Bill to Strip Citizenship for Treason

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

I think he can be brought up on charges of treason by attacking any of our allies as well... hopefully we can see this in effect.

True, but he has already been convicted of attacking Americans by the American system. Canada can't really place him in double jeopardy on that front. They'd need a new reason for new charges.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Why is this always your attitude? ... as in why bother making changes to the law unless we are in a crisis situation because surely there is something more important that needs to be done?
Has the government EVER done anything that you agree with?

As to your actual question....

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-s...y-hearing.html

Technically he wasn't charged with treason... but he may as well have and could have been...

Well I just think that of all the things going on that affect Canadians, this one ranks somewhere in the mid 500's of most people's list. When I woke up this morning, I didn't think "You know, we could lower unemployment more, or we could reduce the debt, or we could stop enforcing laws that restrict personal freedom...but lets make sure traitors lose their citizenship?" Its just this issue seems to really effect nobody. Its not like passing this will somehow be a benefit to all Canadians. Its sort of a "Cool? I guess..." kinda thing.

And personally this shouldn't even be a discussion. The punishment for treason should be death, so if it were up to me they'd lose their citizenship when they lose their head.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

No country has an obligation to allow a non-citizen into its territory. Simply stripping the citizenship of someone without another country to call home is pointless, as nobody would take the person in. They'd still be stuck on Canadian soil.

I think there are international laws too where you can't leave a person stateless, and many countries make people renounce their citizenship to take another citizenship.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

No country has an obligation to allow a non-citizen into its territory. Simply stripping the citizenship of someone without another country to call home is pointless, as nobody would take the person in. They'd still be stuck on Canadian soil.

Not if we put them in a canoe and set them loose on the Arctic Ice Floes like they do with seniors.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Locke

Not if we put them in a canoe and set them loose on the Arctic Ice Floes like they do with seniors.

waste of a canoe

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Well I just think that of all the things going on that affect Canadians, this one ranks somewhere in the mid 500's of most people's list. When I woke up this morning, I didn't think "You know, we could lower unemployment more, or we could reduce the debt, or we could stop enforcing laws that restrict personal freedom...but lets make sure traitors lose their citizenship?" Its just this issue seems to really effect nobody. Its not like passing this will somehow be a benefit to all Canadians. Its sort of a "Cool? I guess..." kinda thing.

And personally this shouldn't even be a discussion. The punishment for treason should be death, so if it were up to me they'd lose their citizenship when they lose their head.

You know the gov't has many departments that focus on many different issues, both big and small. I am pretty sure they all work concurrently.

[afc wimbledon]

waste of time and effort, it has zero chance of getting past of passing the constitution.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

You know the gov't has many departments that focus on many different issues, both big and small. I am pretty sure they all work concurrently.

Plus they've got extra time on their hands thanks to the last omnibus bill.

[Itse]

Some very typical reasons for being charged with treason are whistleblowing and political dissent. Terrorism is also something people can get charged with for really odd reasons. These are situations where people really need their legal rights.

Legal protections against your government come from having a citizenship, mostly.

Giving the government the right to take away all your rights is dangerous.

If someone wants to push such legislation for apparently no specific reason, one should always be extremely suspicious.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by fotze

When does this sub citizenship expire, with their offspring or can we turf their treasonous hypothetical asses out as well?

What does "sub-citizenship" mean?

[afc wimbledon]

well I can be stripped and sent back to the UK where as a 'natural born canadian' can't, effectively its a law to create a second class of citizan.

which is why the supreme court will kill it stone dead

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Locke

Not if we put them in a canoe and set them loose on the Arctic Ice Floes like they do with seniors.

Wouldn't that be a kayak.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Wouldn't that be a kayak.

Is the vehicle really important? Give them an innertube for all I care.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

waste of a canoe

Put a GPS tracker on it, so we re-claim the canoe.

[Kavvy]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

well I can be stripped and sent back to the UK where as a 'natural born canadian' can't, effectively its a law to create a second class of citizan.

which is why the supreme court will kill it stone dead

No comment on the supreme court as I have no idea how this plays out in the courts, but what you said isn't true.

A) You could renounce your UK citizenship I think, let me know if that is incorrect (not that I am advocating for you to do this, just providing counter argument). I would argue the second class of citizen only really takes hold when someone can't move into the first class.

B) Natural born has nothing to do with it, plenty of natural born Canadians have dual citzenship

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I was a non-citizen, and did my tour when I was a non-citizen.

Yes but with a name like Undercover brother you're probably a man of color and the second we start turning away minorities from the army, we're goddamn lost.

Joking aside, thank you for your service

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Kavy

No comment on the supreme court as I have no idea how this plays out in the courts, but what you said isn't true.

A) You could renounce your UK citizenship I think, let me know if that is incorrect (not that I am advocating for you to do this, just providing counter argument). I would argue the second class of citizen only really takes hold when someone can't move into the first class.

B) Natural born has nothing to do with it, plenty of natural born Canadians have dual citzenship

the only mechanism to strip citizanship would be through changes to the application process in immigration, the goverment has no ability to take citizanship away from natural born canadians because it did not grant them citizenship in the first place, this therefore does create a two tier system.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by REDVAN

I don't think non-citizens should be in the military. That seems like a big treaosn risk itself.

Why not? Provided the military does an extensive background check and make sure their end is covered I see no reason to not allow non-citizens to enlist.

In fact I would encourage it as a way to gain Canadian citizenship on top of the education you can get from serving in the various fields.

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by Locke

I dont understand that. If someone were to commit Treason against Canada who cares if they have somewhere to go?

They dont have to go home, but they cant stay here.

I think its a very reasonable policy. Most countries would just execute them, so giving them the boot and not caring where they land doesnt seem unreasonable.

You're ok with dumping our trash to other countries that want no part of our trash?

If they're born here then I believe they should be jailed here for treason, not given a free pass in another country to do as they please.

Make the treason laws so strong that someone will just rot in jail and never get out.

They are trash, but they should be our trash.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

this therefore does create a two tier system.

Actually, the way I see it the two tier system is created by the person deciding to hold citizenship in more than one country. From the quote, it says it would only affect Canadians who also hold citizenship in another country. It does not say it doesn't affect Canadians who were born here.

I was born in Canada and only hold Canadian citizenship. However if I were to move to the UK and become a British citizen as well, I could risk my Canadian citizenship if I were to commit treason.

I could see this happen. I know of immigrants who have children born in Canada, so those children are Canadian citizens. I have also seen those people move back to their original country with those children. The kids end up having dual citizenship. If one of those kids commits treason, they would also risk losing their Canadian citizenship.

I could also see this being a case where you could avoid this by renouncing your UK citizenship. I wouldn't recommend this; as there are obvious benefits to holding both, and the odds of you commiting treason are likely low. But that is your choice; to be 100% Canadian or 50-50. (Like I said not a bad thing; I'd become a UK citizen if I could.)