More authoritarianism Bill C-63

bigpoppa

bigpoppa

Well-known member
Forum Sponsor
More internet and speech policing from our beloved justin trudeau:

"hate speech" (However thats defined) could carry jail sentences (including life in prison apparently)

 
raginduck said:
Have you read C-63?
Click to expand...
Did you?

Video explained it pretty well.
A lot of well intentioned censorship under the guise of "protecting xyz" or "stopping hate"
 
Is this the gov just trying to control the media on the internet, like they do already with traditional media. It probably has nothing to do with what individuals will say, but more about "rouge" media outlets, and this gives them something to shut them down?
 
raginduck said:
Have you read C-63?
Click to expand...
Quite a bit of it.

The problem lies in the language and who gets to interrupt it.

Offence motivated by hatred​


Start of inserted block
320.‍1001 (1) Everyone who commits an offence under this Act or any other Act of Parliament, if the commission of the offence is motivated by hatred based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity or expression, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life.

End of inserted block

Definition of hatred​


Start of inserted block
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), hatred has the same meaning as in subsection 319(7).
Click to expand...

What does that subsection say?

(4) Subsection 319(7) of the Act is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:​


Start of inserted block
hatred means the emotion that involves detestation or vilification and that is stronger than disdain or dislike; (haine)
Click to expand...

It stinks as bad as the definition of 'Assault rifle'. It's what every they want it to be at the time.


It gets worse....

Fear of hate propaganda offence or hate crime​


Start of inserted block

810.‍012 (1) A person may, with the Attorney General’s consent, lay an information before a provincial court judge if the person fears on reasonable grounds that another person will commit​

  • (a) an offence under section 318 or any of subsections 319(1) to (2.‍1); or
  • (b) an offence under section 320.‍1001.
Click to expand...

You seem to be one of those people that would commit a hate crime. Life imprisonment for you......

Nothing to see here my ass.
 
Last edited:
I've seen the concerning language..
I expect at least some of it will be challenged...
The courts will interpret it.

Edit.. I just noticed the last paragraph...
810 is about peace bonds.. I'm not sure how that "gets worse".. a lot of that already exists.

You're last sentence shows how exaggerated you're thinking is..
 
Last edited:
raginduck said:
I've seen the concerning language..
I expect at least some of it will be challenged...
The courts will interpret it.

Edit.. I just noticed the last paragraph...
810 is about peace bonds.. I'm not sure how that "gets worse".. a lot of that already exists.

You're last sentence shows how exaggerated you're thinking is..
Click to expand...
810.012 Directly links back to subsection 318,319 and 320.

Please explain how this is about peace bonds.....

Fear of hate propaganda offence or hate crime​


Start of inserted block

810.‍012 (1) A person may, with the Attorney General’s consent, lay an information before a provincial court judge if the person fears on reasonable grounds that another person will commit​

  • (a) an offence under section 318 or any of subsections 319(1) to (2.‍1); or
  • (b) an offence under section 320.‍1001.
Click to expand...
 
I usually look to see what Michael Geist has to say about Canadian "digital" legislation and he has weighed in on it.

www.michaelgeist.ca

My First Take on the Online Harms Act: Worst of 2021 Plan Now Gone But Digital Safety Commission Regulatory Power a Huge Concern - Michael Geist

After years of delay, the government tabled Bill C-63, the Online Harms Act, earlier today. The bill is really three-in-one: the Online Harms Act that creates new duties for Internet companies and a sprawling new enforcement system, changes to the Criminal Code and Canada Human Rights Act that...
www.michaelgeist.ca www.michaelgeist.ca
www.michaelgeist.ca

Why the Criminal Code and Human Rights Act Provisions Should Be Removed from the Online Harms Act - Michael Geist

Having a spent virtually the entire day yesterday talking with media and colleagues about Bill C-63, one thing has become increasingly clear: the Criminal Code and Human Rights Act provisions found in the Online Harms Act should be removed. In my initial post on the bill, I identified the...
www.michaelgeist.ca www.michaelgeist.ca

TLDR; Life imprisonment for hate speech is questionable, "Digital Safety Commission" will be vested with an alarming amount of power
 
Soulcatcher668 said:
810.012 Directly links back to subsection 318,319 and 320.

Please explain how this is about peace bonds.....
Click to expand...

Go to the actual criminal code...
look up section 810 (SURETIES TO KEEP THE PEACE)..
then look up 810.011 (FEAR OF CERTAIN OFFENCES)
Then tell me what your concern is with the purposed 810.12..
 
raginduck said:
Go to the actual criminal code...
look up section 810 (SURETIES TO KEEP THE PEACE)..
then look up 810.011 (FEAR OF CERTAIN OFFENCES)
Then tell me what your concern is with the purposed 810.12..
Click to expand...
My concern is that you have nebulous definitions for an act that can be enforced because you might do them. With heavy penalty.

When you start adding the 'Fear of Offences' clauses, you best have good definitions of what those offenses are.

Just because something has been used before does not make it a good or reasonable idea.
 
For fear of delving into yet another political thread at a motorcycle forum (sigh), I wonder what all the people here irked about "internet policing" feel about Poilevre's plan to rollout digital ID's to restrict things like Porn...to start.

pressprogress.ca

Conservative MP Says He Trusts Porn Companies Won’t Leak Digital IDs of Canadians Who Visit Porn Websites

Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives voted to introduce digital IDs for porn users
pressprogress.ca pressprogress.ca

I must have misheard when conservatives seemed all upset a few years ago when Digital ID's was a thing during a global public health emergency. Hmmm.
 
PrivatePilot said:
For fear of delving into yet another political thread at a motorcycle forum (sigh), I wonder what all the people here irked about "internet policing" feel about Poilevre's plan to rollout digital ID's to restrict things like Porn...to start.

pressprogress.ca

Conservative MP Says He Trusts Porn Companies Won’t Leak Digital IDs of Canadians Who Visit Porn Websites

Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives voted to introduce digital IDs for porn users
pressprogress.ca pressprogress.ca

I must have misheard when conservatives seemed all upset a few years ago when Digital ID's was a thing during a global public health emergency. Hmmm.
Click to expand...
Always down for less government intervention, that includes Digital IDs for any reason.
 
PrivatePilot said:
For fear of delving into yet another political thread at a motorcycle forum (sigh), I wonder what all the people here irked about "internet policing" feel about Poilevre's plan to rollout digital ID's to restrict things like Porn...to start.

pressprogress.ca

Conservative MP Says He Trusts Porn Companies Won’t Leak Digital IDs of Canadians Who Visit Porn Websites

Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives voted to introduce digital IDs for porn users
pressprogress.ca pressprogress.ca

I must have misheard when conservatives seemed all upset a few years ago when Digital ID's was a thing during a global public health emergency. Hmmm.
Click to expand...
Seems ridiculous. I would imagine that affected sites would just block Canadian IPs.

Why set up data containment for one small country? I certainly wouldn't trust it.
 
Difference is that one is currently being implemented, while the other may be destined for the bin along with crypto.

Could the Palestinian protesters be put in jail for life, just for being there under this law? That's not something I'd want.
 
Baggsy said:
may be destined for the bin
Click to expand...

Or very well may not be.

Of course the conservatives will still vote for him regardless and take that gamble, because something something, muble, reasons.

The hyprocrisy is off the charts with this whole situation. A lot of cons were literally losing their minds about "Trudeaus Covid passports" a few short years ago (despite a lot of the laws being introduced by Ford, a conservative, but that's another story), now it's just silence, or excuses when presented with their desired new leader not only looking at something similar, but potentially far more heavy fisted. Or they just red-herring the whole situation and then change the topic.
 
Last edited:
PrivatePilot said:
Or very well may not be.

Of course the conservatives will still vote for him regardless and take that gamble, because something something, muble, reasons.

The hyprocrisy is off the charts with this whole situation. A lot of cons were literally losing their minds about "Trudeaus Covid passports" a few short years ago (despite a lot of the laws being introduced by Ford, a conservative, but that's another story), now it's just silence, or excuses when presented with their desired new leader not only looking at something similar, but potentially far more heavy fisted. Or they just red-herring the whole situation and then change the topic.
Click to expand...
Uninformed voters, plenty to go around whatever colour you subscribe to.

PP will get the Con vote because he largely represents what matters to a 'majority' of conservative voters. Plenty think he's too left and plenty think he's not far right enough, but he's further right then anyone else in the commons so that's where the chips will largely fall. He isn't the first leader to clue in on; 'you only have to be right of the Liberals to start splitting the centrist vote, but you don't have to go all Book of Job on people to get there'. He is however getting his message across better than his predecessors.
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom