Fak her right in Pus**: feminists need to suck the big one! | Page 3 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Fak her right in Pus**: feminists need to suck the big one!

sonnythebull said:
These guys are drunken losers. It was funny one time when the original guy did it years ago but not over and over,
however it isn't sexual harassment ( they don't work with her and they don't have power over her)and the fact they are trying to find a crime to pin on these guys is insane.
as a boss I wouldn't fire these guys. I would make an example of them. Make them apologize publicly, demote them , cut their pay , make them do some kind of charity work,and put them on probation ( if they were good workers who deserved another chance) then if they do anything wrong after that fire them . If not they will be paying them a lot of money for wrongful dismissal
does anyone here want to be penalized for ANY of their behaviour outside work?
Click to expand...

Amen to all of that - the issue is public obscenity, for which there are laws. These losers would be the first to complain if it was a female member of their families that were spoken to that way. They should go back to living in their parents' basements where they belong...
 
SunnY S said:
He got "fired", but when the dust settles, he will be rehired. just watch...
Click to expand...

Why would anyone do that (rehire him)? Please explain.

Picture this: You post a job for a "Senior Financial Analyst" at $105,000 plus benefits, and you get anywhere between 100 to 300 resumes. If management can pick the cream of the crop, why would they do business with a known ******e like this one?
 
TK4 said:
Amen to all of that - the issue is public obscenity, for which there are laws.
Click to expand...


charge or a convictian for obscenity not likely. chekc R. v. Butler.

the late-Alan Borovoy rolling in his grave now. have not we learned anything about free speech? free speech is not meant to protect ideas that ppl agree with. we, as free society, only as free as offensive ideas we willing to protect.
 
Dreamy Boom Boom said:
charge or a convictian for obscenity not likely. chekc R. v. Butler.

the late-Alan Borovoy rolling in his grave now. have not we learned anything about free speech? free speech is not meant to protect ideas that ppl agree with. we, as free society, only as free as offensive ideas we willing to protect.
Click to expand...

These gentlemen's rights to free speech have been in no way violated
 
Boorish behaviour, all 'round.
 
Dreamy Boom Boom said:
charge or a convictian for obscenity not likely. chekc R. v. Butler.

the late-Alan Borovoy rolling in his grave now. have not we learned anything about free speech? free speech is not meant to protect ideas that ppl agree with. we, as free society, only as free as offensive ideas we willing to protect.
Click to expand...

Apparently, you are not very clear on what free speech means... so I guess that would make your own statement correct, I agree with you, we have learned nothing about free speech...
 
Can someone explain in more detail why they think these idiots will get re-hired?

I don't know the exact terminology but I know that my employment contract contains some sections about personal conduct and being a representative of the company. If I'd done something this stupid and the powers of social media publicly linked me to my employer I would expect a swift dismissal.
 
oh, that very nice.

here we gooo:

(1) dude says somthing offencize;
(2) dude get fired by his working place;
(3) working place is crown corp
(4) charter of rgts applyes to crown corp
(5) s. 2(b) of charter protect freedom of expresian
(6) s. 1 of charter (crown corp wood have hard time justifiing infringging on his s. 2(b) rights via Oakes Test)

(7) therefore, how this not a a freedom of speech issue?


By way, ur comic relates to american legislatian. i dont kno how they work. this is canada after all.


TwistedKestrel said:
Here is a summary in entertaining comic format

Click to expand...
 
The comic highlighted the principle you are invoking. You can replace "1st amendment" with "Section 2(b)" if you like
 
Dreamy Boom Boom said:
oh, that very nice.

here we gooo:

(1) dude says somthing offencize;
(2) dude get fired by his working place;
(3) working place is crown corp
(4) charter of rgts applyes to crown corp
Click to expand...

Oh my, oh my. Let me stop you right there, at #4. Charter of rights applies everywhere, not only to Crown Corporations. Or do you think it applies only to some organizations, and not to others?

Dreamy Boom Boom said:
(5) s. 2(b) of charter protect freedom of expresian
Click to expand...

Have you actually read it? It is not an absolute right, it does not allow you to say anything you want!

Dreamy Boom Boom said:
(6) s. 1 of charter (crown corp wood have hard time justifiing infringging on his s. 2(b) rights via Oakes Test)
Click to expand...
Where are you getting your information? There is no infringement of his freedom of speech, but there are consequences.
Furthermore, his firing falls squarely under labour laws. Explain how Oakes is connected to labour laws.


Dreamy Boom Boom said:
By way, ur comic relates to american legislatian. i dont kno how they work. this is canada after all.
Click to expand...
Dude, in Canada, free speech has arguably more limitations than in the USA.

Anyway, just my 2 cents...
 
Dreamy Boom Boom said:
By way, ur comic relates to american legislatian. i dont kno how they work. this is canada after all.
Click to expand...

Actually the comic just refers to freedom of speech in general it has nothing to do with any direct legislation. Its just written by an American but applies equality here. If i remember the context he was making a comment on people who complain about being censored on social Media and forums specifically.

It can be summed up as Freedom of speech isn't freedom from consequence. Not that this has anything to do with this laws that govern freedom of speech in this country arn't without limits.
 
Last edited:
Poor guy. We have all done something stupid while drunk. What's next, I have a few too many beers at a concert and pass out will I get fired if the film gets back to my boss? Give me a break. I hope he takes it to court. It was rude and un-called for but I disagree with him being fired.

Too bad he didn't work for the city of Hamilton. 22 city employees get fired for selling city asphalt for cash on the side and 10 months later 19 of them are getting their job back (not exact on my numbers but pretty close)
 
Dreamy Boom Boom said:
charge or a convictian for obscenity not likely. chekc R. v. Butler.

the late-Alan Borovoy rolling in his grave now. have not we learned anything about free speech? free speech is not meant to protect ideas that ppl agree with. we, as free society, only as free as offensive ideas we willing to protect.
Click to expand...

The right to free speech means only that you are free to say what you wish without fear of criminal prosecution. It does not means that you are free of the civil and social consequences of others taking offence at what you say.
 
TwistedKestrel said:
These gentlemen's rights to free speech have been in no way violated
Click to expand...

True enough. They even got to have their "free speech" broadcast for all to see. They are famous now. Years down the road they will be able to proudly show the video clip to their children.

Now their employer is able to exercise its right to fire employees with the kind of public character traits that do not suitably represent the values of the company.

Aren't rights wonderful?
 
MikeMrsguided said:
Poor guy. We have all done something stupid while drunk. What's next, I have a few too many beers at a concert and pass out will I get fired if the film gets back to my boss? Give me a break. I hope he takes it to court. It was rude and un-called for but I disagree with him being fired.
Click to expand...

Agree. His firing looks like the politically correct holier than thou response. From Ontario Hydro of all places.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom