So he has outstanding warrants for his arrest in Quebec - why isn’t he in jail already?
Arrest warrants can be Canada-wide or province-wide. It sounds like his Quebec warrants are only province-wide. So, if he’s arrested in Quebec, he’s in trouble. Anywhere else in the ROC, and he’s not necessarily.
And he’s arrested.
So much for diplomatic immunity. Whatever is the world coming to?
Alrighty then - asked and answered. 
Hey, how’s everyone liking the absence of pennies in your change now? Isn’t it great?
Let’s see, I have $3.25 in my pocket, and no pennies! Useless pieces of crap that they are.
Good riddance.
New development in the Calgary Freeman house matter:
New squatters stake ‘embassy’ claim on Calgary duplex after ‘Freeman’ Mario Antonacci arrested
Sheeee-it, how was that allowed to happen? Why wasn’t the original turd escorted out and the place boarded up until Caverhill got possession back?
Some of the comments from that story -
And the response to the comment:
Heh.
Okay, legal types - can she just have this new bunch of jerkwads arrested immediately as trespassers?
Up till now I’ve been immune from political comments from my scant friends on Facebook. Last weekend I somehow connected with a girl I went to public and high school with.
Apparently HARPER is a right wing idiot. He got in with only 39% of the popular vote, therefore he does not represent Canada and we need a real democracy.
This was explained in two separate posts, in case we weren’t clear the first time.
Gah. I resisted but couldn’t help commenting “Your opinion. We don’t all share it.” I’m sure she’ll unfriend me now.
I would never in my life think of posting this type of stuff on Facebook for all my friends to see.
I may not agree with your political views, and I’m willing to debate policy points rationally, but to smear the Prime Minister by calling him a right wing idiot is not very ingratiating to your cause.
I don’t think I would call Tom Mulcair a left wing idiot, or Justin Trudeau a Liberal middle-of-the-road idiot on Facebook.
The country wouldn’t fall apart with either of these parties in power. Things would be different from a policy and international affairs perspective, but I doubt my life would change much directly. And if it did it would be corrected 5 years later when someone else got voted in.
I’m done my rant now.
Yes, but the police will try to get the trespassers out without causing a ruckus, rather than rush in breaking heads.
Personally, I think it would be much more entertaining to sell the trespassers to the highest bidder. Since they believe our laws do not apply to them, then I’m sure that they won’t want to be protected by that pesky old British law from 1833. It would be one of the few ways the landlord could get some funds to repair the place.
I agree!
I was going to read Michael Ignatieff’s book and post a review here, but I’m loathe to give money to a rich guy who seems totally unaware that not all people are rich guys like him. He’s Canada’s Mitt Romney.
Hmm, I think I’m glad that most of my Facebook friends have similar political views to mine… and I will definitely leave it at that and not elaborate any further in this thread.
You can borrow it from the library and take a bullet for all of us - maybe you could read PM Harper’s new book, too!
Forgive my ignorance here, but why not? I know I was discussing with muffin how I don’t know wtf a notary does exactly. My summer boss was one, and we used her stamp to seal on photocopies of wills. If these freeman make stupid ass private law manifesti, why not take the idiot’s money? It’s not like the thing he’s asking you to stamp has any value anyway, right? I’m guessing I’m missing something here.
There is a difference between a matter that has merit but is extremely unpopular, and a matter that has no merit. Lawyers, who are also officers of the court, are not supposed to bring forward matters that have no merit. Freemen crap has no merit.
Freemen crap, particularly false documents that try to look official, is deceptive, and adding a lawyer’s or notary’s seal to it just increases the deception. Lawyers are not supposed to deceive.
What I do with my on-again off-again Freemen client is to not rubber stamp any of his documents and instead draft fresh documents that do not include any of the Freemen crap and actually deal with genuine matters. That way he gets the legal representation he needs, but on a meritorious and non-deceptive basis.
That review would have to go in the Game Room. 
Muffin made some excellent comments, but I’ll add this:
In the photocopying example you’re stating, a notary can certify copies as exact duplicates of the originals. No problem there.
Freemen, however, seem to feel that a notary’s seal on one of their documents gives it some sort of legitimacy; or indeed, some sort of “approval” from one who knows the law. FOTL forums are full of “where can I find a notary?” questions, which indicates to me that they place great stock on notarization.
If they get a notary seal on their documents, they then use this “approval” to move forward with their documents; so it logically follows that, if they do not have this “approval,” they cannot use their documents for anything, and they know it. Thus, the warnings against notarizing Notices of Understanding and Claims of Right, fee schedules, and other Freeman paperwork.
Speaking of books by politicians… is Stephen Harper’s book on hockey out yet?
As well, a notary public is a public official. You aren’t given the power to notarise a document so you can make a quick buck. It’s to validate the accuracy of documents that then may be filed in court or with government agencies. As a public official, you have a duty to ensure that you only use your notary seal for the purpose of validating documents, not to aid in a potential fraud on the court.