U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-15-2008, 12:19 PM
 
Location: The Woods
16,455 posts, read 21,469,319 times
Reputation: 8410

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by leangk View Post
every day students dont have the right to "bring protection" only sihks. i dont think any weapons should be allowed, because worse comes to worse a school fight has some fists thrown or people beat up abit. throwing in knives is a whole different story
Minor students shouldn't carry weapons perhaps but teachers and administrators should have that right to help guard against the mass killings that happen now and then. Colleges/universities, where the students are adults, is another matter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-15-2008, 12:34 PM
 
Location: Ottawa, Canada
609 posts, read 1,043,362 times
Reputation: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
Minor students shouldn't carry weapons perhaps but teachers and administrators should have that right to help guard against the mass killings that happen now and then. Colleges/universities, where the students are adults, is another matter.
yeah no i misunderstood at first, your absolutely right. the danger (not really in canda but in the US and other countries) of a school shooting is extremely real and there should be some sort of "safety system" readily available to teachers. like abunch of guns under lock and key. this system would definently have to be safe checked so as to make sure no student could ever access it (maybe by having different locks and needing a combination of say 5 kays to open it for example). unfortunately i dont think most parents would go for it. the idea of "guns in schools" even though they are for the student's protection is too complicated for some parents to handle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2008, 12:36 PM
 
Location: southern california
55,237 posts, read 72,402,860 times
Reputation: 47449
good post--- part is left out. some take freedom and safety away from others to have more for themselves. when we disarm the sheep the wolves become very aggressive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2008, 12:40 PM
 
Location: Ottawa, Canada
609 posts, read 1,043,362 times
Reputation: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathagos View Post
Gotcha. Thanks for the lesson!
yeah no problem. it really quite sad i find when a country no longer controles its own rules, especially a "democratic one" like canada. for example even if 100% of the politicians were for it, and made a law banning weapons in school, and even if theoretically say 99% of candians were for it, it could and would still get overturned by the supreme court based on thier "opinion and interpretation" of law.

it goes on "reasonable accomodation". which basically states that the limitation on a right (stopping kirpans) must be counter weighed against the safety of the students. yet again this is up to interpretation by the nine judges as i said, and it gives us an "opinionated" justice, instead of a "equal" (applies equally to all even though some people contest equality for equity) justice agreed on by all
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2008, 12:47 PM
 
Location: The Woods
16,455 posts, read 21,469,319 times
Reputation: 8410
Quote:
Originally Posted by leangk View Post
yeah no problem. it really quite sad i find when a country no longer controles its own rules, especially a "democratic one" like canada. for example even if 100% of the politicians were for it, and made a law banning weapons in school, and even if theoretically say 99% of candians were for it, it could and would still get overturned by the supreme court based on thier "opinion and interpretation" of law.

it goes on "reasonable accomodation". which basically states that the limitation on a right (stopping kirpans) must be counter weighed against the safety of the students. yet again this is up to interpretation by the nine judges as i said, and it gives us an "opinionated" justice, instead of a "equal" (applies equally to all even though some people contest equality for equity) justice agreed on by all
It was set up that way in both Canada and the U.S. for a reason: prevent the "tyranny of the majority." Some rights, and some people, aren't popular at times, but that doesn't justify taking away those rights or harming those people. If rights only apply to the popular and not the unpopular they aren't rights in fact but rather privileges. Having something not operating based on the whims of the moment (the supreme court) was meant to be a safeguard. In a country such as the U.K., parliament can essentially do anything. The "Bill of Rights" in England was against the monarch not parliament and in fact there are no rights, only privileges parliament grants in such a system. Take for instance Britain's handgun ban: guns are not popular with a large portion of the British population so most didn't have a problem with oppressing a minority (handgun owners) on the basis of one deranged person's actions, and there was no real, effective, safeguard in the system to prevent that from happening. Does it work perfectly? No, but it's the best that's been thought up so far.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2008, 12:50 PM
 
Location: Ottawa, Canada
609 posts, read 1,043,362 times
Reputation: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
It was set up that way in both Canada and the U.S. for a reason: prevent the "tyranny of the majority." Some rights, and some people, aren't popular at times, but that doesn't justify taking away those rights or harming those people. If rights only apply to the popular and not the unpopular they aren't rights in fact but rather privileges. Having something not operating based on the whims of the moment (the supreme court) was meant to be a safeguard. In a country such as the U.K., parliament can essentially do anything. The "Bill of Rights" in England was against the monarch not parliament and in fact there are no rights, only privileges parliament grants in such a system. Take for instance Britain's handgun ban: guns are not popular with a large portion of the British population so most didn't have a problem with oppressing a minority (handgun owners) on the basis of one deranged person's actions, and there was no real, effective, safeguard in the system to prevent that from happening.
i agree to an extent, but you could also argue that having the "right" to a knife isnt a right at all, its a privledge, made a "right" by the court. we have the "right" to freedom of religion, but does that mean we have to right to polygamy? human sacrafice? no
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2008, 12:52 PM
 
Location: The Woods
16,455 posts, read 21,469,319 times
Reputation: 8410
Quote:
Originally Posted by leangk View Post
i agree to an extent, but you could also argue that having the "right" to a knife isnt a right at all, its a privledge, made a "right" by the court. we have the "right" to freedom of religion, but does that mean we have to right to polygamy? human sacrafice? no
Well the idea of our founding fathers in the U.S. was that a person has the right to do anything until it infringes on another's right. So, a person has the right to have any religious belief, but may not harm another person to practice it. A person has the right to have a weapon, but doesn't have the right to harm another with it or use it recklessly. A person has the right to speak freely but it doesn't extend to libel or shouting fire in a crowded theater.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2008, 01:26 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 40,266,772 times
Reputation: 10915
Quote:
Originally Posted by leangk View Post
There is always a constant struggle between these two forced, about things we see and hear about on a daily basis. In canada unfortunately, it seems "rights" have taken precedent over the safety of millions of people, something I think is terribly wrong. Bills, rules, regulations and laws are constantly shot down by our left wing senate (a majority were appointed by the left wing liberal government. which is also another topic worth talking about) who find it nessecary to undermine our safety any chance they can get, but have no problem limiting free speech if its "right wing".

i think that the balance is certianly delicate, but when "rights" constantly have precedent over safety (which is actually very funny because safety and security is a canadian right too) we see extremes happening. religious knives are being brought to schools. police uniform guidelines are changed because they are deemed "offensive". suspected terrorists are being let go as not to infringe on their rights".
When everyone has freedom, they can act to ensure their own security.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2008, 01:39 PM
 
Location: Ottawa, Canada
609 posts, read 1,043,362 times
Reputation: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
When everyone has freedom, they can act to ensure their own security.
your basically saying the opposite of the "social contract" theory, which is what our society as we know it and what I am talking about is built on.......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2008, 01:45 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 40,266,772 times
Reputation: 10915
I don't believe too much in society. I'm a bit of a loner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top