Slashdot Mirror


Canadian Lawful Access Legislation

EvilAlien writes "In Canada, existing legislation covers access to telephone records, disclosure of customer information in accordance with the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) and other means compelling the release of information. However, the laws regulating access to these networks for Canadian law enforcement and national security groups are only under development. The Department of Justice has released their Lawful Access Consultation Document to get feedback from all the stakeholders including industry, civil liberties groups, and the legal community."

170 comments

  1. I didn't read the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Blame Canada!

  2. double post? by Kwikymart · · Score: 1

    Though I like seeing Canadian issues get a lot of coverage, isn't this a double post

    --

    Buying a Dell computer is equivalent to dropping the soap in a prison shower.
    1. Re:double post? by EvilAlien · · Score: 2
      Arguably, yes. My bad, I suppose. That CNet report is garbage though, there is nothing like getting to the source and skipping past rediculous media coverage.

      I'm fairly dissapointed at the level of apathy. Americans don't seem to care, at least relatively. Canadian's don't seem to care much (are we really this apathetic?). There are a number of problems with the consultation process that nobody is noticing.

      There is no mention of safe harbour. Does this mean that an ISP forced to release data is subject to a civil suit for privacy violation?

      Why is the consultation process so short? It seems like Justice is trying to ram this through. It also smells like the laws are already drafted, and after an obligatory lip-service "consultation process", they will get tabled. And industry and civil liberties will get ignored just as they were with Bill C-15a. In an of itself, it is a noble cause to fight child exploitation. However, it is dangerous when laws aimed at doing so also try to turn ISPs into content watchdogs.

      Who will bear the costs? Will Canadian industry be forced to pay for a Canadian equivalent of Carnivore?

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
  3. This doesn't matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    I don't live in Canada.

    1. Re:This doesn't matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what they said about Germany back in the old days. Do you want to end up in a gas chamber somewhere in Manitoba because nobody paid any attention to Canada? Do you want to be forced to hail the Prime Minister and see nuclear war break out over the secession of Quebec? If you turn a blind eye to Canada when Canadian Fascism is in its infancy, you will one day learn the error of your ways.

    2. Re:This doesn't matter by digidave · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's pretty ignorant. I am Canadian, but I don't say that American issues don't matter. DMCA doesn't matter because I'm Canadian, so Slashdot shouldn't post about it, is that how I should think?

      Perhaps you should go back to the dump and find your soul. It's good to care about what happens in countries besides your own.

      --
      The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
    3. Re:This doesn't matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. I'm Canadian, but the DMCA has made me very concerned..largely about the future of computing in general. Just because it doesn't happen in your back yard doesn't mean that it won't affect you.

    4. Re:This doesn't matter by Marc+Desrochers · · Score: 1

      BINGO! Americans Dont's seem to understand why the world dislikes them. It's this attitude that brings upon them days like 9/11.

  4. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know that post doesn't warrant a response but I have a feeling that there are many people out there who don't know much about Canada.

    Canada has something called the Charter of Rights and Freedoms which guarrantees their basic liberties.

    It does not mention anything about the right to own a gun, but why should it?

  5. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Have you seen Canada's constitution?"

    Apparently you havn't. And you wonder how Americans get their reputation for being arrogant morons? This is exactly the thing that they are known for. It is not your job to stick your noses in matters you have no reason to nor understand at all. Get a fucking clue you moron. Lies may get you some place in your own country, but the real world doesn't buy into your fucked up ways.

  6. Re:Why bother? by Orthanc_duo · · Score: 1, Troll

    Maybe they should be fighting their government for basic guaranteed human rights like free speech and press and the freedom to own guns before worrying about their "rights" online because they don't have any
    Is owning a gun a basic human right? Lets take a quick guess at why there are so many shootings in USA. Quite frankly you can keep your rite to own guns, down here in NZ the cops don't normally carry guns. If someone is shot its headline news, not a daily occurance as it seems to be over there. You should be fighting to remove such a "right" as it will likely get you killed.

    Orthanc

  7. Re:Why bother? (Why modded down?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a Canadian, and I agree with the parent post to a certain extent. After 9/11, it was easier for Canada's government to take away our (largely illusory) rights than it was with the Patriot Act in the USA. For instance, anti-globalization activists are amongst those who can now be labelled "terrorist" and locked away without outside contact.
    On the other hand, this process is not a complete sham. At this time, Canada's government doesn't want people to realize that their rights are not grounded upon inalienable principles. They will not completely dismiss the results of the public input they are requesting. If they were going to do so, why request input at all, since they aren't actually required to.
    JG

  8. Re:Canada-specific legislation, what a waste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure it's cool to have you own legislation, but when you're a mere 350 millions people, it makes more economical sense to buy the legislation texts you need from China.

  9. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    It does not mention anything about the right to own a gun, but why should it?
    Because an unarmed population is ruled, not governed.
  10. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't bother modding the parent up, he's just feeding the trolls.

  11. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And this is exactly the sort of crap that makes America bashers look so bad, and fuels the arrogance of some Americans who actually are morons. Where did the original poster say he was American? Here's a hint: he didnt! If you do some research, you will discover that he is Austrian. That's right, he's from Europe. And you're using an ignorant flamebait from a European to justify America bashing? Disgusting. I can only hope you are a troll, and not some poor fool lost in his misguided imaginary world.

  12. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    liberal commie

    Canada is slightly left wing compared to the US, but it is definitely not communist. Do some of your own research.

    shithole

    You are forgetting that this shithole is about the best place to live in the world according to the United Nations. I think we ranked 2nd or 3rd this year, but have rated consistently 1st for the past number of years. Oh yah, and the US is not even in the top 5.

    All I can say is, at least we don't have a retard like bush for our leader.

  13. Let's not follow the US! by farrellj · · Score: 4, Interesting

    True North Strong and Free...that's what our national anthem says...Mr Bush & Co have gutted the US Bill of Rights, don't let our so-called "Liberal" government do the same. We can fight terrorism with the tools we have, the only reason why 9/11 happened is that we were not looking for it.

    If we turn this continent into Fortress North America, they they have won the war by making us into our worst fears...a police state with autocractic politicians. When rule of force becomes the rule of law, we might as well just elect a dictator and be done with it.

    If the US is going to be too stupid to realize what they have done, let's show then how it's done, and maybe they will realize their mistake before theey *do* elect a dictator.

    ttyl
    Farrell ...concerned about his home, and his friends in the States.

    --
    CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
    1. Re:Let's not follow the US! by davidstrauss · · Score: 1

      You seem to care a lot about privacy for someone who uses Hotmail.

    2. Re:Let's not follow the US! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mr Bush & Co have gutted the US Bill of Rights

      Oh really, I don't seem to recall any modifications to Amendments 1-10 since he was elected into office.

    3. Re:Let's not follow the US! by davidstrauss · · Score: 1

      Have you read the Patriot Act?

    4. Re:Let's not follow the US! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "When rule of force becomes the rule of law, we might as well just elect a dictator and be done with it."

      That's exactly what we do. We only have one legislative house (senate is a joke and doesn't count) and members are expected to vote along party lines. There is no separate executive branch, the leader of the majority party in the house of commons is the Prime Minister.

      GW would love a system like that, what a pain for him having to worry about two legislative houses where he can't dictate outcomes.

    5. Re:Let's not follow the US! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The other day I was sleeping with this fucking Mexican woman with a lot of warts on her body, and I asked myself is this life worth living. You see I was born in a black incubator in Quebec. When I say black incubator I really mean it. It was this kind of place where they grow people in these black metallic tubes and then when you are three they take you out and they put you in a box and they send you overseas. Now you know there are many strange countries in this world, and I woke up in a little place they call Shrill Lanka. There were a lot of seashells or something laying around, or maybe it was pieces of people's bones, I'm not sure. I'm a young guy you see, and back then I was just a little kid, so I didn't know if it was seashells or bones. So anyway, we got on this space ship that was called the "Celine Dion Mustard Express" and it took off into space! Man, that bitch shook! I thought it was going to fall apart and drop us back to the Earth in one big flaming heap. So finally we got to the moon and there are all these little people with slanty eyes running around, I think they call them Chinese or Oriental or something. They were trying to fix this broken steam engine but they weren't having much luck. For some reason I just stood there staring at them putzing around with that old beat up steam engine, and finally I burst out laughing, walked over to them, and whipped out my dick and took a leak on the one guy who acted as though he was in charge. This crazy bastard turned around and started shouting something in his chicken shit language, and so I zipped my pants back up and ran like hell! You can run pretty far on the moon without getting tired, so soon I was totally lost. I was stuck in some crater that was full of various cheeses. I curled up into a ball and started crying, but as I cried my tears melted the cheese and the cheese began to float! Soon I was far above the surface of the moon on a bed of cheeses. I nibbled at the cheeses (I was hungry) as it carried me across the solar system. I passed all the planets but finally returned to earth. The Good Ship Cheese lowered me safely into the earth's atmosphere and back to Canada. "God save the Queen!" I shouted as I hopped off the cheese and to solid ground -- back home again! So at this point there were a couple people staring at me, probably because the front of my pants were wet from some of the piss that missed the Chinese guy. So I said to these people "What the fuck are you looking at??? I want a whore!" Immediately they brought me this Mexican chick, who was heavily wrapped in winter clothes (later I realized this was because her skin was covered with warts) and they gave her to me as a gift because I was a national hero because of my space exploration. Well, I thought I was the luckiest guy in the world, but no one had told me that Mexican women are full of STDs. Man did I live to regret that decision! Crazy times! Crazy times! Now I am a mild mannered accountant, but I still have this Mexican bitch following me around. I think I am going to have to have someone kill her, because she keeps following me.

    6. Re:Let's not follow the US! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do the same? Usually canada is one step ahead of the US in gutting our civil rights. We follow the EU on that bit.

      The opposite has been the same with other things though. Mostly foods, or consumer goods.

    7. Re:Let's not follow the US! by Anonymous+DWord · · Score: 2

      What drugs are you on, and where can I get some?

      --
      "If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
    8. Re:Let's not follow the US! by farrellj · · Score: 2

      My privacy is why I use Hotmail. I am *not* going to put my primaray or evern my secondary email addresses on a place like Slashdot! If someone really has something interesting to talk to me about, I will see it on the hotmail account, then email them from one of my more secure email addresses!

      ttyl
      Farrell

      --
      CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
    9. Re:Let's not follow the US! by paladin_tom · · Score: 2

      members are expected to vote along party lines

      You forget that this rule is followed only so long as the backbenchers believe that it benefits the party.

      People hate elections. They want to elect a government, and be done with it for the next 3-5 years. If the backbenchers vote against the government, under normal circumstances, that just pisses Joe Voter off. Hence there is anger at the incumbent party for forcing people to the polls early, and the Opposition has a good chance at forming the next government. So voting against your party is usually a bad thing.

      Bug if, say, tomorrow, the Prime Minister introduced a new bill calling for genocide of a racial minority or something abhorrent like that, then the backbenchers would vote against the government, disown the PM, and get a new leader for the next election, since Joe Voter would rather go to the polls early than have such a horrible law passed.

      So voting with the party doesn't make the PM a dictator; (s)he does have a lot of power, but this power can only be used within the confines of what people find acceptable. So long as the government doesn't step too far out of line, our system gives us what the Constitution calls for: peace, order, and good government.

      Of course, I guess 2 out of 3 isn't bad. ;-)

      --
      #define sig "Every social system runs on the people's belief in it."
    10. Re:Let's not follow the US! by Reece400 · · Score: 1

      If they do follow the US, i may be one of the 1st emmigrants, i know for a fact that i couldn't live in the US cight now,, and if the C'dn govenment makes the same mistakes as they seem to contiually make... Reece,

    11. Re:Let's not follow the US! by quantaman · · Score: 2

      Well at least we're still north eh? ...

      --
      I stole this Sig
    12. Re:Let's not follow the US! by Boiled+Frog · · Score: 1

      The proposal -- if you've read it -- is only for bringing the Criminal Code up to date for the Internet for criminal suspects. This isn't to spy on Joe Average User. It's about gathering evidence on criminal suspects. You would still need to get authorization from a judge, solicitor general, etc. to execute a "search warrant" on your Internet communications.

  14. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    All I can say is, at least we don't have a retard like bush for our leader.
    I'm Canadian, and all I can say... you're joking, right? I mean, you honestly think Chretien is like, not a bumbling retard, perhaps even more so than Bush? Have you ever listened to the man?
  15. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you're saying that french canadians are into homosexual bondage? Yeah, i'd agree with that.

  16. how dare you slam canadian rights when.. by apoKalypse · · Score: 0

    your country's new changes to the US Patriot Act is limiting all the fun stuff you used to be able to do. Take a look at this website.

    1. Re:how dare you slam canadian rights when.. by Jim+Norton · · Score: 1

      Oh, don't worry, we're practically the 52nd state way up here. Those laws will apply to us, despite the fact that they were never passed in this country. Be nice to our American rulers and maybe they'll throw us a bone.

      --
      -- Jim
    2. Re:how dare you slam canadian rights when.. by ryants · · Score: 1
      Oh, don't worry, we're practically the 52nd state way up here.
      How I tire of this. I am Canadian, and if any other nation is fast becoming the "52nd state", it's the UK.

      If Bush were to come to a sudden stop, Blair's head would end up halfway up Bush's ass.

      --

      Ryan T. Sammartino
      "Ancora imparo"

    3. Re:how dare you slam canadian rights when.. by Jim+Norton · · Score: 1

      I think Bush, Blair and Chretien probably like each other in that "special" way.

      --
      -- Jim
    4. Re:how dare you slam canadian rights when.. by kien · · Score: 1

      Or maybe we could all pop our heads out of our ass and stop lapping up troll-shit. I love the movie Canadian Bacon because it pokes fun at US foreign policy while at the same time complimenting Canadian domestic policy. Canadians and Americans are here on one big piece of rock and, so far, we've managed to coexist by manifesting our hostilities in the sports arena. If you want to escalate that relationship out of some kind of jingoism, that's your call. Personally, I'd rather just play hockey. --K

      --
      Sig: Bad people happen. Try to avoid being one of them.
  17. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is owning a gun a basic human right?

    Yes.

    Lets take a quick guess at why there are so many shootings in USA. Quite frankly you can keep your rite to own guns, down here in NZ the cops don't normally carry guns. If someone is shot its headline news, not a daily occurance as it seems to be over there. You should be fighting to remove such a "right" as it will likely get you killed.

    Where you live the people are outnumbered by f***ing sheep. Cops don't need to carry guns. Things are different in the United States, and the way you view "rights" is restricted by your narrow-minded views.

    Banning guns seems to be restricting your rights. If the "bad" people want guns, they'll get them no doubt. Some people here actually want to hunt for sport.

    Just think of it this way before you speak: every single Australian thinks that y'all are having sex with the sheep. Go figure.

  18. La grande r�gion de Ste-Agathe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    La grande région de Ste-Agathe est composée de plusieurs municipalités: Ste-Agathe-des-Monts, Ste-Agathe-Nord, St-Adolphe d'Howard, Ivry-sur-le-Lac; on peut même considérer les municipalités de Lantier et de Ste-Lucie comme faisant partie de cette grande région.

    Le coeur de cette région se compose de 2 municipalités bien imbriquées l'une dans l'autre: Ste-Agathe-des-Monts et Ste-Agathe-Sud. Si bien bien imbriquées ensemble qu'elles ont fusionnées. Mais pour les gens de l'extérieur, ces divisions administratives ont peu d'importance: on vient passer ses vacances à Ste-Agathe!

    Cette région est bien garnie en infrastructures de tourisme et Ste-Agathe peut se vanter d'avoir accueilli des générations de villégiateurs et de touristes. Quels que soient vos besoins, Ste-Agathe peut se vanter de pouvoir les combler sur place. L'hôtellerie et la restauration y tiennent une place de choix.

    Le train ne passe plus à Ste-Agathe? Qu'importe! On rénove la gare et on transforme le chemin de fer en piste cyclable, un concept unique en Amérique du Nord. Fruit d'une concertation de la région touristique des Laurentides le parc linéaire "Le p'tit Train du Nord" traverse des dizaines de villages tout au long de ses 200 kilomètres. Vous pouvez l'utiliser le plus facilement du monde à partir de Ste-Agathe, au site de l'ancienne gare, par les différents moyens adaptés aux saisons: motoneige, ski de randonnée, cyclisme et randonnée pédestre. Ce parc est probablement l'une des plus belles réalisations touristiques des Laurentides.

    Dans cette grande région, les sports et les activités d'hiver n'ont rien à envier à celles de l'été. L'hiver en Nord, grande fête de l'hiver à Ste-Agathe, permet de bien apprécier les splendeurs de l'hiver. L'été apporte également son lot d'activités: plage, natation, motomarine, bateau, voile, cyclisme, randonnée pédestre, et encore plus...

    Quel que soit votre séjour dans la grande région de Ste-Agathe, nous pouvons vous assurer que vous en partirez enchanté. Et que vous y reviendrez!

  19. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's cause you don't have any buildings to begin with, the exception being that giant pointy cock in Toronto. "Let's build one story and place it on stilts, eh?"

  20. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hey u fuckin piece of shit, wanna come to my place so i can rip you a second asshole? lets see how much of a fag you can be. I bet you wank off to goatse.cx while like your daddy's penis every night. fuckin slut. come to quebec and we'll talk. It's people like you that end up killing themselves because they're so fuckin friendless and pathetic. so do us all a favor and go sit on the girator in your washing machine. gay piece of shit.

  21. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All I can say is, at least we don't have a retard like bush for our leader.
    Chretien, that ignorant moron, whom half the people in Canada blindly believe everything he says, claims those that think Canada should spend more on defense are pawns of the arms industry. He has continually stripped the pride, dignity, and capability of the Canadian Forces, and even have the nerve to push farther. I'm a proud Canadian, but I have to say that the Americans are totally correct when they say Canada's military is a joke. However, I'd like you all to know that not all people in Canada share this idiot passive attitude towards military and defense. It's just that there are far more people who do have this stupid attitude.

  22. We're pretty backwards, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup, we're pretty backwards up here in Canada. I have to watch my DSL modem so that doesn't melt my igloo, eh? Otherwise I won't be able to surf the internet while I hibernate until spring, eh? Go slashdot! eh?

    1. Re:We're pretty backwards, eh? by Glytch · · Score: 2

      You hoser, the igloo ice makes it real easy to keep the beer and back bacon cold, eh? Although I've heard that Prime Minister Jean Poutine just keeps his beer in a his icefishing shanty on Rideau Canal, since it's frozen over all year round, eh?

      Just another resident Maritimer. Go Baby Habs, eh!

  23. Re:Why bother? by digidave · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Your percieved "namby-pamby" attitude towards human rights accounts for a lack of Canadian culture? That doesn't make any sense. If fact, I want you to describe to me what American culture is because I don't know.

    Do you consider music a part of culture? If so then Britney Spears is our culture and that's pretty pathetic. I think you'll find that upon speaking with some Canadians and Americans from different regions there are many cultures within each country. Texas sure isn't the same as New York, is it?

    --
    The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
  24. Re:La grande r�gion de Ste-Agathe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    humm... ste-agathe... le bon air frais du quebec! tu diras bonjour a gerard et a roger de ma part :)

  25. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Having a gun is like having the source code. You surely want to have the source code, don't you?

  26. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wtf is the deal with french canadians? quebecois aren't fuckin french canadians, not anymore than americans are north american Englishmen. So fuck the fuck off slut. Shit, withouth quebec half of the fuckin United States wouldn't even have electricity.

  27. Re:Why bother? by Orthanc_duo · · Score: 1

    Banning guns seems to be restricting your rights...
    Guns are not banned they are licenced. I know plenty of people that hunt on a regular basis and have been myself.
    Owning a gun is not a right it is a privelege. In order to own a gun you must have a licence, it is not a difficult process to go through but it stops some of the "bad people" from getting guns. It also makes it far easier to trace those that are used.

    Orthanc
    Sorry for feeding the Trolls but they threatened my billy-goat (sheep).

  28. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh yah, and the US is not even in the top 5.

    You homos from .ca love to fiddle with the numbers to your advantage, huh?


    Rank Country
    1 Norway
    2 Sweden
    3 Canada
    4 Belgium
    5 Australia
    6 United States
    7 Iceland
    8 Netherlands
    9 Japan
    10 Finland

  29. Re:guess what? by digidave · · Score: 2

    We can't fool you! Just in case, we've decided to reinforce our igloos and ration the sled dogs' food. Can't be too careful. Rumour is that the terrorists have a heat bomb.

    --
    The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
  30. Re:Why bother? by lostPackets · · Score: 1
    This is just stupid. Either Switzerlan or Sweaden (forget which) requires military service two weeks a year for all males 18 to 40 or so. In order to enable rapid response time, those not on a duty rotation are required to have their military gear, including assault rifle, in their house. Following your logic that weapon accessabliity = gun murders this country should have a huge problem. Guess what - it doesn't

    Just a thought.

  31. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Americans don't get to see much of Canadian culture. Newfie culture is unique. And the Maritimes have their own culture. And there are at least a half dozen variations of Quebec culture from the Bluettes to the the Gaspesie. And the western provinces have their own culture as well. It is Ontario which is the major importer of American culture.

  32. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You have to do this in the US as well, which makes your original point moot. What, you think just anyone can go down to Dick's Sporting Goods and buy a gun? Um, no.

  33. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It sort of explains why there is no Canadian culture. They import all their culture from America. It is funny to watch Canadians trying to sing the delta blues, eh?



    The most hilarious part is that the Canadian government mandates that Canadian radio stations play at least 20% Canadian music. If it wasn't required by law, they wouldn't cause American music > canadian music.

  34. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i am the english nazi bot, and i have spotted an error in your post. Incorrect use of 'moot': look it up. It does not mean what you think it means.

  35. Response from Canadian ISPs by Penguinista! · · Score: 3, Informative


    Can I claim "First worthwhile post"?

    I'm going to ignore comments thus far as generally just not representative of Slashdotters, most of whom can find Canada on a map.

    This story is a duplicate post on Slashdot, but parts of the story haven't really been covered yet: additional links are to be found in this story, which you can follow to find out more info on the issue, including some sample response from Canadian ISPs, one of which I represent. We're also CAIP members and I can tell you that the only comments I've seen on the members' mailing list so far are all negative, so you can probably expect resistance on our part, as the stories linked indicate. Any Canadian Slashdotters (believe it or not, not everyone here is American - I wonder if there are any geographical /. stats?) should make their views known now during the process leading up to the draft of the law that will result following the consultation process. Unfortunately the document as far as I've read it does not describe a process for doing so as an individual, but it does Identify the three government agencies involved, and industrious persons can probably take it from there.

    Contrary to one informationally-ignorant prior post, as Canadians we do have Rights and Freedoms, and as in every other country (yes, including the USA) sometimes we need to speak up to exercise them and make sure that they aren't clawed back from us.

    -brt

    --
    Penguinista!

    You will be un-assimilated. Resistance is just plain stupid.

    1. Re:Response from Canadian ISPs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm Canadian, and I'm applying for American citizenship, as I can't stand it any longer. I'm sick and tired of having French on my candy wrappers and my cereal boxen. Damn those French!

    2. Re:Response from Canadian ISPs by m0nkyman · · Score: 2

      From our Charter:

      33. (1) Parliament or the legislature of a province may expressly declare in an Act of Parliament or of the legislature, as the case may be, that the Act or a provision thereof shall operate notwithstanding a provision included in section 2 or sections 7 to 15 of this Charter.
      Operation of exception (2) An Act or a provision of an Act in respect of which a declaration made under this section is in effect shall have such operation as it would have but for the provision of this Charter referred to in the declaration.
      Five year limitation (3) A declaration made under subsection (1) shall cease to have effect five years after it comes into force or on such earlier date as may be specified in the declaration.
      Re-enactment (4) Parliament or the legislature of a province may re-enact a declaration made under subsection (1).
      Five year limitation (5) Subsection (3) applies in respect of a re-enactment made under subsection (4).

      The end result... we don't have inalienable rights. Trudeau fucked us on that one.

      --
      ~ a low user id is no indication I have a clue what I'm talking about.
    3. Re:Response from Canadian ISPs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make sure you save a (properly formatted) copy of that message somewhere. There's a lot of call for people willing to relieve the ignorance of our countrymen, and I'm starting to get sick of doing it myself.

    4. Re:Response from Canadian ISPs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



      Who can't find Canada on a map? It's just north of the most important nation in the world ... duh.

    5. Re:Response from Canadian ISPs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      You're wasting your time, then, unless you are so sick of French you don't mind trading it for Spanish ...

      "Send us your ... teeming masses ... yearning to be free ..." I know it's a bit late, but, um, could we maybe amend that to, "... yearning to be free ... unless they're Mexican or Cuban, in which case you should promptly either 1) Learn a proper language and a job skill (picking tomatoes and/or selling drugs do NOT count) and then come back or 2) Go To Hell."?

      I mean, damn ... it's sad when we let them into the country and then have to provide them with welfare applications in Spanish ... at the very least, you'd think they could at least be spayed/neutered/de-loused/pumped full of antibiotics before we let them in ...

    6. Re:Response from Canadian ISPs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Hey you have to hand it to the Mexicans though, they happily take the jobs that even a cash-strapped 17 year old kid wouldn't do for spare cash. E.g., picking tomatoes, mowing lawns, custodians, taking out trash, mcdonalds cook, busboy, etc. Plus they don't complain. Props to the mexicanos, mang.

    7. Re:Response from Canadian ISPs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no our fault if english people are too lazy to run that country... We french peoples get to be PM all the time for a reason. ;)

    8. Re:Response from Canadian ISPs by EvilAlien · · Score: 3, Informative
      My apologies for the dupe, I didn't see a previous post on the Lawful Access Consultation. I am also taking part in the process, representing another Canadian ISP which is a CCTA member.

      The paper doesn't provide much detail on making your views known as a private citizen. It is geared towards industry associations such as CAIP and the CCTA, civil liberties groups, etc. Notice the emphasis on "group". God forbid the average citizen should be listened to...

      At any rate, the news release on this matter includes the email address the DoJ wants submissions sent to:

      Those wishing to respond may send their submissions to la-al@justice.gc.ca before November 15, 2002.
      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
  36. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rumour

    It's spelled "rumor" you frog.

    Ribit!

  37. Re:Why bother? by Orthanc_duo · · Score: 1

    Not the only factor granted. But remove weapon accessability and gun murders are likely to decrease.

    Orthanc

  38. Re:Why bother? by Cyno01 · · Score: 1

    no, but anyone can go to a gun show and buy an assault rifle, which are banned in most (all?) states, and this is all legal, why can they do this, because the gun technically doesn't work, this guy at a gun show will have a booth full of assault rifles that are legal for anyone to buy because all the guns have some little spring taken out, and you know what the guy in the next booth is selling? little springs!!, i'm an american, and i dont think its a basic right to own guns, many people cant be trusted with guns, especially americans, most people just aren't smart/responsible/whatever enough to have something thats intended purpose is to very easily end a life... that was a rant, go aheahd and mod me down

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  39. Re:Canada-specific legislation, what a wastehttp:/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OH MY GOD! You, sir, are a racist!

  40. Re:Why bother? by Cyno01 · · Score: 2, Funny

    its probably sweden, swiss army reserves are only requred to cary their knives around

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  41. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And you make American basher bashers look bad!

  42. Microsoft Assport by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it true that the Canadian government has switched to Microsoft Assport for their authentication services?

  43. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Newfie culture is unique.

    Tell me aboot it.

    Did you hear about the Newfie terrorist who tried to blow up a school bus?
    He burnt his lips on the exhaust pipe.

    How many Newfies does it take to go ice fishing?
    Four. One to cut a hole in the ice and three to push the boat through.

    Did you hear about the Newfie who went ice fishing?
    He caught fifty pounds of ice and his wife drowned trying to cook.

  44. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You still suck either way. Take it hard or take it like a cranky little pussy for all I care.

  45. Re:HELP ! by Lil'Bastard · · Score: 1

    WOW...now that is a bad bad day...

    --
    *When you gotta go...*
  46. YHBT HAND by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FYI

  47. Re:HELP ! by Bi()hazard · · Score: 2

    Sir, you should submit your case to the Darwin Awards. As the nature of the injury precludes the replication of your genes, you are very likely to win a Darwin award. See, your situation isn't all bad!

  48. Re:Off-topic question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  49. Sad.... by mc909 · · Score: 1

    sad, pathetic and ignorant...the lot of you. And to think that I thought that /. represented a more educated to outlook, guess I'll have to change my start page to something more intelligent.....maybe http://pbskids.org/teletubbies/

    1. Re:Sad.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember, the gay teletubbie is really a Canadian guy!

  50. Re:guess what? by noda132 · · Score: 1

    I'm a proud Canadian, but I have to say that the Americans are totally correct when they say Canada's military is a joke.

    When's the last time someone's attacked Canadians? I most certainly would rather put tax dollars towards a better economy or food for the poor than funding an army which never kills (we have plenty of soldiers who help other countries through hard times, and our budget still covers them).

    I beg to ask, what's stupid about this attitude? Canada has never needed more soldiers and never will. I am proud to live in a country which doesn't resort to war for every international problem (and doesn't pull stupid publicity stunts like "war on Bin Laden"), and I give our few forces the honour they deserve for giving help in other countries with no thought of reward.

  51. Re:guess what? by noda132 · · Score: 1

    It's spelled "rumor" you frog.

    Only Americans spell it 'rumor.' English spelling is 'rumour.'

  52. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Die, frenchie, die.

  53. STFU, YOU COCKSUCKING FROSTBACK!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  54. LOL, DID YOU TYPE THAT FROM YOUR WINDOZE BOX? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  55. Re:Why bother? by C0LDFusion · · Score: 1

    Yes, yes...I love your logic. Make a law to keep lawbreakers from breaking existing laws.

    It's already illegal to shoot someone, but in order to keep people from breaking that law, you create a new law.

    Exactly what the world needs, more laws.

    All gun laws effect law-abiding citizens that don't generally pull guns and kill people.

    The problem isn't the weaponry. If someone wants to kill and a gun isn't available, I'm sure there are other ways to kill someone.
    The problem is the person behind the gun. Creating a culture where killing someone is considered a justifiable act, for example, is one cause.
    A more effective mental health institution wouldn't hurt, either.

    --
    Only in slashdot are posts of solidarity modded at -1 Redundant, while posts of antagonism are modded as -1 Flamebait.
  56. Re:Why bother? by dadragon · · Score: 1

    It's actually $ behind american music > $ behind Canadian music.

    --
    God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
  57. Seems very similar to what EU is cooking by jukal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Here is a leaked draft of a similar framework (proposal) on data retention in Europe, and here is Statewatch analysis of it - I believe the analysis is good reference for Canada/US as well. It seems these things are happening all over the world at same time, so maybe the kick-off to start working on these was made in some multi-national meeting (interpol, maybe). Anyway, it is rather alarming.

    1. Re:Seems very similar to what EU is cooking by EvilAlien · · Score: 2

      Actually, if you read the Lawful Access Consultation paper, you will notice that much of the drive for this is to be able to not only ratify, but comply with the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime. Canada is a signitary already, but our existing laws do not allow us to actually comply. The DoJ's Lawful Access legislation for service providers will change that.

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
  58. what about my ass? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it needs attention!!!

  59. testing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    while(true){ document.write("Quack Quack Quack!\n"); }

  60. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, the English spelling is "rumor" ... not that crap you people and those silly Brits and Aussies speak.

    I mean, seriously. "Aluminium"? WTF kinda word is "aluminium"? It's ALUMINUM. And "colour"? "Endeavour"? You people apparently have some sort of sick "u" fetish. Anyway, it doesn't matter. Everyone knows American English (by virtue of being American) supersedes all the lesser dialects.

    And "Z" is pronounced "zee" ... why those fools call it "zed" is beyond me. Ah, well. It's either quaint and provincial or just ignorant and barbaric; I haven't quite decided yet.

  61. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    STFU poodle-wacker

  62. Re:La grande r�gion de Ste-Agathe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    piece of shit gangrel ridden turkey stuffer. your grandmother is my fuckin bitch. quebec is the place to be. dickwad.

  63. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    If Cananda is such a great place, why do almost everyone in the country live as close to the 39th parallel as possible? I mean, sure, you can't actually BE Americans, right? So I guess you figure you can live as close as possible, look wistfully toward the border, and ... dream ...

    But, hey. Canada has its uses. Syrup, for instance. If there's ever a syrup shortage you guys will rule the world.

    And what's your leader's name again? (My apologies to Mr. Chretien, I was merely being facetious to make a point and he can't help being wholly irrelevant.)

    Oh well, doesn't really matter. You guys don't actually NEED a leader, just like you don't need a military. Why bother when the US is right there to take care of you, eh? Bash us all you want, but if planes DID start flying into your buildings (though why anyone would waste a perfectly good plane on some poorly-thatched log cabins is beyond me) you can bet your "military" would run screaming to the US and Great Britain faster than you can say, "I pledge allegiance to the flag, of the United States of America ..."

    Canada is irrelevant, and if America didn't suffer you people to exist as a sovereign nation, you wouldn't. You're welcome.

  64. Re:La grande r�gion de Ste-Agathe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Québec is widely known as the capital of Canadian faggotry. I suspect you're a homosexual who is seeking recruits. Oh, and if I want to go to a French place, I'll go to fucking France, not some lame imitation.

  65. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    Oh please, you idiot. Do you REALLY think the reason Canada has never been attacked is because it's so wonderful and peaceful and great? Come on, thaw your brain out and think for a change.

    The reason no one would dare attack Canada (even though it's basically defenseless -- I mean, you people have what for defense? Guys in bright red "Shoot Me Now, Please, Sir" jackets riding around on horses, for god's sake -- and you can't even own guns to defend yourSELVES ...) ANYway ... the only reason Canada is immune to attack and doesn't HAVE to go to war is simply because it happens to share a 3000 mile border with and the protection of the most powerful military power in the world.

    The fact that you insult us while riding happily on our coattails and then having the unmitigated gall to claim it as some kind of moral victory for your nation ... it disgusts me. Canada is a military welfare case.

  66. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a proud Canadian, but I have to say that the Americans are totally correct when they say Canada's military is a joke.

    When's the last time someone's attacked Canadians?


    I believe it was called the war of 1812, we had a pretty tiny army then as well. Yet we still managed to repel the numerically superior invaders, then launch a counterattack that gave the White House its name. ;)

  67. Re:Off-topic question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    Yes, they take baths, but their primitive religions, based on ancient Grand High Gibberish, require them to roll around in the decaying remains of a sacrificial chicken afterwards. This is the only way they believe their soul will not be "washed away".

  68. Re:I want some Canadian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I knew this Canadian guy, said he didn't drink Canadian beer cause it was too "weak" -- plus in Canada they have totally nude bars, not this topless shit we have in the US.

  69. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ummm...ya, it means "obsolete" according to Merriam Webster. I believe that comment has used the term correctly.

    Let me guess, you're one of those people who doesn't believe that split infitives have their place? And you actually correct people when they use them. Classy.

  70. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I believe most of the deaths in the US by guns are accidental. Kids fooling around or what have you.

    I personally don't believe guns have a place in society, except for killing wild game. If nobody has a gun, there's no reason to bear arms yourself. Why protect yourself from no threat. The US Bill of Rights may need some updating. I can see a place for "The Right to Bear Arms" in the day that it was written, but now...no. If anyone has a good argument for owning their own gun, other than "protection", I'd like to hear it.

  71. Re:Canada-specific legislation, what a wastehttp:/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ummmmm why? I think the argument is a numbers one. 30 million vs. 350 million. Or 350 million vs. over a billion.

    How is that racist? Do people like to claim racism over anything? Ridiculous. Polotypy doesn't exist except for in the minds of those that feel oppressed. Whether rightly or not.

  72. SuCk My DiCk AnD fUcKiNg LiKe It !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  73. Be Serious Now by SerialEx13 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    After reading this, it's no wonder a lot of the world hates the States. It's those of you who have no respect for other cultures/nations/etc. that are causing it. Not saying that the states is the only country that does this though. I've known Canadians too who have done this (although the states is a lot bigger, therefore being heard more); it sicken's me how ignorent people are. I do not believe /. was created with the intent of having flame wars like "my country's better than yours". I'd be surprised if this reply does not get any "childish" responses.

    1. Re:Be Serious Now by Nex · · Score: 0

      Just don't forget that you never actually know where an anonymous coward comes from. Nex

  74. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last time the U.S. attracked Canada and we won...

  75. Re:Why bother? (Why modded down?) by GigsVT · · Score: 1

    Klerck wasn't modded down, he posts at -1 by default. I guess you havn't been around here very long. Klerck is the most famous crapflooder. I'm glad to see he is posting his opinions rather than crapflooding now, he is actally pretty smart it seems.

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  76. Re:I want some Canadian by GigsVT · · Score: 1

    plus in Canada they have totally nude bars, not this topless shit we have in the US.

    Wow, isn't that dangerous? How do the waitresses serve hot food?

    I know what everyone will say,"very carefully". :)

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  77. Re:Why bother? by Orthanc_duo · · Score: 1

    All gun laws effect law-abiding citizens that don't generally pull guns and kill people
    How so? For example. If automatic weapons were banned/restricted would that affect hunters. If you are hunting with automatic weapons you need a serious change of attitude.

    It's already illegal to shoot someone, but in order to keep people from breaking that law, you create a new law
    Last time I checked it was illegal to blow up building (I believe this is know as "terrorism"), I'm pretty sure you need a licence to legally obtain nitro or plastic explosives.
    It's illegal to steal. It's also illegal to sell stolen property. A law to stop people breaking the law by stealing.

    If someone wants to kill and a gun isn't available..
    True, but I'd rather someone come at me with a knife rather than an assult rifle.

    Orthanc

  78. Democratic Rule by rakerman · · Score: 2
    The rule is: if you didn't participate in the process, you don't get to complain.

    The deadline for feedback is November 15, 2002.

    1. Re:Democratic Rule by WildBeast · · Score: 2

      Shouldn't the rule be : If you don't participate in the process then it shouldn't apply to you?

  79. Re:Why bother? by tzanger · · Score: 2

    In order to own a gun you must have a licence, it is not a difficult process to go through but it stops some of the "bad people" from getting guns.

    That is such utter bullshit. If you want a gun you can get one illegally very easily in Canada. I'm all for proper training and annual evaluation to keep your FAC but don't for one second believe that it keeps it out of the hands of the baddies. If you want a gun bad enough you'll go around any roadblocks.

  80. Re:guess what? by tzanger · · Score: 2

    'm a proud Canadian, but I have to say that the Americans are totally correct when they say Canada's military is a joke.

    We're horribly underfunded but that doesn't seem to stop us from achieving international recognition as some of the best trained and highest respected soldiers on the planet.

    I'd love to have our military better funded. But a joke? Give your fucking head a shake. A proud Canadian would understand where the problem comes from and not assign blame/ridicule to the military itself.

  81. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sorry to say, but on a similar note; your poor subset of our language has simply been dumbed down for the stupid majority of American people.

  82. Re:I want some Canadian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    WAITRESS: Baby, my nipples are so hot for you!

    CUSTOMER: They should be, they're in my coffee!

    ~~~

  83. Re:I want some Canadian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    plus in Canada they have totally nude bars, not this topless shit we have in the US.

    Yet we have draconian laws where pornographic magazines have those black bars on them - I have this love/hate relationship with my country (and not just because of the porn)

    Heh - only in Canada could a liberal leader choke someone and make jokes about protesters being sprayed with pepper spray.

  84. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    flamebait, but very true.

  85. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    >When's the last time someone's attacked Canadians?

    I believe it was called the war of 1812, we had a pretty tiny army then as well. Yet we still managed to repel the numerically superior invaders, then launch a counterattack that gave the White House its name. ;)

    Actually, it would have been during World War 2, when German U-boats were attacking Canadian ships inside Canadian waters, some of them even as close as the mouth of the St. Lawrence river.

    Also, Canada used to have quite respectable military, at the end of WW II we had something like the 4th largest airforce, and among the largest Navy and Army. Of course a military this size was entirely un-maintainable for a country with such asmall population (much smaller than it is now even). But still, the regular standing army has drastically declined since the 1960's when it peaked at 100 000 solders to the 50 000 - 60 000 soldiers that it is today.

  86. Re:I want some Canadian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who still buys pornographic magazines? All my pr0n comes from the web.

  87. You know what the problem is? by WildBeast · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm willing to bet that at least 60% of Canadians are happy with such legislation. Very few people care about there privacy.

    Hell the government can look at our bank account whenever the hell he wants to. I sent letters to the mayor, letters to some political parties and no response whatsoever. What's amazing is that everyone I talked to didn't seem to care about the fact that the government can look into there bank account without permission.

    1. Re:You know what the problem is? by Dexx · · Score: 1

      "I'm willing to bet that at least 60% of Canadians are happy with such legislation. Very few people care about there privacy."

      That's not what I've come across. I work for a Canadian ISP and we are required to jump through some pretty big hoops in authenticating users before we change passwords, etc. Some people (about 1 in 15 or so*) complain about the process that we have to go through, usually after we've failed to properly authenticate them. Another small group (about 3 in 15*) complain about it, then agree with it when it's pointed out that anybody with their username could call up and pretend to be them, so this prevents anybody else from changing their password and getting their email. The rest either don't care or are happy with the procedure.

      * all stats are guessed at based on experience, not somesort of scientific method.

      --
      Feel the fear and do it anyway.
    2. Re:You know what the problem is? by EvilAlien · · Score: 3, Informative

      Who you need to talk to is the Privacy Commission, not puny little MLAs. Our Privacy Commissioner is very much an advocate for the people. I've had a change to attend a course on privacy which he spoke at. That would be the appropriate venue for your concerns.

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
    3. Re:You know what the problem is? by WildBeast · · Score: 2

      thanks for your help, I'll check it out.

  88. Re:La grande r�gion de Ste-Agathe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you pimple dicked pickle-ass-ingestor, quebec is not and does not claim french heritage. quebec is claiming fuckin independence from those english-queen-loving faggots in the rest of canada. They like fucking moose while venerating queen victoria, wearing nothing but fuckin canadian flag underwear. We have nothing to do with those bitch ass queers. Vive le québec libre câlisse.

  89. Re:HELP ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Offtopic. This should be in 'Ask Slashdot.'

    Wait your turn like everyone else.

  90. you just made a canadian reader unhappy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    * 2002-08-31 07:31:00 Canadian government proposes internet wire-tap law (yro,privacy) (rejected)

    That was well over a week ago, what the fuck is up with that?

  91. Re:guess what? by Jim+Norton · · Score: 1
    A bitter American... ho ho ho. What, does Canadas presence anger you? Do we make you upset? Poor baby.

    Riding on your coattails, huh? Tell me, where do you get a lot of your water from? Where do you get a lot of your lumber from? Where do you get many of the natural resources that just don't exist in large quantities in your country(at dirt cheap prices) from? Did you know that you guys can buy Canadian lumber at cheaper prices than Canadians can?

    You guys have been living the high life on the backs of honest Canadians for YEARS. It's hilarious how we supposedly have free trade with you guys, yet it doesn't really work bidirectionally, does it? If we buy something from you, we pay taxes. If you buy something from us ... no duties at all. That's really neat. It gets even better when you guys pass some half-baked legislation like the DMCA and we're expected to follow it by proxy.

    Have a nice day. Hope a jumbo jet crashes into your house.

    --
    -- Jim
  92. Re:guess what? by Jim+Norton · · Score: 1
    Hey, idiot, the reason we live closer to the border is that ... the further north you go you get a little something called arctic tundra which is practically uninhabitable.

    Actually we don't have a leader or a military. Oh sure, we have a leader that's practically in your pocket every time they are elected (whoever it may be at the time... Chretien, Mulroney, they're all the same to me)

    And the sole reason that planes aren't crashing into buildings in our country is because they have no reason to. Whereas the US is possibly the most hated nation on the planet (and for good reason, especially with dickheads like you residing in it)

    Yeah, Canada has its uses alright. See this post. Yeah, you American scumbags are sure a compassionate nation by letting us live. Remember, might makes right.

    --
    -- Jim
  93. Not "Blame Canada"... now it's "Hate Canada". by RobinH · · Score: 0, Troll

    I can't believe the posts so far in this story. You'd think that there would at least be SOME amount of rational posts on /.

    I think that we Canadians have offered our friendship to the U.S. long enough. The Americans are obviously not intelligent or mature enough to even bother acknowledging anymore. You wonder why people hate you? It's not a mystery to Canadians.

    Screw the United States. The next time Osama knocks down one of your buildings, don't come whining to us for blood donations, places to land international flights, or donations for the victims. I, for one, couldn't give a shit. I'm sick of giving without even getting a thankyou.

    --
    "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    1. Re:Not "Blame Canada"... now it's "Hate Canada". by RobinH · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I can't believe the posts so far in this story. You'd think that there would at least be SOME amount of rational posts on /.

      I think that we Canadians have offered our friendship to the U.S. long enough. The Americans are obviously not intelligent or mature enough to even bother acknowledging anymore. You wonder why people hate you? It's not a mystery to Canadians.

      Screw the United States. The next time Osama knocks down one of your buildings, don't come whining to us for blood donations, places to land international flights, or donations for the victims. I, for one, couldn't give a shit. I'm sick of giving without even getting a thankyou.

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    2. Re:Not "Blame Canada"... now it's "Hate Canada". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does that work? His first post is -1, and his reply, which is a carbon copy of the first, gets +3?

    3. Re:Not "Blame Canada"... now it's "Hate Canada". by RobinH · · Score: 2

      How does that work? His first post is -1, and his reply, which is a carbon copy of the first, gets +3?

      Obviously, some of the moderators are American, and some are from the rest of the world. Duelling moderation... a new(?) /. phenomenon.

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
  94. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, then you should be required to undergo two weeks of military training per year - including weapon use/safety - before any of you wannabe cowboy USians are allowed to own a gun. Deal?

  95. Re:I want some Canadian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, back in highschool, a friend of mine took a few days trip to montreal (where drinking age = 18) from Ontario (where drinking age = 19), and at the particualr nudie bar where they decided to spend one particular night the strippers all did 'tricks' for extra tips - not sex stuff, but things like blowing out candles (you know how I mean), strange body contortions, etc.

    One girl's trick was picking up loonies (dollar coins) off the stage using only her...ehm..parts.

    Thinking quickly, my friend whipped out his lighter and HEATED UP A LOONIE!

    The results? There was a scream, an ass-kicking by the bouncers, and a VERY forcible ejection from that club.

    heh heh heh... at least that's the way he tells it.

  96. Re:guess what? by Scrameustache · · Score: 2

    ou people have what for defense? Guys in bright red "Shoot Me Now, Please, Sir" jackets riding around on horses, for god's sake

    Bah, all you guys have are so called marines dressed all in white who are only good at twirling their guns around like cheerleaders...not only is that pathetic but its kinda girly.

    and you can't even own guns to defend yourSELVES

    Yeah, nobody can get a gun permit in canada, its just impossible! All those hunters forced to hunt bare handed...that's so sad.

    the only reason Canada is immune to attack and doesn't HAVE to go to war is simply because it happens to share [...] protection of the most powerful military power in the world.

    Yes, the US military clearly made the US "immune to attack" like you said. No one EVER flew a plane in a US building, they're all too scared of the gun throwing cheerleaders!

    Pathetic ignorant...

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  97. Re:Why bother? by C0LDFusion · · Score: 1

    How so? For example. If automatic weapons were banned/restricted would that affect hunters. If you are hunting with automatic weapons you need a serious change of attitude.

    I'm okay with banning Automatics, but when you say that a 5'2" woman has to fill out a 6" pile of paperwork to get a concealed weapon permit (which is very often declined, unless you've worked for the police department) to carry a small 9mm Glock to protect herself from rapists...it's a bit extreme.

    Last time I checked it was illegal to blow up building (I believe this is know as "terrorism"), I'm pretty sure you need a licence to legally obtain nitro or plastic explosives.
    It's illegal to steal. It's also illegal to sell stolen property. A law to stop people breaking the law by stealing.


    Yes, you can't obtain those, but if you go to your local Home Depot, you have the makings of another OK City bombing. I mean, Tim McVeigh didn't exactly buy the junk mail-order from "blowshitup.com", he got stuff from a local hardware store. Are you going to ban fertilizer now?
    Illegal to steal for obvious reasons. Illegal to sell stolen property, because, technically, you have to own something to sell it. If you attempt to misrepresent your proper ownership of an item, it's called fraud.

    True, but I'd rather someone come at me with a knife rather than an assult rifle.

    You'd rather lie in the street bleeding to death slowly than to get it over with quickly...hmmm....smart.

    --
    Only in slashdot are posts of solidarity modded at -1 Redundant, while posts of antagonism are modded as -1 Flamebait.
  98. Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First off, this review is nothing new. It's been done since 1982 - the government polls people and civil rights groups on the amount of privacy they think is proper. It is usually done on a bi-yearly basis.

    Secondly, Canada, while having certain problems that need to be looked at, is generally pretty good about things like this. We have a Constitution, we have our Bill of Rights. And those Rights are not generally infringed upon.

    Thirdly, I am sickened by the number of people who don't care. Moreover, I am sickened by the number of people who do care, but don't take the time to learn about our governmental processes.

    Fourthly, and I must put emphasize on this: AMERICANS, WE DO NOT HAVE THE SAME POLITICAL BELIEFS AS YOU, NOR HAVE WE EVER. We like our gun-control laws, and we like our health-system. To us, the government should do whats best for everybody, not just the majority. I will admit, Canada has some very serious problems to deal with - so how about the Americans here just let us deal with them, instead of becoming condescending assholes about it? I have just stereotyped Americans as assholes, just as Canadians have been stereotyped as 'liberal commies'. We don't WANT your system of government. Stop forcing your political beliefs on other people.

    Fifthly [if there is such a thing], Canadians and Americans, while being the same in so many ways [entertainment, clothing, etc. etc.], are fundamentally different people when it comes down to it. We have common ground, but we don't have THAT much common ground.

    I suggest all of the Americans who have commented negatively about Canada [with no specific reasons] start showing us a little bit of respect. There really isn't anything you can point out to in the first place - our country is only 100 years old, for Gods sake. Yours is 300. We can figure our path out by ourselves, just as you did. So stop assuming moral and political superiority based on the fact of your economy or otherwise. kthx.

    To the American's who have taken the time to learn our governmental processes, as while as consider this thing impartially and reasonably, I thank you. Even if you disagree with how we Canadians work, you've at least taken the time to consider it. I respect that.

  99. Re:guess what? by RobinH · · Score: 2

    If Cananda is such a great place, why do almost everyone in the country live as close to the 39th parallel as possible?

    If you weren't a dumb American, you'd realize it's *warmer* towards the south of Canada. (You would also realize it's the 49th parallel, but nobody ever accused Americans of knowing where their border was.)

    Since you're so interested, however, consider the fact that even though 80% of Canadians live withing 2 hours of the United States, very few actually live in border towns. Canadians live farther south for the climate, but not so far south that we have to smell the rancid stench of the United States.

    BTW, Cuba is a great vacation spot - cheap as hell, great cigars, and no Americans. So sad you can't join us.

    --
    "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
  100. Re:guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >We're horribly underfunded but that doesn't seem

    Underfunded doesn't begin to describe it.

    If Canada is ever attacked, it will be months before they can get the money together
    to start to repel the attackers.
    [ I can't find the figures off hand, but the
    Canadian forces in Afghanistan are being paid for
    with US Tax Dollars because Canada can't afford to send them anywhere. ]

    >best trained and highest respected soldiers

    Best trained?

    a] The Defence Minister McCallum admitted in parliment that he had never heard of the Dieppe Raid, and knew next to nothing about Canada's Military History. [I suppose he was being truthful when he said that the future Canadian forces will fight as well equiped as the Canadian forces at Dieppe.]

    http://www.canada.com/search/site/story.asp?id=F 5B 41DC7-39BB-4043-971B-0E050F60E345

    b] The Canadian Coast Guard can't even figure out how to search for survivors when the Cap Rouge II capsized.

  101. Re:Why bother? by Orthanc_duo · · Score: 1

    You'd rather lie in the street bleeding to death slowly than to get it over with quickly...
    Go ask an A&E doctor how many people with gunshot wounds die instantly.

  102. Re:Why bother? by Orthanc_duo · · Score: 1

    If you want a gun bad enough
    I didn't say all. I said some.
    anyway If you read my origonal post you would see the example I'm using is not Canada.

  103. Canada in a nutshell... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
    ... for the benefit of stupid yankees who are ignorant of what's outside of their borders.

    Canada (as we know it now) was founded in 1867. It was a business decision made by britshit business interests, as they realized they were not competent enough to compete against yankee businessmen.

    (The typical britshit way of doing business is to force people to buy their products; cas in point, horsepiss brewer molson, came to canada only to find french peasants drinking their own applejack cider (grapes would not grow satisfactorly, and in any case, the french mostly came from Normandy where everyone makes applejack cider anyways). So, rather than corner the cider market, molson displayed his true britshit incompetence by whining that people wouln't buy his piss to the governor who promply outlawed applejack cider making, thus forcing the peasants to buy his horsepiss, the only thing he knew how to make).

    Over the years, canada slightly evolved, but nevertheless remains mired as a britshit colony. But the main canadian problems remain the same thoughout the ages:

    • Keep the americans out.
    • Keep the french in.
    All while hoping that, somehow, the indians would simply vanish.

    The french were the first to introduce european civilization to north-america. Well before the Mayflower, a small colony was thriving along the banks of the St-Lawrence, in good harmony with the indians who gave the french the technology to survive the long winters. As the french are not as constipated towards private property as the britshit are, they certainly did not mind sharing the country with the indians, which being a totally different civilization, had very few competing interests.

    As there was plenty of interaction between the french and the indians, it is not surprising that it was french explorers who "discoved" (ha ha ha. Like if the indians didn't discover it first) most of the inside of the continent, as only them had the technology and knowledge to survive off the land, quite unlike most britshit (Baniel Boon was quite atypical in that respect) who never mingle with natives.

    When the britshit colonized Egypt, for example, they built themselves clubs surrounded by high walls so the would not see the natives. When France was in Egypt, they built schools to educate the natives for free.

    The french were also the only colonizers who did not exterminate the indians when they found out they could not enslave them. As they were not competing with the french for ressources (different civilizations), they were best left to themselves. Better yet, when the britshit expansion in New England pushed the Iroquois out, the french gladly accepted them in New-France and gave them territory, even though they used to be ennemies.

    This changed with the coming of the britshit, who promptly rounded the indians into reserves, and going about with their ultra-constitpated notions of private property, much to the dismay of the indians chiefs.

    The britshit also introduced biological warfare when lord amherst gave smallpox-infected blankets to indians. Truly the works of an unenligthened civilization whose only goal is rape, pillage and plunder!

    At first, when a handful of britshit found themselves at the head of a colony peopled with 60,000 french peasants, they quickly realized that their usual governing tricks (especially when it came to repression of the scatholics - as the totality of the french were [officially] scatholics). So, in order not to be kicked back at sea by the french and their indians allies, they compromised and allowed scatholicism to keep running rampant.

    This, of course, was the typical britshit incompetence at work, as this tolerance towards scatholics precipitated the american revolution... So, to keep a small worthless colony, the britshit risked and lost the prize jewel...

    Over time, the britshit merchants discovered one fantastic thing about scatholicism: for a devout scatholic, making a profit (be it through commerce, hard work or mere stock manipulation) is a one-way ticket to hell. So, they reasoned, if the french population was kept scatholic (and therefore ignorant), they would not face any competition while they set shop...

    So, those merchant princes, the Frobishers, McTavish, Redpath, Allan, etc. (the incompetent family compact) accumulated extraordinary wealth, by plundering natural ressources with the cheap labour provided by the ignorant (because scatholic) french.

    In order to perpetuate that status, when the britshit north america act (the constitution of canada) was elaborated in 1867 by the incompetent family compact, they made sure to enshrine in the constitution that education would be solely controlled by the scatholic church, for the french (and by the protestants for the britshit, of course). This is the reason of the economic backwardness of the french in canada, backwardness that is only starting to subside, as the french threw out the scatholic church en masse starting some 8-10 years after television was introduced in 1952.

    Canada went through the usual colonial troubles. In 1836-37, a rebellion tore apart the country, as mostly french people rebelled against the britshit (but the rebellion included a non negligeable amount of englishmen). The britshit army fought back with unparalleled savagery (until perhaps the nazis) and thousands of farms were burned to the ground. Resentment for this still survives to this day; and in fact, when the parliamant voted some 10 years later to indemnify the innocent victims of the destruction, a mob of brishit lowlifes (mostly businessmen and merchants) ransacked the parliament and burned it down to the ground, as that kind of people will not tolerate democracy.

    In 1867, the canadian population was half french, half britshit (the britshit certainly didn't count the indians). However, in typical britshit fashion, only the landowners were granted the right of vote; and as the french were systematically poorer, they were therefore underepresented. But this not preclude the existence of prominent french politicians, such as Wilfrid Laurier, who was the first french prime minister. However, do not let the frenchness fool you; the britshit would not let anyone become prime minister unless he displayed the utmost allegiance to the britshit interests... This held true of other french prime ministers: Louis St-Laurent, Pierre-Elliott Trudeau (this one declared martial law in 1970 and put his political opponents in jail), Brian Mulroney (well, he's irish, but in Québec, the irish very much became french) and Jean Chrétin.

    1. Re:Canada in a nutshell... by just4now · · Score: 1

      God, what a rant.

      Do you think anyone is going to read the entire thing just to find out if is on topic or not.

      You gotta be either from Ontario or Quebec if you think so.

  104. Re:La grande r�gion de Ste-Agathe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey man, you Frenchies lost the war. You were British citizens, so get over it. Now you're Canadian. At least we gave you rights - we could just treat you like the Israelis treat the Palestinians (a conquered people). You're lucky we let you live.

  105. What's the Problem by TC+(WC) · · Score: 1

    Can someone please point out to me where freedoms are actually being lost here? There seems to be a large amount of whining about nothing. This document appears to be looking at, basically, extending legal means of search into new technologies. You still need a court order to go searching for records or taking personal information, this proposal is just looking at methods of effectively doing this. There seems to be a lot of effort made to keep these changes legitimate and even keep them in line with similar procedures for what are currently used for telephone networks...

  106. Re:La grande r�gion de Ste-Agathe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and you fuckin british loving wankers just sucked cock. At least if you'd separated from england as the US did, you would have a point. but a lapdog cannot make a point, he's a fuckin animal!

  107. Re:I want some Canadian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Yet we have draconian laws where pornographic magazines have those black bars on them

    You obviously haven't bought any porno mags lately. There are no black bars anymore. Not that I actually read any of that stuff..

  108. Re:Why bother? by C0LDFusion · · Score: 1

    Go ask how many guys shot with an Automatic Rifle, as you illustrated in your original example, don't die quickly?

    --
    Only in slashdot are posts of solidarity modded at -1 Redundant, while posts of antagonism are modded as -1 Flamebait.
  109. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm okay with banning Automatics, but when you say that a 5'2" woman has to fill out a 6" pile of paperwork to get a concealed weapon permit (which is very often declined, unless you've worked for the police department) to carry a small 9mm Glock to protect herself from rapists...it's a bit extreme

    Ahem. If rape is common enough that a woman needs to be actively concerned, doesn't that indicate a very serious societal problem? Rape, murder, and violent crimes should be rare in a healthy society. After all, we don't all walk around with lightning rods on our heads, "just in case" we get hit by lightning. Actually, I don't -- I don't really know about you, I guess. But I hope not.

    --

    AC

  110. Re:Why bother? by C0LDFusion · · Score: 1

    Ahem. If rape is common enough that a woman needs to be actively concerned, doesn't that indicate a very serious societal problem? Rape, murder, and violent crimes should be rare in a healthy society. After all, we don't all walk around with lightning rods on our heads, "just in case" we get hit by lightning. Actually, I don't -- I don't really know about you, I guess. But I hope not.

    Read some of my other posts on this topic. There IS a major societal problem. Even in low-crime areas, rape is a concern, especially for ladies who happen to go to college. Most rapes occur with women who are attending a college, generally aided (if not aided, then I'm sure it doesn't help) by the level of drugs and alcohol that goes around campuses.

    --
    Only in slashdot are posts of solidarity modded at -1 Redundant, while posts of antagonism are modded as -1 Flamebait.
  111. Re:Why bother? by Guppy06 · · Score: 2

    "Canada has something called the Charter of Rights and Freedoms [justice.gc.ca] which guarrantees their basic liberties.

    It does not mention anything about the right to own a gun, but why should it?"


    It also doesn't mention about the right to vote for the members of the House of Lords, or the ability to vote for either your chief of state or head of government.

    Also, I find myself uncomfortable with some of the wording. It states, for example, that everyone has the freedom of expression. Nothing about how much freedom or who says how much, just that it's there. Somewhere. I may be biased, but I would prefer wording to the affect of "Parliament shall make no law abridging the freedom of expression."

    Of course, the document goes on to limit just how much freedom of expression you have by declaring two official languages, how they can and cannot be used, by who, when, where...

    Without even getting into the way it seems it took Canada until the 1980's to write down some of the things the United States wrote down in 1790's, I find it... interesting how much power the British crown and aristocracy still has in Canada's government. ... or am I just being an "ignorant Yank" again?