And encourage people to rat out their neighbors? What will that do to the social fabric?
I have no desire to live in a safe society. The ardent desire for safety and security is pretty much how we got to where we are. It’s not a good place.
Doesn’t the Canadian government have all these ads about ParticipACTION and their mission to make physical activity a vital part of everyday life for people living in Canada ? D’oh
“Progressive Conservative” - now THAT is an oxymoron.
Emphasis on “moron”.
Ha... and this guy has deliberately challenged it... and the fine he got handed was $28,872.50 with the taxes, fees and surcharges. Going to be interesting to watch this one go to court. Something tells me that guvmint will end up backing down....
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/nova-scotia-wildfire-forest-ban
A Nova Scotia man who intentionally violated the province’s ban on entering the woods says he plans to fight his $28,000 fine.
Jeffrey Evely, a veteran and former candidate for the People’s Party of Canada, recorded a video over the weekend of him first going to the Department of Natural Resources in Coxheath, N.S., and informing officers he was going into the woods to protest the ban.
“I want to challenge this order in court, and the only way to do that is to get the fine,” Jeffrey Evely says in the video. “So, I’m not trying to make trouble for you guys, I just want a piece of (Premier) Tim Houston and I want to be as accommodating and nice as I can be.”
One of the officers asked him not to enter the woods, but he followed through with his plan.
When he left the forest, he was handed a fine of $28,872.50, according to an image of the document.
The new policy came into effect on Aug. 5, and will remain until Oct. 15. It bans people from hiking, camping, fishing and the use of vehicles like ATVs in the woods due to the elevated wildfire risk. People are not even allowed to enter the woods. The fine for violating the ban is $25,000…..
It should be permissible to hike if they wore a mask and had their vaxx card.
The Nazis had a phrase which covered all abuses by the state: “Für Ihre Sicherheit.”
“It’s ‘for your Safety’.”
“Why do so many of us feel we need to have guns? Because we can read history.”
You left out the most important part:
Because we can Read & Comprehend when you let the state dictate your Safety.
“It’s ‘for your Safety’,” when the Nazis made Jews wear the yellow star(s.)
“It’s ‘for your Safety’,” when the Nazis made Jews live in the ghettos.
“It’s ‘for your Safety’,” when the Nazis made Jews give up their guns.
“It’s ‘for your Safety’,” when the Nazis made Jews load up into the Box-Car Trains.
Now, this is where a reasonable person would say: It's not that I don't TRUST YOU, it's that I plain FLAT-A$$ don't TRUST YOU.
Now. having dealt with the necessary TRUST ISSUES, with my hand properly resting on my weapon of choice in my holster, how may I help you. (BIG SHITE-EATIN GRIN.)
I’m pretty sure “abundance of caution” wasn’t a thing when we were building the Empire State Building, the Golden Gate Bridge and the Hoover Dam.
As Ben Franklin Said: Those who give up freedom for a temporary sense of security deserve neither.
And I add: Nor will they receive either.
Also, I have said for years that our elites don’t want us peasants trespassing on ‘their’ lands. I’ve personally seen that attitude in District Head Rangers with the U.S. Forest Service and some BLM (Bureau of Land Management) agents.