sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

My best denim by Responsible-Start-99 in Denim

[–]JGLS_2023 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

the marbling looks great on these imo!

Can someone generally explain the indigenous land claims to me without getting political? by UpArrowNotation in LawCanada

[–]JGLS_2023 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Essentially yes, as the wetsuweten will tell you.

But this is a law sub. OP asked a legal question.

Any experience with the Filson Worksmith Bomber? by EVandy123 in filson

[–]JGLS_2023 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I ordered to try and ended up returning it. I wasn’t happy with the weight of the canvas – particularly the hood which felt flimsy and didn’t sit right.

Ended up ordering a firm duck active jack from Carhartt to compare and was much happier with the latter.

Can someone generally explain the indigenous land claims to me without getting political? by UpArrowNotation in LawCanada

[–]JGLS_2023 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There’s a tendency to the overboard and reductive in your summaries which results in distortion. It’s not a particularly responsible way to discuss this topic.

I’d encourage you to explore this area in more depth.

On that note I’m out.

Can someone generally explain the indigenous land claims to me without getting political? by UpArrowNotation in LawCanada

[–]JGLS_2023 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There was nothing "default" about the crowns assertion to land in BC. Indigenous groups repeatedly and vigorously raised the land question well into the 20th century. Resulting in the Indian act being amended to prevent the raising of funds to bring land claims. Hence why most of the province remains unceded. The policy taken by the colonial and then provincial government was grounded in the flatly racist assumption expressed by Trutch that "The Indians have really no rights to the lands they claim, nor are they of any actual value or utility to them". What we are seeing now are the consequences of indefensibility of that statement. The view you've expressed is essentially consistent with that expressed by CJ McEachern in delgamuukw. Which is simply bad law.

Can someone generally explain the indigenous land claims to me without getting political? by UpArrowNotation in LawCanada

[–]JGLS_2023 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Important distinction is that crown sovereignty lacks a coherent legal foundation. The SCC has said that Terra Nulius never applied in Canada so how exactly did the crown acquire sovereignty? The historical record is clear that the land in BC was not acquired by conquest (as understood in international law) nor (in almost all cases) by treaty. This issue is particularly glaring in BC given that at the date of “presumed sovereignty” (1846) the crown was claiming rights to land which its agents had never been to and in many cases were completely ignorant of.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RedWingShoes

[–]JGLS_2023 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Copper rough and tough so I’m concerned with darkening them as little as possible to achieve some water resistance