Search results

You're correct of course, it's always technically illegal.  If they're found to have a legitimate claim, what they did to get here doesn't matter anymore, and the convention applies.  Until they're processed, the convention applies.  Irregular is a better word, IMO, until their claim is denied...

Does anyone know if we've (Canada) been asked for help at this point?

I'll ask a question.  If their asylum claim is granted, will the charges for the illegal crossing go forward? (This happens to be another of the areas that I actually do know the subject matter, unlike on actual military matters, btw) They are being referred to by people in the legal...

I was being more....dire than that.  Hours usually means dead.  Not always, mind you, but with each hour, your percentage chance of being found alive gets a lot smaller.

But yes - under every other conceivable circumstance, crossing the border illegally is....illegal.

Since this is an area that I have some expertise, I feel I can contribute.  Yes, minutes count.  With SAR, and general rescue, hours don't count so much.  The difference between many hours and many many hours is usually not as significant.

Except when it's not.  Canada is a signatory to the UN Convention on Refugees.  We can - if we choose to ignore/pull out of the convention.  I don't see that happening.  They cease to be illegal crossings when the person making the crossing claims asylum. They are released, with charges put...

It looks like there's one being used in BC right now, also.

If such a bill comes forward, I'll eat my hat.

I'm okay with a court being able to find against hate propaganda.  Hate speech hasn't been legal in Canada for a very long time.  Hate speech against Islam is already illegal.

You can't discriminate based on gender identity.  That's a totally different thing, I would think. 

Do me a favour, and point out what I said that was wrong.

No it's not.

I'll just point on that the National Research Council came to the conclusion that said quality was an arbitrary criterion.  That's probably because we're doing the job on the west coast an in the north (secondary role) with slower aircraft now.

Everything you say is true.  Except for the part that you're missing (I was missing said part too until recently - in fact, if you look back in this thread I've been saying the same things as you pretty much word for word).  There is a reason that the PM called them irregular crossers.  There is...

You expect me to believe that the government that is finally removing Canada's blasphemy laws is going to make new ones?

Lucky thing then, that M-103 wasn't a law.

Crossing a border to claim refugee status is legal under international law.  We're signatories to said law.

I thought some still did the occasional transport?  Or is that completely done now?

It's also worth noting that while it's not replacing only the buffalo, it's only replacing one role of the SAR Hercs.  It's not meant to replace their other functions.