I’m told that the world houses a fair number of countries other than this. Many of them quite lovely I’ve heard. Have you any interest, perhaps, in going to one of them for a bit?
And the horror is that this bit of tomfoolery is overshadowing the fact that there is some seriously important legislation coming at us and Trudeau has reputedly attempted to usurp (possibly too strong a word) Parliament in order to get these measures passed.
I don’t really understand what motion the House Leader had to rescind but the few stories I’ve seen on it suggest that it was a fairly overt attempt to wrest power from Parliament. This in and of itself is worthy of debate in the House - if fair.
On top of that there is assisted-dying, marijuana, court challenges to Harper’s legacy all of which are important issues that need to be dealt with in addition to the day to day stuff and it is all being buried under elbow-fucking-gate.
Even the BBC is mocking this. Mother England laughing nostalgically at the antics of her child. Awwww.
And Uzi drop the assault horseshit. Nobody on God’s green Earth thinks he assaulted anyone. Notice that the assaultee - who had to sit out for a spell owing to the trauma - has not pressed charges.
Know why? Because they won’t stick because if they did then the courts would be packed with bargain hunters and yard-salers being prosecuted for each jostle and bump.
I wouldn’t get too worked up or this being an “assault” or not. What it does show us is that Trudeau is out of his element. Discipline, patience, respect, are not in his repertoire.
He is supposed to be the leader of a G8 nation. Put him on the stage without a script and every second word is “uhh”.
If he ever gets in a similar pushing match on the world stage, possibly someone like Putin will deck him. I hate to see how he responds to Trump, should he be elected.
In my opinion, he’s a wannabe alpha male.
The next three and a half years could be quite embarrassing.
Heh. Does anyone want to tell him how to check the location field?
‘Assaultees’ don’t press charges in Canada. They make a complaint to the police or possibly the crown directly.
Who creates the laws of Canada? Parliament.
Who votes on implementing the laws of Canada? Parliament.
Who enforces the laws of Canada? The Canadian government.
Who is the Canadian government at the moment? The Liberals.
Who is the head of the Liberals? Our intepid bouncer, JT.
JT would have had to wield an axe and behead a few people before he’d be charged with anything. The NDP/CONs probably recognize this and won’t make the complaint to the police. They don’t want to look like the pussies people seem to want to make them out to be for even complaining as much as they have done so far.
But just to be clear, as clear as the law is in this case (you did read it, did you? Unlike looking at my location which you obviously haven’t), if you were driving 1 mph over the speed limit, even if you did it in front of a police officer who was checking for speeding, just because he didn’t pull you over doesn’t mean you didn’t break the law. It was just not chosen to not be enforced in that particular instance.
I’ve never said he should be charged, btw. Yet for those that create, vote on and enforce the law, the letter of the law should be important to them and for us to hold them to it.
When I suggested a different country I was thinking of one that has yet to be saddled with internet access.
As to the rest… I’m very impressed that you can dig up publicly available information and include it in a post. It shows a certain degree of acuity. I commend you on your comprehension and ability to understand pretty straight forward legislation.
Now since we are both agreed upon the letter of the definition of assault can we perhaps address the way that applying the letter of the law would play out? It would result in the police doing nothing but taking complaints and doing investigations into every little nudge or bump. You would have to be fucking nuts to think that applying the code in strict adherence to the letter is anything but ludicrous.
And you are correct. The assaulted does not “press charges” but rather files a complaint… which is exactly what people mean when they say “press charges”. The word is colloquialism; check it out.
No, actually. The criminal law is enforced by the police and the provincial Crown prosecutors office. A person in this circumstance could lay a complaint with the Ottawa municipal police or with the OPP.
If either of those forces thought charges were warranted, the matter would go to the Ottawa Crown office of the Ontario Attorney General Department, which would decide whether to proceed to trial or not.
The government employees police to enforce the law. They are part of the government. I should have said the Liberals control the government at the moment.
So, you admit that what JT did constituted an assault if we applied the letter of the law? Whether he is ever charged is another matter and has no bearing on if he did it.
You can dance all you want saying the police have better things to do, because I agree that they do. It doesn’t mean that they couldn’t charge him given the letter of the law. Also, why is the law written this way? It could as well have a clause that states there has to be an appreciable injury. But there isn’t. Why did parliament pass this particular law the way it is? Should not the government that passes such laws follow them to the letter?
So these groups don’t enforce the laws that the HOC passes? They can choose to enforce laws of the State of S.Carolina or some other random jurisdiction?
Back in public school I assaulted a little old lady across the street. She had teetered her way out into traffic, but then became disoriented, so I held onto her arm and guided her the rest of the way. At the end of the assault, she said, “Thank you, you’re such a nice young woman.”
Although the elements of criminal assault were met, neither the police, the Crown, nor the little old lady privately, prosecuted me.
You see, Uzi, its about keeping things in perspective. Our courts are pretty good at that, which is why you will not see Trudeau criminally prosecuted for escorting the Conservative through the NDP blockade by the arm, despite the elements of criminal assault having been met. Now you may not like how the law functions, given that keeping things in perspective is not black and white, but I assure that this is how the law works, and how the law is intended to work.
As far as I can tell, you are suggesting that there is no chance the Prime Minister will be charged with an offence because you assume that the police and Crowns who enforce the Criminal Code will take their bidding from the PMO. If I have misunderstood you, I would appreciate clarification.
If that is what you are suggesting, it rests on a misapprehension: the Criminal Code is passed by Parliament, but enforced by municipal and provincial police, and by the provincial Crown prosecutor service. The PM and the Attorney General of Canada do not have any power to block criminal investigations by the municipal and provincial police, nor to direct the provincial Crown office not to prosecute an offence under the Criminal Code.
I agree that it is highly unlikely that the PM will be charged in this case, but because of the principle of de minimis cited by Muffin, not because the PM can block the police or Crown’s office.
Police officers are not employees, in the normal sense that they take direction from their superiors on all job-related matters. As peace officers charged with enforcing the law, they have an independent power to investigate allegations of crimes and to decide whether the evidence supports a charge or not.
Both you and I know that isn’t assault under any definition of assault. Brown didn’t need any help in getting where he was. He wasn’t in any danger of being hit by fast moving NDP’ers such that JT needed to rush to his defense. Nor did you have any intention to enforce your will upon her other than to ensure her safety.
Now if you had been in your car waiting at the light and the little old lady was doddering across the road and you got out of your car to get her out of the way, then that would be assault.
Actually, it was (C.C.C. s.265) because there was no implied or explicit consent prior to my taking hold of her arm. The reason that you and I know that there would be no prosecution is the perspective I set out in my previous post.
I agree. Doesn’t mean he didn’t do the crime. Maybe someone will understand my point which is the PM should be held to a higher standard especially in the HOC and that what you and I do are one thing and may be considered ‘a trifle’ to the law, but what he does shouldn’t necessarily be.
Nor are they stupid enough to go against the government whether that government can directly, or indirectly, affect their careers.
Once again, you lack perspective. Yes, one can find examples of improper use of proprietorial discretion, both in inappropriately prosecuting and failing to appropriately prosecute, but you have not shown how this applies to the matter at hand, particularly in face of de minimus. Insinuating that Trudeau’s federal government has influence over the careers of non-federal police, non-federal prosecutors, and non-federal judges just doesn’t cut it. Perspective, Uzi, perspective. You’re in conspiracy territory now. Let’s reign it back in.
After reading more, I don’t disagree. You helping the little old lady across the street is an assault. Your defense is that you thought she was in danger.
What defense or excuse can the PM use that justifies his actions that aren’t due to his selfishness and frustration in the vote being delayed? Or will you assert that Brown was physically in danger like the little old lady in your story and needed the ‘Bouncer’ JT to help him and bully the NDP members out of his way?
As previously stated: de minimus. That is a common law defence. Trudeau’s motivation is not relevant to that defence. Think of it as a mom telling little Billy: “I don’t give a fuck that your brother in the chair beside you touched you.”