The government said Canadians who joined ISIS would face the 'full force' of the law, but not a single woman who lived under ISIS has yet been convicted.
The government said Canadians who joined ISIS would face the ‘full force’ of the law, but not a single woman who lived under ISIS has yet been convicted.
Why yes, having everyday citizens be able to purchase firearms since the countries existence, only to them remove such ability and make anyone who keeps the property a criminal isn’t a degredation of rights and freedoms then you are blind.
Also, nice only attempting to refute one of my many points.
I didn’t “attempt to refute” your arguments. I proved that you were wrong. You have no right to own a firearm in Canada.
[Montague] argued that the right to bear arms has always been a part of Canada’s Constitution. His arguments failed to convince the trial court. The Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the lower court’s ruling that there is no constitutional right to bear arms in Canada. Montague tried to appeal the case one more time, to the Supreme Court of Canada. On September 16, 2010, the Court announced that it would not hear the appeal. As a result, the ruling that there is no Canadian right to bear arms is settled constitutional law for the foreseeable future. The Supreme Court said in 1993 that “Canadians, unlike Americans do not have a constitutional right to bear arms.” Montague will not have a chance to change the Court’s mind.
Now that you’ve descended to name calling were done.
Rights and Freedoms. I have said many times, what you have as a right you have as a freedom, but you had as a freedom may not be a right. You had the freedom to own and operate firearms since the countries inception, but the current government is doing everything it can to remove the ability for its citizens to defend themselves, or any other lawful reason to use a firearm. To have such a right for many years only to take it away and make previously lawful citizens into criminal is a degredation of rights and freedoms. Good job also not discussing any other point and focusing on this one with nomenclature you didn’t understand.
As I said, now that you’ve descended to name calling, we’re done. If you want to talk to me you will be respectful of I will ignore you. No one owes you a response if you’re being an ass.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
Why yes, having everyday citizens be able to purchase firearms since the countries existence, only to them remove such ability and make anyone who keeps the property a criminal isn’t a degredation of rights and freedoms then you are blind.
Also, nice only attempting to refute one of my many points.
Next.
You made a Gish Gallop.
I didn’t “attempt to refute” your arguments. I proved that you were wrong. You have no right to own a firearm in Canada.
Now that you’ve descended to name calling were done.
Rights and Freedoms. I have said many times, what you have as a right you have as a freedom, but you had as a freedom may not be a right. You had the freedom to own and operate firearms since the countries inception, but the current government is doing everything it can to remove the ability for its citizens to defend themselves, or any other lawful reason to use a firearm. To have such a right for many years only to take it away and make previously lawful citizens into criminal is a degredation of rights and freedoms. Good job also not discussing any other point and focusing on this one with nomenclature you didn’t understand.
As I said, now that you’ve descended to name calling, we’re done. If you want to talk to me you will be respectful of I will ignore you. No one owes you a response if you’re being an ass.
Sounds good, thanks for not returning my points and then storming out when you lost. 👍
Danth’s Law
👍 cope