gowlerk

No, I am not referring to the possibility of fraud. I am talking about two issues with vote by mail. Both involve the erosion of the secret ballot. I can easily see someone's spouse or parent supervising the vote and making sure it goes to the preferred candidate of the most aggressive person in the household. And secondly, it makes vote buying possible again, just like the bad old days. Does anyone here have any good ideas on how to prevent this other than in person ballots?

Sometimes She guides the football into the arms of the receiver in big games. Maybe she has a bet in with Satan?

California is not going to be a swing state. Trump tweets stupid sounding stuff, but there is thought behind most of them. He is trying to appeal to his base in such a way that all hardship is the governor's fault and anything good that happens is thanks to him. It's all about November.

He posted a meme with a pic of a mini-gun and a threat to overturn governments by force to get his way. Normal right wing extremist stuff. What's rebel about that?

I'm pretty sure it goes deeper into American military thinking than that. The bias and unwillingness to treat Iran fairly has an underlying cause. And that is the US decision to align itself with both the House of Saud and Israel. Yes Iran is a difficult and belligerent actor in the region, but there have been many opportunities to help change that which have been deliberately sabotaged by elements on all sides.

So, I looked it up. I do have a vague memory of a small controversy a couple years ago. First of all it is not "compelled speech". It is an administrative directive. Compelled speech makes people say things with which they disagree. Bill C-16, like provincial human rights codes, does not make specific reference to speech. ... Along with human rights tribunals, they have primary control over the meaning and application of code provisions, something the justice minister must know. Jordan Peterson, a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, criticized the bill, saying that it would compel speech. Peterson argued that the law would classify the failure to use preferred pronouns of transgender people as hate speech. According to legal experts, not using preferred pronouns would not meet legal standards for hate speech. As you have already been told by another Canadian JORDAN PETERSON LIED TO YOU. The reason knuckle dragging American right wingers know about C-16 and Canadians just don't care is simple. Your right wing media loves to hate anything that protects LGBQT people and rails on and on about it. You have bought into the propaganda and now you are attempting to spread the lies in this forum. Please just stop with the trumping.

2.3 million people As of 2016, 2.3 million people were incarcerated in the United States, at a rate of 698 people per 100,000. Total US incarceration peaked in 2008. Total correctional population (prison, jail, probation, parole) peaked in 2007. In 2008 the US had around 24.7% of the world's 9.8 million prisoners. I don't even know what C-16 is. But I will bet you that not a single person in my much freer than yours nation is in jail over it. I rest my case.

FFS, the term you used in your post was not "castle doctrine", it was "sovereign citizen". The exact quote is "In my country, people are sovereign citizens with inalienable rights." Now I suggest you look up the meaning of that term. If you posted carelessly and used incorrect words that you did not mean that is on you. But back to the point, which is your assertion that somehow your nation has greater freedom than Canada does. I'm calling bullshit.

Oh right. The "sovereign citizen" movement. If that what he believes that he is I challenge him to try to exercise his "sovereign rights" and see how quickly he finds himself in one of his nation's numerous prisons.

He is gay, not trans. Biden has stated it will be a woman.

'zactly

Thinking is not prohibited. You are allowed to hate anyone or anything you like. Only actions are prohibited and the punishment for those actions can sometimes be modified by their motivations. There is nothing new about this except that there are classes of persons that these laws are aimed at protecting. Just like there are laws protecting police specifically.

Well, his stated motivation was to start a race war. Because like many before him he thought that a race war would eventually lead to the establishment of a white only homeland within the current USA. In other words, he wants a civil war to destroy your nation, overturn your constitution, and start anew. In other words he is a traitor as well as a murderer. About the only good thing about such an event is that the new nations formed along racial divisions would be unlikely to repeat the mistake of the second amendment. The bad part is that they would likely drop the first as well.

There may have been an automatic assumption at first. But that does not mean a conviction for a hate crime. As I said, and you have not acknowledged, a hate crime conviction requires clear evidence of motive. Not circumstantial evidence, but provable cause to show the person was motivated by a bias against whatever the statute bars.

He is the best ever at pissing off the people they love to see pissed off. It's that simple.

You really should look at the Canadian Charter of Right and Freedoms. You should look at some of the rulings our Supreme court has made. Americans often make the mistake of thinking that just because Canadians don't have a constitutional right to use the tools of war as toys we are somehow oppressed. Your idiot country drafted kids into the army as cannon fodder for no good reason in the '70s. Canada was here as an escape valve for those not blinded by the propaganda. Not all Americans are assholes, don't fall into that hole. Edit, of course Skydecker was not the original source of the quote or the person I am addressing

He is a big target.

You seem to be somewhat angry. And you also seem to have a poor grasp of the law. If the restrictions in place under emergency declarations were not lawful don't you thing some lawyer somewhere would not have gotten an injunction by now?

You just can't help yourself can you?

ESP is not enough to establish a motive when prosecuting a hate crime. In order to be successful the prosecutor must show hard proof.

I also find this to be a bad example. Is it okay for a wife to kill another woman for insulting her husband? But again, Dylan Roof.

There is something in what you say about all crimes being equal. There is also something in providing an extra penalty for crimes motivated by beliefs that we want to suppress. Of course we can not change the minds of the haters, but increased penalties are not designed to do that. They are designed to send a clear message to society in general. We have hate crime laws because our history is rife with hate being allowed and we want tools to force change. Unjust? Dylan Roof.

Individuals can believe whatever they want. States must not care what anyone believes. They are allowed to care what people do.

NO LEVEL OF SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE CAN EVER RISE TO ABSURDITY. IT MUST BE ABSOLUTE.

Trump controls the US arsenal. Think about that. Not too hard, you might get sick. Persia is and has been a rational actor. They have good reason for the things they do.