What does the new NDP leader have against the Canadian Flag???

[EagleSmack]

Once again, an american proving that americans are dumb like stick.


The legislation has no provisions for fines or jail, but if you had actually read the link supplied to the new legislation, you would have known that.

Yeah the new version you dumb azz.

Man you are slow.

"A previous version, introduced last year, included fines and up to two years in jail for condo boards or housing authorities that try to prevent Canadians from flying the flag."

The idea that this was even being entertained is ridiculous.

 

[gerryh]

Yeah the new version you dumb azz.

Man you are slow.

roflmfao.... the only version that means anything. The version that was actually voted on. The version that this OP refers to..... dumb ass.


Once again, typical american, can not admit when they have made a mistake.

 

[EagleSmack]

roflmfao.... the only version that means anything. The version that was actually voted on. The version that this OP refers to..... dumb ass.


Once again, typical american, can not admit when they have made a mistake.

Add another DUH Gerry!

I actually followed the thread you dumb fur trapper, unlike you.

Once again, typical american, can not admit when they have made a mistake.

What a bigot you are.

 

[gerryh]

Add another DUH Gerry!

I actually followed the thread you dumb fur trapper, unlike you.

Ya.... you followed the other dumb asses that were complaining about the fines and jail terms that were non existent in the legislation.

So, who's dumber.... the idiot that complains about a non existent "problem" or the idiot that follows without thinking for themselves?

 

[EagleSmack]

Ya.... you followed the other dumb asses that were complaining about the fines and jail terms that were non existent in the legislation.

So, who's dumber.... the idiot that complains about a non existent "problem" or the idiot that follows without thinking for themselves?

Ahhh...such a simple mind you have Gerry. Was there an old version that had possible fines and jail terms. Answer ...YES

You LOSE again bigot!

 

[gerryh]

Ahhh...such a simple mind you have Gerry. Was there an old version that had possible fines and jail terms. Answer ...YES

You LOSE again bigot!

Ah yes, let's bring up old versions of laws that either didn't actually become law, or are no longer law. Let's see which country comes out on "top" shall we..... how confident do you feel...... I already have a whole list of racist laws starting with Article 4, Section 2 of the original constitution.

 

[EagleSmack]

Ah yes, let's bring up old versions of laws that either didn't actually become law, or are no longer law. Let's see which country comes out on "top" shall we..... how confident do you feel...... I already have a whole list of racist laws starting with Article 4, Section 2 of the original constitution.

Translation... lets move the goal post for you?

Keep trying hypocrite... keep preaching your hate then go to Church on Sunday.

 

[gerryh]

Translation... lets move the goal post for you?
Keep trying hypocrite... keep preaching your hate then go to Church on Sunday.

No goal post moving, it was you that decided to comment on legislation that does not apply to today.

 

[EagleSmack]

No goal post moving, it was you that decided to comment on legislation that does not apply to today.

But it was certainly part of the thread.

And now you want to talk about the Constitution? Or try and determine which country is more racist? Sounds like moving the goal post.

But hey... that's your problem up there. All that flag waving and people hating it. Wow.

 

[earth_as_one]

The issue here is whether or not someone should be sent ot jail for violating this law. I disagree. Jail time cost taxpayers.... Fines are revenue. I am against jail time over something as trivial as a flag, but I would support fines.

 

[Spade]

What a perfectly divisive issue to take Canadians' minds off election misdeeds, the raising of the pension-qualifying age, the environment, corporate welfare, etc.

 

[gerryh]

The issue here is whether or not someone should be sent ot jail for violating this law. I disagree. Jail time cost taxpayers.... Fines are revenue. I am against jail time over something as trivial as a flag, but I would support fines.

How can that be an issue? It's not in the legislation. You following eaglesmuck down the same road?

What a perfectly divisive issue to take Canadians' minds off election misdeeds, the raising of the pension-qualifying age, the environment, corporate welfare, etc.

The only ones making this a "divisive" issue are the morons that are adding on things that aren't in the legislation. Whether or not there USED to be fines and jail terms is moot as the present legislation does not have that in it.

 

[Tonington]

The issue here is whether or not someone should be sent ot jail for violating this law. I disagree. Jail time cost taxpayers.... Fines are revenue. I am against jail time over something as trivial as a flag, but I would support fines.

You can't violate a law when the government only encourages something...it's fluff. A toothless tiger.

 

[earth_as_one]

How can that be an issue? It's not in the legislation. You following eaglesmuck down the same road?

The only ones making this a "divisive" issue are the morons that are adding on things that aren't in the legislation. Whether or not there USED to be fines and jail terms is moot as the present legislation does not have that in it.

Sorry, I missed the middle of this conversation. rereading thread...

 

[TenPenny]

I thought Conservatives were against government meddling needlessly in our lives, but here they are, encouraging us to fly the flag.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

Right.

The thread title and article are deliberately misleading.

This is a discussion about the repercussions of someone preventing you from hanging up the flag, not some active active attempt to muzzle Canadians. There are already property rights and trespassing legislation that should dissuade someone from using your property without consent. We don't need specific legislation for flags.

We should have recognized this from the start, but the inflammatory way in which the usual suspects frame the discussion has the purposeful intent of fear mongering.

Currently a tennant can't display a flag without landlord concent. The purpose of this law is to prevent that. Everything else is political spin one way or another. If the Libs had presented it, there would be less objection.

 

[Cannuck]

Next,we can pass a law to encourage people to Brush their teeth.

...and well we should. Gum disease can be very serious. Think of the children. Looks like the Conservatives have bought into the whole social engineering thing. The NDP would probably vote against it unless it had provisions for flossing.

But then cons like to make mountains out of mole hills when they don't get their own way.

The food industry is regulated to death.

LOL. When did you become a Conservative?

 

[Spade]

Anyone have a flag that can cover his face?

 

[Cannuck]

So, who's dumber.... the idiot that complains about a non existent "problem" or the idiot that follows without thinking for themselves?

It isn't a non-existent problem though. The original bill speaks volumes about how the current government thinks. The problem isn't the bill. The problem is an over bearing, social engineering nanny state government.

 

[TenPenny]

Currently a tennant can't display a flag without landlord concent. The purpose of this law is to prevent that. Everything else is political spin one way or another. If the Libs had presented it, there would be less objection.

Really? Can you explain how it is to accomplish that?