Canadian Rights And Freedoms Are At Risk
05-26-2008, 04:25 PM
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is the website guys, this is some pretty sicken stuff to hear is about to happen and definately a huge load of bullshttt if the bill passes. EVERYONE needs to know about this!!!!!
http://www.stopc51.com/
Bill C-51 Will:
Allow Government agents to:
-Enter private property without a warrant Section 23 (4)
-Confiscate your property at their discretion, at your cost Section 23.3 a
-Dispose of your property at their discretion, at your cost Section 23.3 c
-Seize your bank accounts without a warrant Section 23 (2) (d)
-Charge you for shipping and storage of your property Section 23.3a-b
-Store your property Indefinitely without paying you for damages Section 23 (2) (d)
-Levy fines of up to $5,000,000.00 / 2 years in jail per offence. Section 31.1
Introduce new legislation that will:
-Allow laws to be created in Canada, behind closed doors, with the assistance of foreign governments, industrial and trade organizations Section 30.7
-Allow "Crack house style" of enforcement on natural health providers Section 23.1
-Allow enforcement to be considered on more than 70% of Canadians who use NHP's Health Canada Reference
-Allow the minister, based on opinion, to shut down research without any scientific reason or evidence of risk or harm Section 18.5
-Allow the minister, based on opinion, to allow or disallow market authorizations for Natural Health Products Section 18.7 (1)
http://www.stopc51.com/
Bill C-51 Will:
Allow Government agents to:
-Enter private property without a warrant Section 23 (4)
-Confiscate your property at their discretion, at your cost Section 23.3 a
-Dispose of your property at their discretion, at your cost Section 23.3 c
-Seize your bank accounts without a warrant Section 23 (2) (d)
-Charge you for shipping and storage of your property Section 23.3a-b
-Store your property Indefinitely without paying you for damages Section 23 (2) (d)
-Levy fines of up to $5,000,000.00 / 2 years in jail per offence. Section 31.1
Introduce new legislation that will:
-Allow laws to be created in Canada, behind closed doors, with the assistance of foreign governments, industrial and trade organizations Section 30.7
-Allow "Crack house style" of enforcement on natural health providers Section 23.1
-Allow enforcement to be considered on more than 70% of Canadians who use NHP's Health Canada Reference
-Allow the minister, based on opinion, to shut down research without any scientific reason or evidence of risk or harm Section 18.5
-Allow the minister, based on opinion, to allow or disallow market authorizations for Natural Health Products Section 18.7 (1)
05-28-2008, 03:43 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vehicle: 2000 Turbulence
....I get the feeling that that website is either run by the mob, or people who haven't actually read the bill.
And the people who are angry about it haven't read it either, or don't understand what it's about.
Example of people hopping on the "evil government" wagon:
That's bad? If you arrest a crack dealer, do you let him keep the crack?
From the bill:
Do any of the people getting riled up even know which "things" are governed by these laws?
Reality:
If you're eating in a restaurant and find rats, roaches and gross greasy illegal immigrant mexicans (no offense to you mexicans) in the back, would you be happy knowing that the place will keep on making people sick for a few days because the health inspector has to get a warrant, or would you want that place busted into and shut down? I'm leaning towards the latter.
Anyone who is upset about this bill, please remember that criminals are the target, and read every line. I haven't read it all, but in the parts I have read, I haven't seen any threats to our rights as law-abiding citizens. Only threats to the rights of criminals.
edit:
I was doing some more reading, and noticed this:
I'm reading that as, If the health minister thinks that someone might be injured/killed, or that you've lied or otherwise broken the health act, he has the right to suspend further activity while it is investigated. How does that translate into:
I mean, hell. I have the right to shut down any unsafe activity that I see when i'm at work based on my opinion, I would want the health minister to have the same power, i'm sure he's more picky than I am about what's safe.
And the people who are angry about it haven't read it either, or don't understand what it's about.
Example of people hopping on the "evil government" wagon:
QUOTE
-Confiscate your property at their discretion, at your cost Section 23.3 a
-Dispose of your property at their discretion, at your cost Section 23.3 c
-Dispose of your property at their discretion, at your cost Section 23.3 c
That's bad? If you arrest a crack dealer, do you let him keep the crack?
From the bill:
QUOTE
23.3 An inspector who seizes a thing under this Act may...
Do any of the people getting riled up even know which "things" are governed by these laws?
QUOTE
-Enter private property without a warrant Section 23 (4)
Scared they'll burst into your house?Reality:
QUOTE
23.1 (1) If the place referred to in subsection 23(1) is a dwelling-house, an inspector may not enter it without the consent of the occupant except under the authority of a warrant issued under subsection (2).
If you're eating in a restaurant and find rats, roaches and gross greasy illegal immigrant mexicans (no offense to you mexicans) in the back, would you be happy knowing that the place will keep on making people sick for a few days because the health inspector has to get a warrant, or would you want that place busted into and shut down? I'm leaning towards the latter.
Anyone who is upset about this bill, please remember that criminals are the target, and read every line. I haven't read it all, but in the parts I have read, I haven't seen any threats to our rights as law-abiding citizens. Only threats to the rights of criminals.
edit:
I was doing some more reading, and noticed this:
QUOTE
18.5 (1) Subject to the regulations, the Minister may, after giving the holder of the authorization an opportunity to make representations, suspend a clinical trial authorization if the Minister is of the opinion that
(a) the holder has contravened this Act or the regulations in respect of a therapeutic product to which the authorization relates;
(b) the holder has contravened a term or condition of the authorization; or
© the suspension is necessary to prevent injury to the health of a clinical trial subject or a person who is involved in the clinical trial.
(2) Subject to the regulations, the Minister may, without having to give the holder of the authorization an opportunity to make representations, suspend a clinical trial authorization if the Minister is of the opinion that an immediate suspension is necessary to respond to a serious and imminent risk of injury to the health of a clinical trial subject or a person who is involved in the clinical trial.
(a) the holder has contravened this Act or the regulations in respect of a therapeutic product to which the authorization relates;
(b) the holder has contravened a term or condition of the authorization; or
© the suspension is necessary to prevent injury to the health of a clinical trial subject or a person who is involved in the clinical trial.
(2) Subject to the regulations, the Minister may, without having to give the holder of the authorization an opportunity to make representations, suspend a clinical trial authorization if the Minister is of the opinion that an immediate suspension is necessary to respond to a serious and imminent risk of injury to the health of a clinical trial subject or a person who is involved in the clinical trial.
I'm reading that as, If the health minister thinks that someone might be injured/killed, or that you've lied or otherwise broken the health act, he has the right to suspend further activity while it is investigated. How does that translate into:
QUOTE
-Allow the minister, based on opinion, to shut down research without any scientific reason or evidence of risk or harm Section 18.5
I mean, hell. I have the right to shut down any unsafe activity that I see when i'm at work based on my opinion, I would want the health minister to have the same power, i'm sure he's more picky than I am about what's safe.