Canada’s top court has ruled that a one-year mandatory jail term for child-porn possession is “cruel and unusual punishment,” sparking outrage from victims’ advocates and opposition MPs.
Perhaps. Unfortunately it seems the number in Canada that tolerate it outnumber those that don’t. Cause it doesn’t seem that easy to get the liberals voted out along with their supremes.
Communism and pedophilia...both must be dealt with severely..and if (our own?) Supreme Court refuses to, then it's open season on both. Happy Hunting..🎯🇨🇦
Yes , Don it is coming that way to a station near You. Common sense is still not in the government dictionary. It does appear that tyranny is about the only way to accomplish any thing . Do not like this direction , but any Canadian with an open mind can see the destiny!
I would have to agree, it shouldn’t be a mandatory 1 year sentence. It should be the death penalty ! And if the government and courts won’t protect the kids . I guess we need to do it ourselves ! We have a fundamental right to protect ourselves and our families ! Full stop .
All current members of the Supreme Court of Canada will FOREVER carry the ugly stigma of trivializing the possession or accessing of child-sexual-abuse material, of supporting child-sex offenders, and of ignoring the safety and welfare of Canada’s children. They have further eroded a dying confidence in the current “politically influenced” justice system. Readers can only believe some of these “decision-makers” themselves have some “personal reasons” colouring their decision????
If there is a change in government in the near future, change of judges needs to b a priority! Children are innocents, they need to be protected. Anyone harming a child should have maximum sentencing! Sadly if a judge thinks hostility to an innocent child is OK they obviously have same feelings as criminals?? .so sad
I totally agree they do not make laws . Our elected officials make laws . The Liberals started allowing courts to rule on cases they had no business hearing . They are the last people you want running our country . Of course the judges are nearly all Liberals .
I think a year is too much. A week would be better in General Population where they wear a jumpsuit that say I love kids and then we can let God sort it out....
For sure. He was outspoken against the Freedom Convoy very early which is odd for a Country's Chief Justice to make the statements he did. The Liberals weaponization of our so called Justice system.
Sure makes you wonder how many kiddie diddlers are wearing judges robes, doesn't it? Judicial decisions like this should spark immediate investigations of the people involved. Something is truly rotten throughout our absolute mockery of a justice system. This shit is happening way too often and it's time for it to end.
That is an absolutely astute and appropriate question.
I have wondered about the following for a very long time:
What is the percentage of judges, lawmakers, MP's', Cabinet Ministers, Prime Ministers, Senior civil servants, and other empowered Liberal lackeys who belong to the
2SLGBTQIA+alphabet group?
I would be astonished if it were not significantly higher than their representation as a percentage of the general population. Including paedophiles - or, as they are now trying to market themselves, MAP's. Minor Attracted Persons.
I suspect that if you removed all such from Parliament, the Judiciary and the Civil Service, those institutions would collapse.
Totally agree, especially the so-called MAPs. Hardly surprising I suppose when our former PM is a paedophile himself and the current PM and his wife spent lots of quality time with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Has created a perfect breeding ground for all these perverts.
This is precisely the activist B.S. that is the reason the Supreme Court needs to have its wings clipped. You do not have any right to determine your punishment if you have broken the law and are found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. When you break a law and commit a felony offense, you abrogate all your charter rights. And the Constitution does not define cruel and unusual punishment. Strange, the Supreme Court has no problem protecting convicted criminals from government overreach but when it comes to protecting Canadian people at large from government overreach, like say during Covid times when governments were forcing government employees and Canadian citizens at large to mask, isolate, preserve a 6 foot radius space around themselves, and, most egregiously, force Canadian citizens to submit to what are now known to be dangerous "vaccines", through compulsion and coercion, the Supreme Court of Canada tripped over one another rushing to find in the government's favour. The Supreme Court of Canada has long since abrogated its responsibility to the Canadian people by its malicious activism which has seen the Supreme Court set about effectively amending the Canadian Constitution through all sorts of radical findings which end up becoming quasi-amendments as all future rulings defer to these findings as precedent setting rulings. The right to unionize workers is not a fundamental right under the original Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the Constitution, only the right to assembly is. Assembling together to organize a union is a constitutional right, creating that union and having it recognized by corporations and governments is not a constitutional right. If a province government passes right to work legislation or if the federal government passes a trade unions act then such things are legal, under that law, But the Notwithstanding Clause is entrenched in the constitution and it can be implemented to supersede any governmental passed law as the constitution has primacy. The Supreme Court needs to stay strictly within its lane and enforce the constitution over any government imposed law or action that is unconstitutional. A government using the Notwithstanding Clause to pass unconstitutional laws is free from Supreme Court interference, otherwise Quebec's numerous unconstitutional language and culture laws should have been thrown out decades ago. In this instance, Quebec has the right to do what it did. The Supreme Court must interpret the constitution to the letter. The numerous findings that have been passed down since the 1980s are, in many cases, the Supreme Court moving out of its lane to actively interfere with matters that are not within its purview.
When the courts no longer serve the people we have 3 choices, take matters into our own hands , totally replace the judiciary or sit and complain which is what we are doing.
Wonder what these all high and mighties would do if it was their child being exploited. They are just a bunch of pervert child traffickers. Is there no end to this political bullshit. Might be time to charge the castle
The Supreme Court of Degenerate Liberals.
I do not recognize this government, the judiciary or law enforcement as being legitimate.
I wish it were that easy.
It is that easy. The Justice System only exists, like the government, because we tolerate it.
Perhaps. Unfortunately it seems the number in Canada that tolerate it outnumber those that don’t. Cause it doesn’t seem that easy to get the liberals voted out along with their supremes.
you willing to prove that by example?..I promise to have your 6 if we storm a meth lab...(we "tolerate" THOSE, too)
Liberals are already losing their minds with their drug labs getting slammed.
Are they? Haven’t heard that but ok.
WOKE, JOKES and FOOLS... Brainy clearly does not signify any degree of SMART.
... But ...
Degenerate and Liberal... Self defining and interchangeable terms.
Communism and pedophilia...both must be dealt with severely..and if (our own?) Supreme Court refuses to, then it's open season on both. Happy Hunting..🎯🇨🇦
Yes , Don it is coming that way to a station near You. Common sense is still not in the government dictionary. It does appear that tyranny is about the only way to accomplish any thing . Do not like this direction , but any Canadian with an open mind can see the destiny!
yup..I'm DONE talking... they refuse to listen..so ...
Plan "B" is coming to fruition, I suspect?
unfortunately..but predictably..yup..
Perhaps if i was to kill someone, they would release me if I promised to vote liberal.
Do not try it! But You are probably correct in Your assessment.
I have been for warned? What if it was someone conservatives don't like. :)
That is for a conservative to answer. I do value life . No Matter Your political stripe .
👍👍
I'm not gonna wait around till someone i care about suffers, and I suffer the guilt of shudda...wudda ...cudda..
Must get a force of some kind to extinguish the corruption. But I guess I'm not elected.
yup..
This made me vomit! WHAT THE F HAS HAPPENED TO THIS COUNTRY! WHY IS IT OKAY FOR THE CRIMINAL TO HAVE MORE RIGHTS THAN THE VICTIM?!?!
I would have to agree, it shouldn’t be a mandatory 1 year sentence. It should be the death penalty ! And if the government and courts won’t protect the kids . I guess we need to do it ourselves ! We have a fundamental right to protect ourselves and our families ! Full stop .
Obviously they care nothing about our children’s rights only the pedophiles. Something very very wrong with our judicial system.
It should be a lot longer than that.
It should be mandatory wood chipper.
All current members of the Supreme Court of Canada will FOREVER carry the ugly stigma of trivializing the possession or accessing of child-sexual-abuse material, of supporting child-sex offenders, and of ignoring the safety and welfare of Canada’s children. They have further eroded a dying confidence in the current “politically influenced” justice system. Readers can only believe some of these “decision-makers” themselves have some “personal reasons” colouring their decision????
Predictive policing logically requires that their dishonors [sic] themselves all face trial.
Not a hope in hell under Carney’s watch!!
count on it..sigh..
There can now be no doubt that we have serious problem with judges in this country.
Names please so we k ow who the pedophile judges are.
If there is a change in government in the near future, change of judges needs to b a priority! Children are innocents, they need to be protected. Anyone harming a child should have maximum sentencing! Sadly if a judge thinks hostility to an innocent child is OK they obviously have same feelings as criminals?? .so sad
A ruling like that actually makes them criminals . Who else would make that ruling .
The judges are hired to act on existing laws not elected to create new legislation by judicial precedent.
I totally agree they do not make laws . Our elected officials make laws . The Liberals started allowing courts to rule on cases they had no business hearing . They are the last people you want running our country . Of course the judges are nearly all Liberals .
I think a year is too much. A week would be better in General Population where they wear a jumpsuit that say I love kids and then we can let God sort it out....
You got my vote..👍
Richard Wagner appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in 2017.
Another faithful lackie of the Liberal Regime.
Yeah he should have been removed for his remarks in the past and now present .
For sure. He was outspoken against the Freedom Convoy very early which is odd for a Country's Chief Justice to make the statements he did. The Liberals weaponization of our so called Justice system.
He is no more a judge than you or I are . Quebec indoctrinated globalist bought and paid for .
Sure makes you wonder how many kiddie diddlers are wearing judges robes, doesn't it? Judicial decisions like this should spark immediate investigations of the people involved. Something is truly rotten throughout our absolute mockery of a justice system. This shit is happening way too often and it's time for it to end.
That is an absolutely astute and appropriate question.
I have wondered about the following for a very long time:
What is the percentage of judges, lawmakers, MP's', Cabinet Ministers, Prime Ministers, Senior civil servants, and other empowered Liberal lackeys who belong to the
2SLGBTQIA+alphabet group?
I would be astonished if it were not significantly higher than their representation as a percentage of the general population. Including paedophiles - or, as they are now trying to market themselves, MAP's. Minor Attracted Persons.
I suspect that if you removed all such from Parliament, the Judiciary and the Civil Service, those institutions would collapse.
Totally agree, especially the so-called MAPs. Hardly surprising I suppose when our former PM is a paedophile himself and the current PM and his wife spent lots of quality time with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Has created a perfect breeding ground for all these perverts.
Moron Liberal Judges. No common sense whatsoever. As pathetic as it gets.
This is precisely the activist B.S. that is the reason the Supreme Court needs to have its wings clipped. You do not have any right to determine your punishment if you have broken the law and are found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. When you break a law and commit a felony offense, you abrogate all your charter rights. And the Constitution does not define cruel and unusual punishment. Strange, the Supreme Court has no problem protecting convicted criminals from government overreach but when it comes to protecting Canadian people at large from government overreach, like say during Covid times when governments were forcing government employees and Canadian citizens at large to mask, isolate, preserve a 6 foot radius space around themselves, and, most egregiously, force Canadian citizens to submit to what are now known to be dangerous "vaccines", through compulsion and coercion, the Supreme Court of Canada tripped over one another rushing to find in the government's favour. The Supreme Court of Canada has long since abrogated its responsibility to the Canadian people by its malicious activism which has seen the Supreme Court set about effectively amending the Canadian Constitution through all sorts of radical findings which end up becoming quasi-amendments as all future rulings defer to these findings as precedent setting rulings. The right to unionize workers is not a fundamental right under the original Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the Constitution, only the right to assembly is. Assembling together to organize a union is a constitutional right, creating that union and having it recognized by corporations and governments is not a constitutional right. If a province government passes right to work legislation or if the federal government passes a trade unions act then such things are legal, under that law, But the Notwithstanding Clause is entrenched in the constitution and it can be implemented to supersede any governmental passed law as the constitution has primacy. The Supreme Court needs to stay strictly within its lane and enforce the constitution over any government imposed law or action that is unconstitutional. A government using the Notwithstanding Clause to pass unconstitutional laws is free from Supreme Court interference, otherwise Quebec's numerous unconstitutional language and culture laws should have been thrown out decades ago. In this instance, Quebec has the right to do what it did. The Supreme Court must interpret the constitution to the letter. The numerous findings that have been passed down since the 1980s are, in many cases, the Supreme Court moving out of its lane to actively interfere with matters that are not within its purview.
When the courts no longer serve the people we have 3 choices, take matters into our own hands , totally replace the judiciary or sit and complain which is what we are doing.
oh...oh....door number one, Monty!!
Wonder what these all high and mighties would do if it was their child being exploited. They are just a bunch of pervert child traffickers. Is there no end to this political bullshit. Might be time to charge the castle