GO FISHING, GO TO JAIL – There’s something’s fishy about Bill C-246

Is this really what we have been reduced to? Sometimes other people’s opinions really don’t matter.but our society of tree hugging individuals don’t have to go fishing if they don’t want to and need to leave us normal people alone

The more we do as individual anglers to promote ethical fishing and a sustainable environment, the longer Canadian society will grant us the privilege to fish

This surely needs to be addressed
To protect the right to our heritage
I am a fishermen and take great pride in our fishery .
And do all possible to sustain it!

This has become a family tradition to spend quality time with my loved ones !

This is absolutely mind boggling to think that something that has been part of everyone’s lives since the beginning of time. To think that’s this is even at all remotely justified is crazy.

What about every family that depends on fishing to keep there families feed and able to live. Are you just gonna ruin there lives. This is just so stupid. It’s no different from animal farms just so stupid.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=8132005

Full text of the bill above.

Part of the bill that the article missed is this:

(c) kills an animal without lawful excuse;

As an avid hunter and fisher, I would assume this envelops those rights provided to us through obtaining our licences. Provided you’re participating in either activity legally, I would assume no charges could/would be laid.

I’m offended by this as they eat the greens that take and filter my air to breath, and eat the plants and endanger my life and yours by doing so. Since when does this type of thing apply to catching and eating fish. Or cow. Turkey,chicken,duck,etc. You touch my green plants that keep this earth. Smog free you are the true killer you green plant eater.

Take away a part of the outdoors, that we can all share with our children, which they can
take a love for and show a passion for. This is ridiculous. This gives children something fun they can do, instead of idle time to engage in possibly bad habits. Unbelievable!

Simmer down folks and READ THE PROPOSED BILL!!! http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=8132005

It is less “mind boggling” than you think. No mention of amending the Fisheries Act to ban lawful angling practices, just adding wording to explicitly prohibit the practice of “shark finning”. That’s it!

This bill is being misinterpreted. this is the cruelty to pets and animals bill, not the tinfoil hat anti hunting and fishing bill.

This what happens when you let idiots reproduce and then let them vote!!

Are the farm animals next. What a bunch of idiots. don’t stop fishing

So much fishing by fishing enthusiasts is “catch and release” and worms are so seldom used – look at the lures, etc. Apparently the gov’t has already conducted studies on fish/fishing and it was discovered, so I’ve been advised, that fish feel little pain. Ok, so we don’t know for sure but really, absolishing this sport??? I’m so astounded that this is how our gov’t is spending taxpayers’ money, ‘cuz I’m sure it isn’t coming out of our politicians pockets. A number of years ago the gov’t spent $1M on studying geese and their pooping habits – apparently geese poop every 11 mins. Politicians, hello !!! we really have more important issues. My grandson has discovered this sport and he loves it … let him continue enjoying himself and not at the cost of others !!! Wake up in Parliament and let’s get ouf magnificent Country back up and moving forward.

Fishing has been a part of Canadian tradition and heritage since the beginning of time, it’s a part of Canada. Do they realize anglers are the largest conservation group in Canada? Do they realize what anglers do for the preservation of our waterways and the life within them????? They should actually do some research on what they are trying to prevent. As an avid, avid angler I am absolutely appalled they would try to take this sport and Canadian pastime away from Canadians. It’s part of our history. Its something I want my children to be able to experience, and something I WILL continue to do!

What happened to sports and recreation here. This world we live in is getting worse and worse. Can’t do this or that. Let’s give this to this person but take away from the other person. I could continue on. But its just absolutely ridiculous.

Pet food, people food, no English riding horses, no leather shoes, no animal type clothing if you clip a sheep you go to jail? If you fix your dog, isn’t that injury? Vets will be in trouble? Canadians will all be vegan soon. Don’t throw your dog a ball because if he’s injured? These people don’t want any interaction with animals, they trick their way into courts to pass laws. They are even teaching this law in universities in Canada. They word everything so it looks fair. It needs to be broken down. They used sharks as an excuse to pass this with the government not paying attention to the small print. They will never stop fighting this. We will have to buy food in the USA. But they are hitting the States also. They are manipulating stories on puppy mills and rapists to get protestors to fund them to get to the highest courts. If it passes, There’s no going back. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3eBouuAdfw3Xzc0VFNFLWxsWjg/view?pref=2&pli=1

I once had a mosquito that suffered both endlessly and needlessly …. after I smacked it!

I would encourage all of you to go and actually read the text of this bill. It is nothing to do with taking away hunting or fishing rights. It is to do with things such as banning the sale in Canada of products with dog or cat fur, making bestiality illegal, making the act of starving your dog to death a crime, and banning shark finning. People who are freaking out over the incorrect interpretations of the bill contained in the Toronto Sun article are the ones who are actually over reacting.

Thank You !

This whole issue of baiting a hook making you a criminal is a red herring. 🙂

Maryam Monsef had my support in Peterborough as she was doing many good things for this city. Seeing her name attached to something so offside and beyond believable is very disappointing. I’m sure if she was to remember her roots and what she had to do to survive to get to where she is today, it might be sn issue to reconsider. My vote may be with someone else next time around.

This has nothing to do with cruelty to animals and everything to do with taking away our ability to feed ourselves without the help of some rich corporation therefore funnelling money from our pockets to there’s. Where does it stop? Heaven forbid a hunter that fails to make a clean kill shot. That is so cruel. As I said this is more about making us needy and dependent. Soon hikers will loose their right to pull water from a lake or stream if big business haven’t destroyed the water so cruelly. Get ready for the future, I believe The Lorax was very insightful. Corporations will be the only one with any rights and our politicians are there to make it so.

wow even baiting your hook with a worm you can go to jail. our country is slowly becoming a communist country.one day we will not be able to take a shit without asking.it is our heritage to provide for our selves long before super markets.as we eat healthy wild meat and fresh fish that isn’t farmed.go ahead you cry babies eat your drugged up meat.if you only knew what was given to beef and domestic pork you would never touch it again.hormones and other drugs given to make this raised meat to look and appear healthy.but it only clogs our body and makes us sick.screw you cry babies.i will fish and hunt as long as I can hold a fishing rod and rifle.

This bill is not intended to prevent people from fishing, but because it is endorsed by a animal rights group, normal people are up in arms. I fish, enjoy the hunt, slaughter my own chickens, but still respect the animal. This bill will also allow authorities to crack down on down right animal abuse. IE puppy mills, dog fighting animal starvation and so on. Other parts of the bill are designed to protect people from unknowingly wearing clothes made cat or dog fur, & shark finning in Canadian waters. Nay sayers are zeroing in on precise little bits, the bill is not finished and will undergo many changes. I find people are not informed. If you think that politicians are out to deprive you of something you have a constitutional right to, you are just plain stupid.

no cops,judge or government is ganna tell me what i can and cannot do and no longer are they ganna steal my god givin right and attempt to sell it back to me
I dont need there permission or anyone elses
I have cancer and learnt that the government has hid the cure since the 20’s therefore this system itself is a threat to my life and safety for now il remain peaceful but any of them attempts to use anyform of force might as well just put a bullet in my head like the brainwashed corporate nazi murdering pieaces a shit that they are

This applies to canada also
And its time too take the country back

It seems very few people truly understand what a “Right” is. They know the word of course and therefore assume they know, but usually it’s only from some vague concept they were given as a youth,  lacking any true understanding of the actual “essence” of the “principle” it was created to symbolize. This is a result of the degradation of language and the individual’s lack of appreciation for its true purpose, as well as the unawareness in the magnitude of its influence on reality.

A “Right” is not just the list of 10 in the “Bill of Rights” of the Constitution. Actually many rights were not defined in the Constitution, one example of “how” and “why” is that most of the individuals creating this illegitimate “claim” of government were powerful individuals, part of organized societies of individuals who wanted slavery, do to their vested interests in slavery. They used that power to influence the arbitrary “definitions” of certain “rights” (this process tends to limit and restrain the understanding of true “Rights” among the masses). For example, how they influenced this with the phrase “You have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” which was originally “You have the right to life, liberty, and property” ( property meaning every individual owns their own body and everything they create “the fruits of their labor”).  First it’s important to realize the fact that at the time people still owned chattel slaves, that’s why certain ruling individuals would not allow that wording into the Constitution and into the public historical memory, so the “creators” of the “U.S. Government” or RULERS made immoral compromises (hint: Hegelian dialectic) to the so-called “Bill of Rights” to better their own interests at the expense of countless individuals who would suffer from the belief in this illegitimate “contract” of “authority”.  A “Right” is a “principle” it is a fundamental truth and can not change, the true nature of what Rights are can not be compromised on. Only when multiple rights conflict with one another does conflict resolution and a possible compromise come in, because your rights are absolute until it conflicts with another’s Rights, as I will explain further.

Through logical deduction you can easily find what is the “most right”. First it’s important to understand that Rights can only be rightfully determined through the individual points of view and the circumstances of the situation and NEVER through the point of view of a collective, since a collective is a CONTRADICTION, a LIE, all that exists are individuals. Everything can be weaponized such as collectivism, which is an abstract concept, it can be useful as an organizational tool, but is often used to convince individuals to give up their rights for the good of the collective, which is never necessary or in their interest, but instead usually in the interest of the individual using the fallacy.

You can easily understand Rights for yourself and it has nothing to do with memorizing arbitrary law. First you must ask where do rights come from? Rights come from (god, existence, whatever you want to call it) think of it as if, there was no other person in the world, you as a human were given life, the ability of speech, you were given the ability of movement, as well as other abilities. Now you have the ability and Right to use those abilities in any way in which you see fit, because you exist and own your life (why would you exist to have those abilities if you were not to use them?). Now when you add another person into existence, you still have the same Rights to basically do whatever you want, but now that someone else is in existence, that means they have the exact same rights as well, but only as long as it doesn’t infringe on another individual’s rights. Whereas the argument “if I have the Right to do whatever I want, why don’t I have the Right to kill anyone I want or stop them from speaking?” Well they have the right to speak, and live, so your right to do what you want is nullified if it comes in conflict with another’s rights. In that scenario it is up to the individuals to engage in conflict resolution. This can be as simple as going each other’s separate ways and avoiding conflict altogether or something more complex such as a “contract”, that can be communicated to other individuals to prove the legitimacy of your “claim of agreement” which is only legitimate if all parties have agreed. This can prove your Rightfulness to use what would otherwise be unjustified acts, giving you a legitimate claim on remedying the dispute in a scenario where one does not fulfill the agreed upon terms. If you try to ignore this and decide to infringe on their rights instead, that’s where they have the right to self-defense. Individuals don’t have the right to initiate violence on another individual, but they do have the right to use violence to defend themselves and their Right’s. A big misunderstanding that causes much conflict, resulting in the infringement on individual Rights is the incomprehension that, you do not have the Right to things such as safety, such as forcing others to do things to make you or themselves safer, you only have the right to make yourself more safe!!!

Simply put you have the right to do whatever you want, as long as it does not infringe on another individual’s Rights. Rights are simple to understand, because by understanding the fundamentals of what a Right is, any individual can understand right from wrong. That is how law should be, simple. We don’t need law, all we need is to understand Rights, which helps to logically determine morals. That’s why every individual should judge every conflict with this perspective. Too many people don’t understand what Rights are or where they came from, most assume the state gives you Rights or the Constitution gives you Rights. That thinking has allowed the individuals who control the state, to create all kinds of immoral laws to control society and secure their position, because the social engineers think they have the right to manage us and control us, making us and everything their property. That’s why they promote ignorance and self degradation or why they don’t teach true rights, so they can manipulate and deceive people into voluntarily and involuntarily giving away all their rights to the state.

You have been duped into slavery/subjugation by a system that takes you at a very young age and conditions ignorance in your mind. Since the beginning of time man has been fighting and dying for their Rights. “Theft” is taking something that is the property of another individual without their consent. Since all the money you earn from working is the fruit of your labor, that is your property. How can you believe that it is morally acceptable for a group of people who call themselves government to threaten you with force, to demand you give them over half of your income, your property, to use in any way they see fit, even for things you don’t support? That is an infringement on the Rights of individuals and is slavery, so by supporting government you support slavery. If you disagree I challenge you to logically explain; at what percent of theft does it become slavery? I bet you would agree 100% is slavery, but what about 99%, 80%, most governments have over 50% “tax” (theft by another name) and many hidden taxes such as inflation. If your argument is “governments provides necessary utilities”, I’d counter with so do slave masters

This is so ridiculous it’s retarded!