How many of our laws are invalid?

[Corduroy]

Those little bylaws are the most annoying ones. I have a buddy that lives in a "heritage" neighbourhood. He needs to ask city hall's permission to paint his house. That really stuck in my craw for some reason. Asking permission to paint your own house?

I don't know how people got it into their heads that they have the right to do anything on their landed property. It's never existed in law or precedent. You shouldn't feel like this is some kind of violation of rights, but more that it's shattered your illusions of property rights. You don't really "own" land. In a sense you just rent from the state.

 

[PoliticalNick]

Calling something unconstitutional either implies a great violation of rights or some illegal exercise of power. You're talking about parking a trailer.

I gave that example because I recently discussed it with the corporate revenue collector (bylaw officer). When asked to justify the law his first response was that it was not insured if not hooked to my vehicle, not that it should matter if it is a stationary object and someone hits it, so I showed him my policy clearly stating I was fully insured whether attached or not. He then stated it would be an eyesore. When pressed how a 2 year old trailer worth as much as my first house was an eyesore he changed his tune to "it was voted in by the majority of the town's citizens so I asked him to point me to the referendum and when it was held etc knowing full well there was never a vote. His response was to turn around and walk away.

It is this type of thing that govts at all levels engage in in violation of the charter and we need to stop it before they legislate our entire lives.

The danger is not with those who would control us but with those who stand idly by and allow it to happen.

 

[Corduroy]

I gave that example because I recently discussed it with the corporate revenue collector (bylaw officer). When asked to justify the law his first response was that it was not insured if not hooked to my vehicle, not that it should matter if it is a stationary object and someone hits it, so I showed him my policy clearly stating I was fully insured whether attached or not. He then stated it would be an eyesore. When pressed how a 2 year old trailer worth as much as my first house was an eyesore he changed his tune to "it was voted in by the majority of the town's citizens so I asked him to point me to the referendum and when it was held etc knowing full well there was never a vote. His response was to turn around and walk away.

You're trying to tell me this isn't about the trailer-sized chip on your shoulder but then proceed to explain to me this trailer saga in unnecessary detail. I don't care.

The danger is not with those who would control us but with those who stand idly by and allow it to happen.

First they came for the trailers. But I didn't speak up because I didn't own a trailer.

 

[gerryh]

I gave that example because I recently discussed it with the corporate revenue collector (bylaw officer). When asked to justify the law his first response was that it was not insured if not hooked to my vehicle, not that it should matter if it is a stationary object and someone hits it, so I showed him my policy clearly stating I was fully insured whether attached or not. He then stated it would be an eyesore. When pressed how a 2 year old trailer worth as much as my first house was an eyesore he changed his tune to "it was voted in by the majority of the town's citizens so I asked him to point me to the referendum and when it was held etc knowing full well there was never a vote. His response was to turn around and walk away.

It is this type of thing that govts at all levels engage in in violation of the charter and we need to stop it before they legislate our entire lives.

The danger is not with those who would control us but with those who stand idly by and allow it to happen.

Well, when it comes to a trailer not hooked up to a vehicle, the danger is in the fact that if an emergency vehicle (ie firetruck) needs to be where that trailer is, it's not possible to move it quickly. Safety concern. I'm surprised the bylaw officer didn't bring that fact up.

 

[PoliticalNick]

You seem to be ignoring the fact not all laws need to be justified as public safety or national security. The charter doesn't say that. The phrase you're citing refers to limits of charter rights. Nothing else. The charter says nothing about parking your RV and walking in the park. Those aren't charter rights.

1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

Application of Charter

32. (1) This Charter applies
(a) to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all matters within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories; and
(b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each province.

All matter within the authority means all laws.

I really don't care if you want to allow govt control of your life and your freedoms to be infringed as you are obviously ok with it but I refuse to let it be enacted upon me.

You're trying to tell me this isn't about the trailer-sized chip on your shoulder but then proceed to explain to me this trailer saga in unnecessary detail. I don't care.



First they came for the trailers. But I didn't speak up because I didn't own a trailer.

If you don't care why the f*ck is your tw*t in a knot arguing in this thread? Go back to whatever useless govt approved thing you were doing previously.

 

[Corduroy]

Application of Charter


All matter within the authority means all laws.

Nope, it means the rights and freedoms set out in the charter. Not all laws. Just the rights and freedoms in the charter, as it clearly says in the very section you quoted.

If you don't care why the f*ck is your tw*t in a knot arguing in this thread? Go back to whatever useless govt approved thing you were doing previously.

I don't care about your trailer. I do care about charter rights though, and I'm trying to explain to you that your trailer and charter rights aren't the same.

 

[DaSleeper]

Maybe his trailer's a bloody eyesore.....

 

[PoliticalNick]

Well, when it comes to a trailer not hooked up to a vehicle, the danger is in the fact that if an emergency vehicle (ie firetruck) needs to be where that trailer is, it's not possible to move it quickly. Safety concern. I'm surprised the bylaw officer didn't bring that fact up.

How is it any more of an issue than if it is hooked to my truck when I'm not there? They do have 2 lanes plus room to park on both sides of the street. Or are you claiming firetrucks can't block traffic in an emergency?

Nope, it means the rights and freedoms set out in the charter. Not all laws. Just the rights and freedoms in the charter, as it clearly says in the very section you quoted.



I don't care about your trailer. I do care about charter rights though, and I'm trying to explain to you that your trailer and charter rights aren't the same.

26. The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as denying the existence of any other rights or freedoms that exist in Canada.

It would appear we do have rights and freedoms other than those specifically listed. You have to go a long way before you can educate me about the charter darling.

It would also appear from your comments you hold the belief we as citizens only have whatever rights and freedoms the corporate conclave in Ottawa tell us we can have. Reality is they only have the control we allow them to have and you are willing to give them all the control they want.

Of course it's a revenue "scheme". There is up keep to those parks. It's called a "user fee". You think those that up keep those parks do it out of the goodness of their hearts?

How much upkeep is there on wilderness? Do we as citizens not pay taxes for our parks? I'm ok with user fees for non-citizens but we already pay.

 

[DaSleeper]

How close to a neighbour's driveway do you park?, does he have an unrestricted view of incoming traffic coming out of his driveway?

 

[PoliticalNick]

How close to a neighbour's driveway do you park?, does he have an unrestricted view of incoming traffic coming out of his driveway?

Doesn't restrict anything. Neighbors drive is about 300 feet

 

[DaSleeper]

Several municipalities say that no unattached trailers are allowed to be parked on roads so park it in your driveway.

 

[Zipperfish]

He would have known about that when he bought the house.

He did know about them--he's a contractor himself. I was the one who was shocked. I always thought if you owned a house, it was up to you what colour your wanted to paint it.

Again, in the grand scheme of things, who really cares? But it still bugs me. Just not enough to do anything about it (except vote for small-government civic candidates)

I don't know how people got it into their heads that they have the right to do anything on their landed property. It's never existed in law or precedent. You shouldn't feel like this is some kind of violation of rights, but more that it's shattered your illusions of property rights. You don't really "own" land. In a sense you just rent from the state.

Yes, that's probably what bothered me.

 

[Corduroy]

It would appear we do have rights and freedoms other than those specifically listed.

Yes we do, but that clause in the charter doesn't apply to them. That clause specifically says it applies to rights set out in the charter. It doesn't say it applies to laws not listed in the charter.

You don't need to keep doubling down on your misreading of the law. Just admit you got it wrong. You can complain plenty about your trailer parking rights without reference to the charter.

 

[Zipperfish]

Can't park my trailer???? Thanks Obama.

 

[PoliticalNick]

Several municipalities say that no unattached trailers are allowed to be parked on roads so park it in your driveway.

Normally it is beside the house. I moved it to get a bobcat in the back while installing my hot tub.

 

[WLDB]

Ah but there is the notwithstanding clause which is quite popular with those who want to keep unconstitutional laws in force. That thing more or less renders the charter and the constitution itself useless. If at any time the politicians can say "Sure, but we are going to do it this way anyway for five years" then renew it when the five years is up.

 

[lone wolf]

Normally it is beside the house. I moved it to get a bobcat in the back while installing my hot tub.

Did you have a Building Permit?

 

[SLM]

Ah but there is the notwithstanding clause which is quite popular with those who want to keep unconstitutional laws in force. That thing more or less renders the charter and the constitution itself useless. If at any time the politicians can say "Sure, but we are going to do it this way anyway for five years" then renew it when the five years is up.

Pretty sure they don't invoke the notwithstanding clause for by-laws.

 

[PoliticalNick]

Yes we do, but that clause in the charter doesn't apply to them. That clause specifically says it applies to rights set out in the charter. It doesn't say it applies to laws not listed in the charter.

You don't need to keep doubling down on your misreading of the law. Just admit you got it wrong. You can complain plenty about your trailer parking rights without reference to the charter.

Section 1 says rights set out can only be abrogated by demonstrably justified laws.

1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

Section 26 sets out that there are rights not listed but since they are referenced in the charter section 1 applies.

26. The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as denying the existence of any other rights or freedoms that exist in Canada.

Unless of course you believe the govt can make any law it wants as long as it doesn't contradict the specific rights listed. It would seem to me you believe that and I hope you are quite happy as every piece of legislation that infringes your rights and freedoms that has been passed and will be passed goes unquestioned by you and don't be surprised when you turn around one day and realize you live in an orwellian state.

Ah but there is the notwithstanding clause which is quite popular with those who want to keep unconstitutional laws in force. That thing more or less renders the charter and the constitution itself useless. If at any time the politicians can say "Sure, but we are going to do it this way anyway for five years" then renew it when the five years is up.

A common mistake. The notwithstanding clause does not actually apply to section 1 or to section 26.

33. (1) Parliament or the legislature of a province may expressly declare in an Act of Parliament or of the legislature, as the case may be, that the Act or a provision thereof shall operate notwithstanding a provision included in section 2 or sections 7 to 15 of this Charter.

There still has to be some type of justification for any legislation.

Did you have a Building Permit?

Why would I need a building permit? I'm not building the tub, I bought it.

All I need is a licensed electrician to sign off on the wiring for my insurance.

 

[lone wolf]

It's a great F Off and Die note to irritating bylaws folk and pestery nosy neighbours, Some places you need one to move a shovel to the other side of your toolshed.

Don't make toast in the tub