•
u/StrongAroma 1h ago
Actual treason. Where the fuck is the RCMP? They should be busting down these bastards' doors.
•
u/BC_Sativa 1h ago
The RCMP is, by design, full of right wing asshats who are more likely to support these traitors than not.
If we were ever invaded, they would immediately become turncoats and start enforcing American rule against us. Don't kid yourself.
•
u/magacorruption Elbows Up! 1h ago
There's a reason why one of Trudeau's last aspirations as PM was to reform RCMP into the FBI of the north.
•
u/thisispaulc 1h ago
46 (2) Every one commits treason who, in Canada,
(a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;
(b) without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada;
(c) conspires with any person to commit high treason or to do anything mentioned in paragraph (a);
(d) forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; or
(e) conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) or forms an intention to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) and manifests that intention by an overt act.(3) Notwithstanding subsection (1) or (2), a Canadian citizen or a person who owes allegiance to Her Majesty in right of Canada,
(a) commits high treason if, while in or out of Canada, he does anything mentioned in subsection (1); or
(b) commits treason if, while in or out of Canada, he does anything mentioned in subsection (2).Given that you're implying that the RCMP is falling down on the job, I assume you're saying that it's actual treason under the Criminal Code as opposed to treason in common parlance. I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that this is actual treason under the Criminal Code, though.
•
u/WippitGuud Prince Edward Island 1h ago
uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province
Define "force" in this context for me.
•
u/thisispaulc 41m ago
"Force" is not defined in the Criminal Code and I'm not aware of case law interpreting it in section 46. Elsewhere in the Code it is given its ordinary meaning of physical power applied to persons or property.
Based on that, I think it's reasonable to expect that non-threatening words in protest, criticism, and political pressure wouldn't qualify, and that there would have to be something that results in a physical compulsion.
The Supreme Court has also established a lawful process for a province to gain independence, so seeking independence in and of itself isn't an attempt to overthrow a government. It would be something that goes outside that lawful process.
•
u/WippitGuud Prince Edward Island 29m ago
So you would not consider a cyber attack to be treason? It is not physical.
•
u/thisispaulc 26m ago
You're really suggesting that someone who DDOSes the CRA website for fun has committed treason?
•
u/asphere8 Alberta 1h ago
I notice that subsections 1 and 4 seem to be conspicuously missing from your copy of the criminal code there bud
•
u/thisispaulc 33m ago
Sorry, I didn't realize you wanted to make an argument that this is an attempt to kill the King or levy war against Canada, or that we are at war or engaged in hostilities with the United States military, and is thus high treason.
And since we're talking about the people doing the act and whether it was treason, I also didn't see the relevance of a provision that deals only with other people who want to join in.
•
u/asphere8 Alberta 9m ago
I would argue that the conspiracy to engage a foreign nation's assistance in an effort to secede is certainly very relevant to 46(4); and strongly implies that they're willing to violate 46(2)(e) and 46(1)(b) (see the "preparatory" clause) even if they haven't already done so.
•
u/thisispaulc 2m ago
46(4) doesn't stand alone. It operates only where the accused's conspiracy is itself treason under 46(2)(c) or (e). Since we're talking about whether even 46(2) is met, 46(4) is beside the point.
•
u/StrongAroma 56m ago
Ok, sedition, then. There is no way these cockknobs aren't breaking a number of laws
•
u/thisispaulc 32m ago
What unlawful use of force are you claiming they committed?
•
u/StrongAroma 23m ago
plotting with a foreign entity to sever territory from the state is the literal definition of treason. Related crimes are subversion and seditious conspiracy.
•
u/thisispaulc 15m ago
You're going in circles. First it was treason, then it was sedition, and now it's treason again. I gave you the definition of treason from the Criminal Code (which you could have also looked up yourself, along with the definition of sedition).
Explain which requirement in the text is met. It's not my or the Criminal Code's fault if what they're doing isn't actually a crime. Complain to your MP.
•
u/Case_Federal 1h ago
What’s crazy is they complain endlessly about being taken advantage of by Canada, but are happy to completely sell off the province’s resources to the US for basically no gain… it’s an illness.
•
•
u/Motorbarge 1h ago
This needs to lose so bad the politicians are afraid to show their faces in public.
•
u/mc1964 8m ago
If this is true, it's about the stupidest thing the separatists can do. Let's say they get their independence. They'll be a nation that gave their most valuable resources away. The U.S. doesn't even need them to become an American state when they already have what they want. Why buy the cow when the milk is free?
•
u/BC_Sativa 1h ago
The fact that these traitors haven't been arrested should be scandalous.