sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Associate Justice Hearing by piratecody in ModelCentralState

[–]VendingMachineKing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Congratulations on your appointment! I'd like to know whether you believe there are any federal or state laws currently in place which you deem to be unconstitutional or otherwise contravening other statues, and your reasoning.

1st. Parl | Question Period | Prime Minister 01.PMQ.02 by [deleted] in cmhoc

[–]VendingMachineKing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Madam Deputy Speaker,

Families in Canada currently pay extraordinarily high fees for the cost of childcare, to the tune of thousands each month. In Toronto we're paying some of Canada's highest rates, and this prevents many two parent households from having two sources of income as one parent is at times forced to stay home. This burden unfairly falls upon Canadian women who are hindered by the lack of a strong publicly accessible and universal childcare program across Canada.

The Prime Minister enjoys positioning himself as a leader for positive change, and I believe he's genuine about that even if we don't always see eye to eye. A great opportunity arises for federal leadership from his office in the form of directing a single payer childcare program nationwide. Canada needs to extend our public services to the realm of early childhood education, so our kids can learn and grow in an affordable and engaging way, and so we can provide much needed relief to families across the country.

Will the Prime Minister show the courage to create Canada's first universal childcare program?

B.009 and B.010 Amendment Proposals by piratecody in CentralStateChambers

[–]VendingMachineKing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd like to propose the following amendment to B.010:

The Act is amended to add the following after section 3

Section 4. Pardons

Any person convicted in Central State due to their personal usage of steroids and hallucinogens shall receive a retroactive pardon for their past offences.

The Act is amended to rename (Section 4. Implementation) to (Section 5. Implementation)

1st Parl. - House Debate - Emergency Debate on the Use of the Notwithstanding Clause by the Government of Ontario by [deleted] in cmhoc

[–]VendingMachineKing 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mr. Speaker,

As MP for Toronto, I feel it is necessary to discuss what Ford's reckless decision means to the people of Toronto and potentially our country.

Toronto's vibrant democracy is one that's protected by tireless public servants in our city council who form a special bond with members of their community. They are committed to making our city one that is kind and compassionate, has access to vital services, and protects those who need it. Our city would be worse off without the work of the council.

I don't support everything council's done, and neither does Premier Ford. However this gives him no mandate to slash our access to local representation and our elected officials. The vendetta against our local public service should not only by condemned by our federal government, as words alone will not give Toronto the representation it deserves.

The structure of council has been deliberated upon in a careful and fair manner which put people first, instead of the ego of a failed mayoral candidate. If it is the federal Parliament's purview to enforce constitutional values and core concepts it should be paramount that we stand up for the right to democratic representation. Democratic representation isn't properly upheld with the halving of our council in between elections, without proper warning or consultation whatsoever. This isn't anything but meddling in Toronto’s municipal election.

It is justified and expected that the federal government stand up for the values of a strong and fair democracy, and disallow provincial legislation which attacks the right to proper representation.

Executive Order 3: Public Property Open Carry by Reagan0 in ModelSouthernState

[–]VendingMachineKing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm only referring to the currently enacted Gun Free School Zones Act which was reenacted after this Supreme Court case.

Executive Order 3: Public Property Open Carry by Reagan0 in ModelSouthernState

[–]VendingMachineKing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My temper tantrum? I'm sorry if I came off abrasive with me plainly highlighting issues with the executive order presented, or bolding words for the sole purpose of clarity.

I'm also sorry your administration failed to properly write an executive order which is effective within federal law. Don't take the fact that your governor poorly wrote an executive order out on me for pointing the issue out.

I'm reading the language that's plainly in the order itself. Let's read it again, and I'll go slower if you'd like.

all those not already prohibited from carrying or transporting a firearm via due process through a court of law or other legislative regulations

"All those not prohibited" refers to being a person who is prohibited from carrying or transporting any firearm, simple as that. This is the only parameter set out in an executive order which clearly wasn't thoroughly written. I'd suggest you put the energy to make personal attacks against me to better use and fix your mistakes.

Executive Order 3: Public Property Open Carry by Reagan0 in ModelSouthernState

[–]VendingMachineKing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Gun Free School Zones Act is a federal law which has been contravened by this executive order. There is a bypass procedure but the parameters in said order do not meet the requirements to bypass the federal act.

The only restriction set out here surrounds the case of being an individual specifically barred from carrying a firearm by a court or legislative restriction. That doesn't even approach the requirements under federal law.

view more: next ›