Canada is a failed state

Great Firewall of Canada incoming.
IDGAF about PornHub, but this will be just the beginning. Other sites will block access if this passes. Italics are mine.
Michael Geist said:
While the government’s support for the online harms bill is unsurprising given that it has been promised for years, the current political dynamics behind the second bill – Bill S-210 – are more difficult to explain. I’ve described the bill, which purports to restrict underage access to sexually explicit materials, as the most dangerous Internet bill you’ve never heard of since it mandates the use of age verification technologies that raise serious privacy concerns (Australia rejected a similar law on those grounds), contains no thresholds such that it covers social media (Twitter), search (Google) and chat sites (Reddit), and features a system of court-ordered blocking of lawful content. A better approach would be to focus on providing parents with filtering software, so that they could better manage their kids’ Internet use and prevent access to content they deem inappropriate. Alternatively, if the bill was narrowly targeted to pornography-only sites, there would be room to defend it (you can listen to Senator Julie Mivelle-Dechêne, the bill’s architect, do so on a recent Lawbytes podcast). As it now stands, Bill S-210 is likely be challenged on constitutional grounds and should be firmly rejected.
Click to expand...
Source (A)
ETA: Relevant section of S-210
(5) If the Federal Court determines that it is necessary to ensure that the sexually explicit material is not made available to young persons on the Internet in Canada, an order made under subsection (4) may have the effect of preventing persons in Canada from being able to access

(a) material other than sexually explicit material made available by the organization that has been given notice under subsection 8(1); or

(b) sexually explicit material made available by the organization that has been given notice under subsection 8(1) even if the person seeking to access the material is not a young person.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Informative
  • Winner
Reactions: The Foxtrot, Mordecai "3 Finger" Brown, Moosebonker and 5 others
Brutality said:
The US looking more and more tempting
Click to expand...
Don't hold your breath. Canada and US are merely in an unwritten competition to see which of the two can keep pushing the envelope on secular/shitlib social engineering until the wheels finally come out. Thus far, I'd say Canada is ahead for now, since it's just been about two months since I last checked this thread and it already gained nearly 50 new pages of new posts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Foxtrot, geckogoy, Lobster Cult High Priest and 4 others
Lunar Eclipse Paradox said:
All these laws Canada is passing is really disturbing. I live in fear my freedoms would be lost overnight. China has done laws like this and what happened were mass exodus and mass suicides.
Click to expand...
I think for the past half decade I’ve been slowly sinking into acceptance. Not being complicit, but understanding reality. I’m honestly shocked when I talk to people about issues, either they are well aware. Or they have absolutely no idea that anything has even changed. I thought most of the people in this thread would be stark raving mad months ago. I’m seeing so many white people suffering and nothing is being done about it. I see immigrants and they have new winter clothes and paid baby items.

I’ve had many immigrants that don’t know how to speak or comprehend the English language. They all have phones and none of them ever think to use it to learn the native language of the country. They beg and plead for a job. “Please please I have no more money, rent is expensive, yes?”
They expect me to count change for them, they expect me to spell words for them, they expect me to do basic life task’s because they are entirely useless as a working class citizen.
A Chinese woman couldn’t understand anything at the coffee house and messed up orders twice in a row while pretending the entire time that she understood you.
 
  • Feels
  • Lunacy
  • DRINK!
Reactions: CloverKitty, UERISIMILITUDO, SilentDuck and 4 others
Lord Xenu said:
(5) If the Federal Court determines that it is necessary to ensure that the sexually explicit material is not made available to young persons on the Internet in Canada, an order made under subsection (4) may have the effect of preventing persons in Canada from being able to access

(a) material other than sexually explicit material made available by the organization that has been given notice under subsection 8(1); or

(b) sexually explicit material made available by the organization that has been given notice under subsection 8(1) even if the person seeking to access the material is not a young person.
Click to expand...
For some additional context, my interpretation of this is that a federal order under (4) is sent to the ISP of non-compliant organizations who don't act within 20 days of receiving a notice. The result of federal action could hinder the free access of non-sexual content as collateral damage. As Geist points out, there are no limits as to what kinds of sites this applies to. Porn can be uploaded just about anywhere these days.

To be precise, they claim they are using the definition of sexually explicit material from Section 171.(1) of the criminal code:
  • Definition of sexually explicit material
    (5) In subsection (1), sexually explicit material means material that is not child pornography, as defined in subsection 163.1(1), and that is
    • (a) a photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means,
      • (i) that shows a person who is engaged in or is depicted as engaged in explicit sexual activity, or
      • (ii) the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a person’s genital organs or anal region or, if the person is female, her breasts;
    • (b) written material whose dominant characteristic is the description, for a sexual purpose, of explicit sexual activity with a person; or
    • (c) an audio recording whose dominant characteristic is the description, presentation or representation, for a sexual purpose, of explicit sexual activity with a person.
Click to expand...

I think it's only a matter of time until they expand what this bill applies to, likely starting with "hateful content". However, trying to play a game of whack-a-mole with porn clips being uploaded to social media simply is not feasible, as Michael Geist was alluding to. I wouldn't be surprised if feds start uploading a bunch of porn to a site like Twitter and hope enough of it flies under the radar for them to strike. I think trannies use a similar technique to take down Discord servers.

5 Any organization that, for commercial purposes, makes available sexually explicit material on the Internet to a young person is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable,
  • (a) for a first offence, to a fine of not more than $250,000; and
  • (b) for a second or subsequent offence, to a fine of not more than $500,000.
Click to expand...

Notice​


8 (1) If the enforcement authority has reasonable grounds to believe that an organization committed an offence under section 5, the enforcement authority may issue a notice to them under this section.

Content of notice​


(2) The notice must state
  • (a) the identity of the organization;
  • (b) that the enforcement authority has reasonable grounds to believe that the organization has committed an offence under section 5;
  • (c) the steps that the enforcement authority considers necessary to ensure compliance with this Act;
  • (d) that the organization must, within 20 days after the notice is issued, take the steps referred to in paragraph (c);
  • (e) that, if the organization fails to take the steps referred to in paragraph (c) within the period set out in paragraph (d), the enforcement authority may apply to the Federal Court for an order requiring Internet service providers to prevent access to the sexually explicit material to young persons on the Internet in Canada; and
  • (f) that the organization may make representations to the enforcement authority in relation to any element of the notice within the period set out in paragraph (d).
Click to expand...

Order​


(4) The Federal Court must order any respondent Internet service providers to prevent access to the sexually explicit material to young persons on the Internet in Canada if it determines that
  • (a) there are reasonable grounds to believe that the organization that has been given notice under subsection 8(1) has committed the offence referred to in section 5;
  • (b) that organization has failed to take the steps referred to in paragraph 8(2)‍(c) within the period set out in paragraph 8(2)‍(d); and
  • (c) the services provided by the Internet service providers who would be subject to the order may be used, in Canada, to access the sexually explicit material made available by that organization.
Click to expand...
 
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Informative
Reactions: Prehistoric Jazz, Ser Prize, Lobster Cult High Priest and 2 others
y a t s said:
I think it's only a matter of time until they expand what this bill applies to, likely starting with "hateful content".
Click to expand...
Yes. Once you see the trick, you recognize it everywhere. How it works is they write legislation to combat a low hanging fruit issue that most people would agree with, for example, limiting children's access to porn. Then they build a body of case law around it. Once this precedence is established they expand the concept to something more controversial, such as "hate speech", and use the prior case law as justification for why this new legislation is constitutional.

If you are aware of the history of gun control in Canada, it works exactly like this.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: CloverKitty, Wintersun, Lowlife Adventures and 9 others
Lord Xenu said:
Yes. Once you see the trick, you recognize it everywhere. How it works is they write legislation to combat a low hanging fruit issue that most people would agree with, for example, limiting children's access to porn. Then they build a body of case law around it. Once this precedence is established they expand the concept to something more controversial, such as "hate speech", and use the prior case law as justification for why this new legislation is constitutional.

If you are aware of the history of gun control in Canada, it works exactly like this.
Click to expand...
Every. Single. Fucking. Time.

And they call the slippery slope a fallacy while they do it. Just because something can be used fallaciously doesn't mean it's a fallacy. If only normies understood nuance.
The slope isn't slippery, stalker child. If it were, how could we keep climbing our way to the top? Enjoy prison.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
  • Feels
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Pedophobe, Wintersun, Lowlife Adventures and 10 others
1423849D-EFBA-46C5-AFB3-19A07DC3431D.jpeg
 
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Wintersun, Lowlife Adventures, Spirelord: Downfall and 15 others
BeetleBug242 said:
View attachment 5753533
Click to expand...
The lever get stuck for some strange reason, a strange statue of a seated man with the head of a bull appears on top and foreskinless rats with large noses stick their heads out the windows and laugh at you as the trolley continues to crush and mutilate White men, women, and children along with foreigners who did not toe the party line.
The color of the trolley changes from red to jew.
 
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: UERISIMILITUDO, Catler, DiscoRodeo and 4 others
Kiwisee said:
While they aren’t wrong for saying Freeland is a treasonous bitch who should face consequences for her actions, they should’ve said “tarred and feathered” because it sounds less like a death threat.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised they haven't paid me a visit, for posting in this thread (namely telling the suicidal guy to take one of the Laurentian Elite with him instead of taking MAID like a bitch).

What they said was tame to what gets posted here.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: SilentDuck, Lord Xenu, Kiwisee and 4 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back