Dagger Ban unconstitutional Supreme Court says

Jersay

House Member
Dec 1, 2005
4,837
2
38
Independent Palestine
A Montreal school board went too far in imposing a blanket ban on the wearing of Sikh ceremonial daggers by students, says the Supreme Court of Canada.

ADVERTISEMENT

In an 8-0 judgment, the court overturned a decision that barred teenager Gurbaj Singh Multani from wearing the dagger, known as a kirpan, to class.

The court said a total ban can't pass muster under the Charter of Rights, because the policy infringes on guarantees of religious freedom.

But the court left room for some restrictions to be imposed on the carrying of kirpans in the name of public safety.

A number of schools in British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario have long permitted the wearing of kirpans subject to certain conditions.

The rules often include a size limit on the dagger, or a requirement to keep it sheathed and to wear it under clothing and out of sight.

Orthodox Sikhs, who make up about 10 per cent of the estimated 250,000 Sikhs in Canada, are required by their religion to wear the kirpan at all times.

The Montreal dispute arose in 2001 when Gurbaj Singh, the aged 12, first wore his kirpan to school.

Officials tried at first to work out a compromise that would allow him to continue wearing the religious emblem, but with some conditions for the sake of safety.

The governing council of the Margueriite-Bourgeoys school board overruled that approach and imposed a total ban.

During a Supreme Court hearing last April, Julius Grey, the lawyer for the Multani family, noted there has never been a school assault committed with a kirpan anywhere in Canada.

That amounts to "overwhelming empirical evidence that the kirpan is not a dangerous weapon," said Grey.

Francois Aquin, the lawyer for the Montreal board, retorted that there have never been any school assaults with kitchen knives either.

"That doesn't mean we will allow students to carry kitchen knives in school."

The case made its way to the high court after conflicting decisions at the provincial level.

A Quebec Superior Court judge ruled in Gurbaj Singh's favour in 2002, saying he could carry the kirpan under certain conditions - for example, if he kept it sewn into a cloth envelope to be worn beneath his clothing.

Quebec Court of Appeal reversed that decision in 2004, ruling that the school board had the power to impose a total ban.

Other precedents in other provinces have produced a patchwork of policies - not only in schools but in other public institutions.

For example, Sikh MPs can wear kirpans in the House of Commons and visitors can wear them in the public galleries.

It's all right to wear kirpans in the Supreme Court of Canada, but trial judges in some provinces have banned them from their courtrooms.

Most airlines once allowed passengers to wear kirpans with blades no longer than 10 centimetres. In the security crackdown that followed the 9-11 terrorist attacks, however, Transport Canada decreed a country-wide ban.

The judgment of the high court is confined to school situations and does not apply to other areas.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/cpress/2006...FlvaA8F;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
Jersay said:
The rules often include a size limit on the dagger, or a requirement to keep it sheathed and to wear it under clothing and out of sight.


Ahhh concealed weapons to boot!
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
I agree with this decision; at my high school, Sikh students are permitted to wear the symbol. However, there is a zero-tolerance strategy in place for any threats or jokes made surrounding the use thereof, and they are required to remain sheathed at all times.

I see no problem with this — I don't feel any less safe as a result.
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
My religion requires that I bring concealed automatic weaponry to school.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
Jay, no, it doesn't.

I don't understand what the big deal is; I haven't heard of any reports of violence stemming from the use of a kirpan in a public place, least of all at a school; such a thing has never transpired at my school, nor do I think it's going to.
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
Yes it does....and no one has been hurt from my automatic weapons...not a one.


I can't wait to send my little gaffer to school...
 

Doryman

Electoral Member
Nov 30, 2005
435
2
18
St. John's
Re: RE: Dagger Ban unconstitutional Supreme Court says

FiveParadox said:
Jay, no, it doesn't.

I don't understand what the big deal is; I haven't heard of any reports of violence stemming from the use of a kirpan in a public place, least of all at a school; such a thing has never transpired at my school, nor do I think it's going to.

Skinheads have never attacked anyone with batons and bicycle chains at my school either, but I don't think they should be allowed to tote them around. THis is another example of special interests triumphing over equal rights. If you are going to ban knives at school, you should ban all knives, secular or religious.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
I myself am a High Priest of the Order of the Holy High Power.

Those of us who believe in the fundamentals of the High Power have taken an oath......we shall forever be with the High Power.

I was converted in 1978, when I first came to be with the High Power.

I speak, of course, of the icon, that version of Holiness, the Browning P-35 9mm High Power pistol.

I guess now I get to carry it everywhere, eh?

The point being, of course, that this is ridiculous. Indeed, even the Sikh carrying of the Kirpan is the fulfillment of an oath always to go armed. Funny how the same people who are bemused by our insistence that there is an ancient right to keep and bear arms, instantly leap to the defense of exactly the same philosophy if dressed in the cloth of religion and NOT practised by white males.

This is ludicrous.
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
Re: RE: Dagger Ban unconstitutional Supreme Court says

Colpy said:
The point being, of course, that this is ridiculous. Indeed, even the Sikh carrying of the Kirpan is the fulfillment of an oath always to go armed. Funny how the same people who are bemused by our insistence that there is an ancient right to keep and bear arms, instantly leap to the defense of exactly the same philosophy if dressed in the cloth of religion and NOT practised by white males.

This is ludicrous.


Anything they can do to get in our way, trample on our rights and smear it in our face is satisfactory to them. This just proves it.


Can you imagine the mother of the child running out of the door after her son...."wait, wait....you forgot your dagger little one!"
 

Andem

dev
Mar 24, 2002
5,643
128
63
Larnaka
No weapons of any sort should be allowed at school.. that's not to mention there should be no religion or symbols thus allowed in public school systems. Catholic and Jewish/whatever type of schools can have their own rules, but keep it out of the public school system.
 

Mogz

Council Member
Jan 26, 2006
1,254
1
38
Edmonton
As usual people are missing the underlaying factors here:

Saying he can bring a knife to school because it is part of his religion is a flagrant contradiction to our way of life. In our nation, religion is not suppose to bear sway over safety and/or equality. However our society, as i've outlined in other posts, is slowly cartering more and more to the "minorty" groups. This dagger issue is the exact same as the cartoon issue. We won't stand up for our laws and rules for fear of offending the religious minority. It sickens me to be honest. I respect that it is his religion, however he lives in Canada, not dirkastan. In Canada we do not take weapons to school, and we do not deem our religion above the laws that are the foundation of this nation. My personal view, if he doesn't like our laws he should get the hell out of this country. It's been my stance for years. You came to Canada, became a part of our society, yet expect to tailor our way of life to your liking? Forgive me, but isn't that, well, wrong? Maybe i'm out to lunch, perhaps we should just let this guy tramp all over our national identity, perhaps we should just start allowing anybody of a religious minority do what they want. Before I sum up, let me pose this question to those that support this "ruling". You deem it acceptable for him to take a knife to school as it is a part of his religion. Well, can an arab beat his wife in public if she speaks with another man? Beat her so badly she could die? No? Well it is a part of his religion, and widely accepted in the arab world is it not? The general argument there would be; "well that's not legal in Canada, you can't beat someone to death". Neither is taking a knife to school, unless you're a minorty that is.
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Colpy

One of the uses of the Browning High Power that has not been sufficiently exploited in my estimation is driving fence posts. I have hammers that don't weigh 2 pounds. At the very least, it is an attractive kosh..... :wink:
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Re: RE: Dagger Ban unconstitutional Supreme Court says

Andem said:
No weapons of any sort should be allowed at school.. that's not to mention there should be no religion or symbols thus allowed in public school systems. Catholic and Jewish/whatever type of schools can have their own rules, but keep it out of the public school system.

Are these the same people who don't want Christmas decorations in the schools either? I suggest we change the constitution. It may be just my age showing through, but this bugs the hell out of me.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
#juan said:
Colpy

One of the uses of the Browning High Power that has not been sufficiently exploited in my estimation is driving fence posts. I have hammers that don't weigh 2 pounds. At the very least, it is an attractive kosh..... :wink:

Blasphemy!!

Now I'm gonna burn your embassy!

Have you tried for hate crimes!!

How Could you oppress me like this? :D :lol: :D :lol:
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Sorry....that was a bit cruel. On the earlier thread about the sixty year old hand guns I defended the High Power. I intended to add on that thread that it is quite a heavy pistol. Some of the new ones out there are mostly plastic and carbon fibre and I wonder if they would suvive a four foot drop to the pavement. I know the High Power would.
 

annabattler

Electoral Member
Jun 3, 2005
264
2
18
Kirpans were first adopted by some Sikhs in the 1600's...they were mandated to "arm" themselves against some ruling power.Not all Sikhs adopted the use of a kirpan.
It is evidently now a "symbol" of a Sikh's duty to defend the helpless,the poor and the downtrodden.
That being said, religions and their use of symbols can and do change.
In this case,I think Kirpans should be worn for religious or ceremonial rites....not at school.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
To my knowledge, a majority of the kirpans worn at my high school (although there are not many Sikhs in my school who choose to wear the ceremonial dagger) are blunted.