Germany wasnt a magical spontaneous dictatorship, it was ruled by a person that was democatrically elected to rule them, the Germands wanted to be ruled by that man.
Everything the Nazis did was actually legal in Germany to do so, they passed the laws that made it legal, therefore they also had the rule of law. What they did, they did incrementally, very small steps towards the final solution over the span of more than a decade.
I am very well versed in the history of Nazi Germany in the 20th century, thanks.
I can be elected in power and pass a law that says everything you own is now mine, another law that says that your wife is now my slave, that would be legal for me to do so, who would stop me? I have the RCMP and all the LEOs of the country on my side since everything I am doing is legal therefore I am right.
No, actually, you can't. In Canada we have something called the constitution, specifically the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which declares any law inconsistent with its provisions to be of no force or effect, so therefore you could not legally pass such laws. Even if you were the PM with a majority in parliament, and even if you managed to get such laws past the senate, which is unlikely, they would be struck down by the SCC. Furthermore, LEO's have a LEGAL basis for refusing to enforce laws inconsistent with the constitution and the charter.
It is the moral duty of a man not to respect an unjust law, it is the moral duty of a citizen to rise against tyranny of government. More importantly LEOs have an even higher moral duty towards ethics and the right thing, not just the legal thing, since they are the gatekeepers of civility and a moral society.
So who decides what laws are just and what laws are unjust? Who decides which laws we uphold and which we ignore? I am telling you that we have provisions in place in our society to prevent grossly unjust laws from being enacted. We have democratic processes in place, we have the rule of law, we have judicial oversight, none of which Nazi Germany had. I am probably one of the harshest critics you're ever going to find of the Westminster Parliamentary system and our milquetoast constitution, but as flawed as they are, they are far better than the arbitrary rule of megalomaniacal dictators or mob violence. You're comparing apples to oranges.
Guards in Nazi Germany would be met with the very fast introduction of a bullet if they said NO. What would an RCMP or any LEO in Canada face? Suspension with pay (also known as a vacation)? A reprimand? A strong worded letter? A talk in the supervisors office? Wow the price of doing what is right sure is not very high!!!
How about getting fired and losing your livelihood and being unable to support your family? When Justin declares himself the supreme ruler, dissolves parliament and starts setting up death camps, I'll be first in line to lead the Resistance. Until then, I'm going to let due process and the rule of law decide what's legal and what's not. If you don't like the laws, use the legal, democratic means at your disposal to change them.
Perhaps I'm hitting a soft spot. I know I sure have arguments with my boss and my CEO all the time, and yes I even refuse to do explicit orders they tell me to do, and why not if they go against my ethics and values? Do I fear being fired, sure, why not, but who cares! I'll find another job. Certainly I should not compromise my values just because I am ordered to do so.
Again, comparing apples to oranges. As a civilian, you no doubt do not comprehend the situation of being entrusted with enforcing laws, carrying weapons, etc. We in law enforcement have to be extremely careful how we exercise our authority - we do not act arbitrarily on our own whims or ideas, but in accordance with the law. Again, if you don't like the law, work to change it. That's what I'm doing - joined the CPC and am going to vote for Maxime Bernier as leader.
Taking away the rightfully owned property of civilians is wrong, no matter how you cut it.
Really? So we shouldn't be able to seize the assets of criminals? Should we not be able to seize illegal goods being smuggled across the border as long as the smugglers paid for the stuff elsewhere? The world is not as cut and dried as you'd like it to be.
It being done legally by the government and their strong arm RCMP is even more wrong. I would expect, even demand, that LEOs would stand up to such ox excrement.
I agree with you that the RCMP's firearms division's actions are improper, and probably not legal. Insofar as it falls within my sphere of discretion, any declarations they make which are inconsistent with the law as I know it will be ignored. As for the rest, the decision whether their actions are lawful or not rests with the SCC. I'm going to uphold the system of accountability and rule of law, flawed as it may be, until such time as it has been shown to have broken down beyond repair. We're not there yet.
