one of the lot. And, even with the full knowledge that he was being raped and tortured in a Saudi prison for a "crime" that was laughably false on the face of it, he was the only one that the NDP and the liberalest of the Liberals didn't go to battle for. Why is that? :?


Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 9914
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:09 pm
 


Thanos wrote:
Hmmm. Unless you're a member of the NDP or the liberal side of the Liberals I wasn't talking about you at all. :?

Lighten up, sizzlechest. 8)


sorry, was talking to c3po


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2366
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 1:43 pm
 


Gunnair wrote:
Agreed. No jail but ban them for three years instead.

Because ban lists are so accurate, and never cause problem for anyone else.

Moreover, if that person has desired economic activity what's the point in a three year ban?

Have any firearms on you? Y/N? Have the documentation for them? No, ok take it to the turn around you are going to need to go back the US and drop them off.

No harm done, no damage done, no need to spend anymore effort or time on the matter.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 63861
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:04 pm
 


Xort wrote:
Have any firearms on you? Y/N? Have the documentation for them? No, ok take it to the turn around you are going to need to go back the US and drop them off.


That would make sense. Naturally, that won't happen because that doesn't serve the agenda of the she-man gun hater's club.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 13958
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:14 pm
 


BartSimpson wrote:
Xort wrote:
Have any firearms on you? Y/N? Have the documentation for them? No, ok take it to the turn around you are going to need to go back the US and drop them off.


That would make sense. Naturally, that won't happen because that doesn't serve the agenda of the she-man gun hater's club.

Yeah, it's so much worse than the over-reaction on the US side because they find a roach in your ashtray. Criminal charges, car confiscated, a lifetime ban on crossing the border. All perfectly normal reactions over a piece of paper with like a 20th of a gram of burnt weed left in it. :roll:


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 63861
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:30 pm
 


PublicAnimalNo9 wrote:
Yeah, it's so much worse than the over-reaction on the US side because they find a roach in your ashtray. Criminal charges, car confiscated, a lifetime ban on crossing the border. All perfectly normal reactions over a piece of paper with like a 20th of a gram of burnt weed left in it. :roll:


I won't argue that at all.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23555
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:32 pm
 


BartSimpson wrote:
Xort wrote:
Have any firearms on you? Y/N? Have the documentation for them? No, ok take it to the turn around you are going to need to go back the US and drop them off.


That would make sense. Naturally, that won't happen because that doesn't serve the agenda of the she-man gun hater's club.


Yeah, the small penis gun wielders cartel will pee themselves if you seek to have them respect the laws of another country.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23555
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:33 pm
 


Xort wrote:
Gunnair wrote:
Agreed. No jail but ban them for three years instead.

Because ban lists are so accurate, and never cause problem for anyone else.

Moreover, if that person has desired economic activity what's the point in a three year ban?

Have any firearms on you? Y/N? Have the documentation for them? No, ok take it to the turn around you are going to need to go back the US and drop them off.

No harm done, no damage done, no need to spend anymore effort or time on the matter.


Not my problem. Don't break Canadian law and we all get along somewhat fine.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2366
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 3:09 pm
 


Gunnair wrote:
Not my problem. Don't break Canadian law and we all get along somewhat fine.


So if you wanted to travel somewhere and you shared a name with someone that was banned from travel, and you can not conduct your trip... that's not your problem?

I guess if you are like me and will avoid traveling outside of the nation if at all possible this is less of a problem. Then all you have to deal with is the minor economic loss of banning a person from entery and the huge cost of running such a system.

PublicAnimalNo9 wrote:
Yeah, it's so much worse than the over-reaction on the US side because they find a roach in your ashtray. Criminal charges, car confiscated, a lifetime ban on crossing the border. All perfectly normal reactions over a piece of paper with like a 20th of a gram of burnt weed left in it. :roll:

So? Is someone else acting poorly justification for you to act poorly as well?

What retarded logic are you trying to use here? Is this the 3rd grade, are we on a playground? Do you have the mental ability of a small child?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Boston Bruins


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 11907
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 3:16 pm
 


QBC wrote:
were did i say that canadians can go anywhere, act like an ass and get away withit? Sorry, dont put words in my mouth.


Did you even read my post? No where did I say what you inferred. Talk about putting words in mouth. :roll:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Boston Bruins


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 11907
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 3:17 pm
 


QBC wrote:
sorry, was talking to c3po



ROTFL

You're a funny guy, taking a page out of the old Rev Blair name changing. :roll:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23555
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 5:10 pm
 


Xort wrote:
Gunnair wrote:
Not my problem. Don't break Canadian law and we all get along somewhat fine.


So if you wanted to travel somewhere and you shared a name with someone that was banned from travel, and you can not conduct your trip... that's not your problem?



If you believe that's how it works, that all of the Jones in the states are banned because one decided to sneak a gun into Canada, then have a great time with that.

http://zapatopi.net/afdb/ this might help with that.

And no, it's not my problem. In that you are correct.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2366
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 5:25 pm
 


Gunnair wrote:
If you believe that's how it works, that all of the Jones in the states are banned because one decided to sneak a gun into Canada, then have a great time with that.
I never said that, and I don't believe that. What I know is that the no fly list causes problems for people that share names with people on the list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List

Head down to the 'False positives and other controversial cases' section.
Quote:
And no, it's not my problem. In that you are correct.

Still is going to cost a lot of money, just so you can feel smug. I don't think that's a good investment of our money. You seem to be able to feel smug without the government spending money on a project that has zero value to the nation.
~
I'm going to update my suggested question to one that's more likely to work better:
"Without proper documentation bringing firearms into Canada is a crime. At this time you can declare firearms that you have on or in your vehicle and you will simply be asked to return back to the USA. No record of this will be kept and their is no pentalty. If you are found to be in posession of a firearm you illegaly imported into Canada at a later time you will face criminal charges, the penalty is a 3 year minium sentance. Do you have any firearms with you, or transport documentation?"


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23555
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 5:46 pm
 


Xort wrote:
Gunnair wrote:
If you believe that's how it works, that all of the Jones in the states are banned because one decided to sneak a gun into Canada, then have a great time with that.
I never said that, and I don't believe that. What I know is that the no fly list causes problems for people that share names with people on the list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List

Head down to the 'False positives and other controversial cases' section.
Quote:
And no, it's not my problem. In that you are correct.

Still is going to cost a lot of money, just so you can feel smug. I don't think that's a good investment of our money. You seem to be able to feel smug without the government spending money on a project that has zero value to the nation.
~


For the handful of issues it causes people, of well. Price of doing business.

And yes, I do feel smug. Banning those who try to cross the border with weapons vice spending the cash to prosecute them and throw them in jail is not a horrendous cost to me.

That seems to bother you. Sorry that I don't care.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2366
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 6:04 pm
 


Gunnair wrote:
For the handful of issues it causes people, of well. Price of doing business.
And yes, I do feel smug. Banning those who try to cross the border with weapons vice spending the cash to prosecute them and throw them in jail is not a horrendous cost to me.
That seems to bother you. Sorry that I don't care.

We both seem to agree that a court case and jail time is a waste of money.

What do we gain from a ban on entry? How does Canada come out ahead from your suggestion?


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 73 posts ]  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.