Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next

And it was the Opposition parties and the CBC who decided that embarassing the existing government was more important than respecting the judicial process of a close Canadian ally and trading partner. And for projecting the idea that a Canadian who commits fraud and larceny in another country is automatically exempt solely be being a Canadian citizen from any consequences that the other nation sees as fitting the crime.

William Sampson. Martin. Smith. Khadr. Sampson was clearly the only innocent one of the lot. And, even with the full knowledge that he was being raped and tortured in a Saudi prison for a "crime" that was laughably false on the face of it, he was the only one that the NDP and the liberalest of the Liberals didn't go to battle for. Why is that?

   

sorry, was talking to c3po

   

Because ban lists are so accurate, and never cause problem for anyone else.

Moreover, if that person has desired economic activity what's the point in a three year ban?

Have any firearms on you? Y/N? Have the documentation for them? No, ok take it to the turn around you are going to need to go back the US and drop them off.

No harm done, no damage done, no need to spend anymore effort or time on the matter.

   

That would make sense. Naturally, that won't happen because that doesn't serve the agenda of the she-man gun hater's club.

   

Yeah, it's so much worse than the over-reaction on the US side because they find a roach in your ashtray. Criminal charges, car confiscated, a lifetime ban on crossing the border. All perfectly normal reactions over a piece of paper with like a 20th of a gram of burnt weed left in it.

   

I won't argue that at all.

   

Yeah, the small penis gun wielders cartel will pee themselves if you seek to have them respect the laws of another country.

   

Not my problem. Don't break Canadian law and we all get along somewhat fine.

   

So if you wanted to travel somewhere and you shared a name with someone that was banned from travel, and you can not conduct your trip... that's not your problem?

I guess if you are like me and will avoid traveling outside of the nation if at all possible this is less of a problem. Then all you have to deal with is the minor economic loss of banning a person from entery and the huge cost of running such a system.


So? Is someone else acting poorly justification for you to act poorly as well?

What retarded logic are you trying to use here? Is this the 3rd grade, are we on a playground? Do you have the mental ability of a small child?

   

Did you even read my post? No where did I say what you inferred. Talk about putting words in mouth.

   

You're a funny guy, taking a page out of the old Rev Blair name changing.

   

If you believe that's how it works, that all of the Jones in the states are banned because one decided to sneak a gun into Canada, then have a great time with that.

http://zapatopi.net/afdb/ this might help with that.

And no, it's not my problem. In that you are correct.

   

I never said that, and I don't believe that. What I know is that the no fly list causes problems for people that share names with people on the list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List

Head down to the 'False positives and other controversial cases' section.

Still is going to cost a lot of money, just so you can feel smug. I don't think that's a good investment of our money. You seem to be able to feel smug without the government spending money on a project that has zero value to the nation.
~
I'm going to update my suggested question to one that's more likely to work better:
"Without proper documentation bringing firearms into Canada is a crime. At this time you can declare firearms that you have on or in your vehicle and you will simply be asked to return back to the USA. No record of this will be kept and their is no pentalty. If you are found to be in posession of a firearm you illegaly imported into Canada at a later time you will face criminal charges, the penalty is a 3 year minium sentance. Do you have any firearms with you, or transport documentation?"

   

For the handful of issues it causes people, of well. Price of doing business.

And yes, I do feel smug. Banning those who try to cross the border with weapons vice spending the cash to prosecute them and throw them in jail is not a horrendous cost to me.

That seems to bother you. Sorry that I don't care.

   

We both seem to agree that a court case and jail time is a waste of money.

What do we gain from a ban on entry? How does Canada come out ahead from your suggestion?

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next