News   Mar 28, 2024
 1.2K     2 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 618     2 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 896     0 

Novel Coronavirus COVID-19 (nCoV-2019)

My coworker and I were talking about it and it's hard to believe how much of a ghost town the Downtown Core will be in the next few days. Cue the tumbleweed...
 
My coworker and I were talking about it and it's hard to believe how much of a ghost town the Downtown Core will be in the next few days. Cue the tumbleweed...

Days? I think this is going to last for weeks. Even if the chain of infections eases, the remainder of the population still doesn't have any natural immunity and are vulnerable.

AoD
 
There are many laws that people follow and we dont have to endlessly police people for...

You really think we have to invoke martial law to do mandatory self-isolation?

Like i dont know what the stats are but getting 9 out of ten 10 people to comply would be a huge victory.

You are right, it would be a victory, but a government really has only two tools in its kit; legislation and moral leadership/persuasion. When a law is created that impacts on citizens, by its very nature implies consequences for non-compliance. There is little point in passing a law that says "everyone should". The overriding goal of any legislation is to seek voluntary compliance. Clearly, most people don't run stop signs or cheat on their taxes, but there are laws in place for those who do not voluntarily comply.

You were the one who raised the concept of martial law, not me, and even what you are proposing has absolutely no connection to martial law which, by definition is the military suspension of ordinary law.

As I recollect; the act is phrased such that Charter guarantees around non-discrimination are preserved. Any violation of the Charter is subject to the Reasonable Limits Clause.

ie. violations that can be justified in a free and democratic society.

I expect many such limitations can be; but not without some reasonable limits, as it should be.

It's actually a very small Act, only 80 sections, and the only reference to the Charter is in its preamble:

"AND WHEREAS the Governor in Council, in taking such special temporary measures, would be subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Bill of Rights and must have regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, particularly with respect to those fundamental rights that are not to be limited or abridged even in a national emergency;"
 
It's actually a very small Act, only 80 sections, and the only reference to the Charter is in its preamble:

"AND WHEREAS the Governor in Council, in taking such special temporary measures, would be subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Bill of Rights and must have regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, particularly with respect to those fundamental rights that are not to be limited or abridged even in a national emergency;"

Granted, but the Reasonable Limits Clause is embedded in the Charter itself.

Rights and freedoms in Canada
1.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
 
Province has halted all evictions:


No new orders to be issued until further notice.

Sheriff's office told to postpone enforcement of existing orders for this week minimum.
 
Granted, but the Reasonable Limits Clause is embedded in the Charter itself.

Rights and freedoms in Canada
1.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

I think we are both trying to make the same point.

Legislators are compelled by the Charter to view their actions (laws, regulations, orders, etc.) through the lens of Section 1. If a particular matter comes before the court, all the way up to the SCOC, it will use the same lens, along with others.
 
Legislators are compelled by the Charter to view their actions (laws, regulations, orders, etc.) through the lens of Section 1. If a particular matter comes before the court, all the way up to the SCOC, it will use the same lens, along with others.

True, but the dead can't ask for rights - and I'd rather risk violating the Charter and deal with the repercussion in the court years down the road than freaking out over it, do the wrong thing and let things slip out of hand. The only reasonable question is whether the violation contemplated is actually enforcable and will actually produce the desired goals in an emergency - it is the latter test where it fails.

AoD
 
Last edited:
True, but the dead can't ask for rights - and I'd rather risk violating the Charter and deal with the repercussion in the court years down the road than freaking out over it, do the wrong thing and let things slip out of hand. The only reasonable question is whether the violation contemplated is actually enforcable and will actually produce the desired goals in an emergency - it is the latter test where it fails.

AoD

Actually, if the action involves scooping people off the street without a justifiable excuse ("papers please") as posited in some posts, it would fail on both points.
 
Completely shutting the US border means that Canada would essentially be nuking its economy (ignoring the political implications). So a soft-closure for now, maybe a full closure if things get worse, I would imagine.

1) Nobody advocated for a "complete shut down" of the US border anyway. Not sure what you're arguing against.
2) There's no "soft-closure" announced. This afternoon's announcement left it completely open. That's the issue.
 
Interesting observation in contrasts. I am on another forum that is mostly populated by Americans and it seems a majority of whom are Republican supporters. There is a prevailing view that federal and state actions are constitutional overreach and a restriction on individual liberties, this is mostly a problem caused by 'foreigners' and their free-market healthcare system is best suited for the response.

Meanwhile, in Florida:

 

Back
Top