CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 10666
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 1:20 pm
 


2Cdo 2Cdo:
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Lemmy Lemmy:
Trudeau did not commit assault.


Lemmy Lemmy:
So to continue to insist that Trudeau committed assault is INCORRECT


Lemmy Lemmy:
Just like when I tapped you on the shoulder I technically committed assault



Thank you for confirming that.

Is Lemmy speaking as an expert on economics, law or welding?

It's hard to keep track of his multiple personalities. :lol:


I'm trying to understand how grabbing a man and elbowing a woman in the tit isn't assault but tapping me on the shoulder is?

Maybe if I was tapped by a Liberal it wouldn't be?

Can you help?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Boston Bruins


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 11907
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 1:22 pm
 


OnTheIce OnTheIce:

I'm trying to understand how grabbing a man and elbowing a woman in the tit isn't assault but tapping me on the shoulder is?

Maybe if I was tapped by a Liberal it wouldn't be?

Can you help?


Well,,,, I'm not a lawyer but I played one in a school play many years ago. :lol:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 12349
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 1:36 pm
 


OnTheIce OnTheIce:
I'm trying to understand how grabbing a man and elbowing a woman in the tit isn't assault but tapping me on the shoulder is?

Where did you get the idea that tapping you on the shoulder is?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 10666
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 1:41 pm
 


Lemmy Lemmy:
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
I'm trying to understand how grabbing a man and elbowing a woman in the tit isn't assault but tapping me on the shoulder is?

Where did you get the idea that tapping you on the shoulder is?


You said it was!


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 12349
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 1:41 pm
 


OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Lemmy Lemmy:
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
I'm trying to understand how grabbing a man and elbowing a woman in the tit isn't assault but tapping me on the shoulder is?

Where did you get the idea that tapping you on the shoulder is?


You said it was!

No I didn't. Committing the act, as described by the Code isn't enough. "Technically" isn't enough. Just like when you punch a guy who's attacking you. Technically assault (applying a force without consent) but not assault because no criminal intent. Getting it yet, are have you not the capacity?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15244
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 1:51 pm
 


Nobody's assaulted anyone.

As was already stated, the incident wasn't was widely reported and on tape. If an assault had occurred, the authorities would have laid charges.

In Canada, it's police who decide to press charges, not the victim. A victim's complaint or even cooperation is not required.

Now let's move on from this silly shit..


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 10666
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 3:11 pm
 


Lemmy Lemmy:
No I didn't. Committing the act, as described by the Code isn't enough. "Technically" isn't enough. Just like when you punch a guy who's attacking you. Technically assault (applying a force without consent) but not assault because no criminal intent. Getting it yet, are have you not the capacity?


An assault is an assault is an assault. Whether I come and grab your arm or you flick me on the ear.

You're trying to tell me an assault didn't take place. It did.

However, that assault is not worthy of criminal charges. That does not mean an assault didn't take place.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 12349
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 3:18 pm
 


OnTheIce OnTheIce:
An assault is an assault is an assault.

Wrong. Again, as usual.

OTI OTI:
Whether I come and grab your arm or you flick me on the ear.

Wrong. We don't have enough information yet to declare either of those things an assault or not an assault. If I flicked your ear to injure you, it's assault. If I flicked your ear to get a mosquito off it, not an assault. If I grab your arm to harm you or intimidate you, assault. If I grab your arm to stop you from stepping in front of a car (or to assist you to your chair when your path is being blocked by others) not an assault.

OTI OTI:
You're trying to tell me an assault didn't take place. It did.

No it didn't. The required elements for the crime of assault did not exist, therefore there was no assault.

OTI OTI:
However, that assault is not worthy of criminal charges. That does not mean an assault didn't take place.

Yes it does mean an assault didn't take place because there was no criminal intent.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 10666
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 3:37 pm
 


You need to read the Criminal Code of Canada. This isn't the US. The definitions vary from Country to Country.

265
1 (a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;

Nothing about elements of crime, or intentions to commit a crime. The definition of assault is clear.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 35270
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 4:51 pm
 


I gag 5-6 times a day just reading the posts here. :lol:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 11829
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 7:34 pm
 


Don't have to fake it , either!


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14747
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 8:40 pm
 


BeaverFever BeaverFever:
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
herbie herbie:
Why apologize, you wimp? Man up! If they're offended by your funny then fuck 'em.


Exactly, and I expect the same latitude to be given by the left to the Wild Rose party for embarrassing the Chairman.



Totally different. One is a private gathering, the other is a public ceremony. Wild Rose can burn Wynne in effigy on their own time if they want, but not in the Legislature.

As I said, let the equivocation begin!


ROTFL

Private gathering my ass. :roll:


It may have been a Party Convention but, as soon as you invite the press it stops being a private gathering. Maybe, next time they have a convention and invite the "Bob the Destroyer" they should do it in camera so his childish antics won't detract from the message their leader was trying to get across.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15244
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 8:54 pm
 


It's still a private function, Einstein. Unlike the Wild Rose incident which was in the Legislature where there are standing customs.

Liberals and Conservatives are free to insult each other, that's not the problem. The problem is that there are certain public functions and customs where that's not appropriate due to common decency like rising for a guest in the Legislature.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 12349
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2016 9:03 pm
 


OnTheIce OnTheIce:
You need to read the Criminal Code of Canada. This isn't the US. The definitions vary from Country to Country.

265
1 (a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;

Nothing about elements of crime, or intentions to commit a crime. The definition of assault is clear.

Oh my god, you're a fucking moron. Go take a grade 11 Introduction to Law class before you say another thing about criminal law in Canada.

You've accused me of refusing to admit when I was wrong. Okay, Dipshit, here's your chance to be the bigger man and admit you were wrong.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14139
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2016 9:35 am
 


Lemmy Lemmy:
PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:
And Yet, fearless leader is still in HIS party despite committing assault in Parliament. An actual crime!

If that were true, he'd have been charged.
Police don't just charge you with assault unless someone presses charges. Except in domestic violence cases.

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:
But you're such a partisan hack I have grave doubts you see it that way.

Lemmy Lemmy:
How's that any different from you out-and-out lying about Trudeau to further your partisan agenda?

What lies? Trudeau committed assault according to Section 265(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. His actions are there for the world to see.
Nor am I a partisan. Assaulting people in Parliament would be entirely unacceptable no matter who was PM.
The difference between you and I is, if it was Harper that had done this, I wouldn't have come up with the weak-ass bullshit you did about how Trudeau was merely helping the Conservative Whip get through the crowd.
He shoved MPs out of the way while saying "get the fuck out of my way" (assault), he grabbed the Whip by the arm and dragged him through the crowd (assault), and inadvertently assaulted another MP while he carried out his initial assault.

Now just in case you weren't paying attention the last time. 265 (1) A person commits an assault when

(a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts ... n-265.html

Not entirely sure how you can say it isn't assault. I guess the CCoC has the definition wrong. Maybe someone should go ask a bunch of economists what the definition of assault is because clearly you have a much better understanding of it than the law makers, justice system and courts.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 91 posts ]  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 40 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.