Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboy89
This has kinda been the 'Ontario Way' of late. Ie outright banning things despite the reprecussions on the totally innocent.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboy89
Pitbull Ban. Also a little known law about local historical societies designating buildings including people's houses 'unique and or historical' without the owner even knowing. If the owner wants to make modifications to, or demolish the building then they have to prove in court that their building or house is not 'unique or historical'. Unlawful modifications or demolision of the building comes with a $1 Million fine. It used to be up to the historical society to prove that the building is unique or historical now the duty is on the owner. Guilty until proven innocent.
|
So how does a pitbull ban (like has been done in many places) make it the "Ontario Way"?
As for the deeming people's homes "heritage buildings" without the owner's knowing, I think you need to back up that statement. It sounds like FUD to me.
To get you started, here's a link to the Ontario Ministry of Culure website
__________________
"The problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence."
—Bill Clinton
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance--it is the illusion of knowledge."
—Daniel J. Boorstin, historian, former Librarian of Congress
"But the Senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity"
—WKRP in Cincinatti
|