I think it probably would be saved by section 1. However, the people being glib about laws that violate Charter rights are pretty ####ing horrible examples of Canadian citizens. Those rights should only be encroached on when absolutely necessary and any encroachment, even if it is justifiable (for example, increased security and concomitant reductions in personal privacy at airports) need to be taken very seriously and implemented in a manner that minimally infringed the right and does not permit any slippery slope effect. It's not something to be joked about or dismissed as being obviously fine because it has a proven benefit in terms of public safety.
Curtailments of rights are always cast in well-meaning terms, are usually justified as being about safety, and only ever happen a little at a time. The fact that anyone can look to the south and be glib about ceding power to the federal government or the erosion of bulwarks like a protection against self-incrimination is very disturbing. Not surprising, though, I guess, given who seems to be at the front of that line.
__________________
"The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
|