Armoured Skeptic Fails Hard on Canadian Law (Part 1 of 2)
Added 2017-06-28 05:18:10 +0000 UTCHere's part 1! Part 2 in a couple days.
Comments
Keep these Canadian video coming I am a big fan of them.
Francis
2017-07-03 02:08:39 +0000 UTCtrue..., on the other hand it keeps the skeptic in me skepting...😎
jonlin
2017-06-29 06:49:11 +0000 UTCWell I originally commented on Twitter that I didn't understand what was so objectionable about Greg's video; That it seemed serviceable enough and it must be my Yankee status that made it unclear. Now I understand. Appreciate all your effort. Trusted sources should be held to a high standard about what they distribute.
Silenttalker
2017-06-28 18:02:27 +0000 UTCI find this video enlightening and disturbing. You did a pretty good job of finding the meaning in the laws you read. If Canadian law is anything like US law, the plain language is what controls, unless another definition is supplied. I read the laws you linked (I'm a lawyer and that's what we do) and I found it an interesting read. I have read the Patriot Act (twice because it was so confusing) and I have to say that your anti-terrorism statute is at least clearer. I does make me think of Ben Franklin: "Those who sacrifice freedom for the sake of security end up with neither." (well, paraphrasing)
jonlin
2017-06-28 07:43:20 +0000 UTCDefinitely hope people don't just write this off as random Youtube drama. You make a lot of cogent points that are important to address here.
Ryusuta
2017-06-28 06:19:46 +0000 UTC
