Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28
  1. #21
    Senior Member RangeBob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    47,186
    Quote Originally Posted by Big-Boss-Man View Post
    thanks RB your post shows people how important the interview was.




    [for discussion]

    Quote Originally Posted by 45ACPKING
    I really like this line from the above sections

    magna carta. King John was a nasty guy. Took away property rights, denied people the right to hunt, took away their weapons because they felt they needed to keep the peasantry in as poor a condition as possible so that they could be a dictatorship. Overtaxing the barons. Women who became widows were forced to marry men that the king wanted. So there was a civil war. King lost. Magna Carta section 8 can't force women to marry. Protect commerce, no over-taxation, taxes have to go through parliament first. Section 61, if the king or barons overstepped, then everyone had the right to pick up arms and go back to a civil war, and put the king and any baron that agrees with the king in their place.
    There's two questions.
    1) what was the English law in 1867 (BNA Act)?
    2) Even if it was the law, and thus the Canadian Constitution, is it today?




    [some stuff from australia]

    Historic record shows that Clause 61 of the 1215 Magna Carta was repealed within months of it’s establishment, and therefore not included into subsequent charters.
    -- https://freemandelusion.wordpress.co...ill-of-rights/

    That's not quite right.
    It was repealed, and then there was another civil war.
    9-year-old King Henry III reissued the Magna Carta, removing section 61.

    Under what historians later labelled "clause 61", or the "security clause", a council of 25 barons would be created to monitor and ensure John's future adherence to the charter.[42] If John did not conform to the charter within 40 days of being notified of a transgression by the council, the 25 barons were empowered by clause 61 to seize John's castles and lands until, in their judgement, amends had been made.[43] Men were to be compelled to swear an oath to assist the council in controlling the King, but once redress had been made for any breaches, the King would continue to rule as before. In one sense this was not unprecedented; other kings had previously conceded the right of individual resistance to their subjects if the King did not uphold his obligations. Magna Carta was however novel in that it set up a formally recognised means of collectively coercing the King.[44] The historian Wilfred Warren argues that it was almost inevitable that the clause would result in civil war, as it "was crude in its methods and disturbing in its implications".[45] The barons were trying to force John to keep to the charter, but clause 61 was so heavily weighted against the King that this version of the charter could not survive.[43]

    John and the rebel barons did not trust each other, and neither side seriously attempted to implement the peace accord.[42][46] The 25 barons selected for the new council were all rebels, chosen by the more extremist barons, and many among the rebels found excuses to keep their forces mobilised.[47][48][49] Disputes began to emerge between the royalist faction and those rebels who had expected the charter to return lands that had been confiscated .[50]

    Clause 61 of Magna Carta contained a commitment from John that he would "seek to obtain nothing from anyone, in our own person or through someone else, whereby any of these grants or liberties may be revoked or diminished".[51][52] Despite this, the King appealed to Pope Innocent for help in July, arguing that the charter compromised the Pope's rights as John's feudal lord.[53][50] As part of the June peace deal, the barons were supposed to surrender London by 15 August, but this they refused to do.[54] Meanwhile, instructions from the Pope arrived in August, written before the peace accord, with the result that papal commissioners excommunicated the rebel barons and suspended Langton from office in early September.[55] Once aware of the charter, the Pope responded in detail: in a letter dated 24 August and arriving in late September, he declared the charter to be "not only shameful and demeaning but also illegal and unjust" since John had been "forced to accept" it, and accordingly the charter was "null, and void of all validity for ever"; under threat of excommunication, the King was not to observe the charter, nor the barons try to enforce it.[56][50][57][54]

    By then, violence had broken out between the two sides; less than three months after it had been agreed, John and the loyalist barons firmly repudiated the failed charter: the First Barons' War erupted.[58][59][50] The rebel barons concluded that peace with John was impossible, and turned to Philip II's son, the future Louis VIII, for help, offering him the English throne.[60][50][e] The war soon settled into a stalemate. The King became ill and died on the night of 18 October 1216, leaving the nine-year-old Henry III as his heir.

    Although the Charter of 1215 was a failure as a peace treaty, it was resurrected under the new government of the young Henry III as a way of drawing support away from the rebel faction.
    ...
    Henry's government encouraged the rebel barons to come back to his cause in exchange for the return of their lands, and reissued a version of the 1215 Charter, albeit having first removed some of the clauses, including those unfavourable to the Papacy and clause 61, which had set up the council of barons.
    ...
    In 1621, a bill was presented to Parliament to renew Magna Carta; although this bill failed, lawyer John Selden argued during Darnell's Case in 1627 that the right of habeas corpus was backed by Magna Carta.[177][178] Coke supported the Petition of Right in 1628, which cited Magna Carta in its preamble, attempting to extend the provisions, and to make them binding on the judiciary.[179][180] The monarchy responded by arguing that the historical legal situation was much less clear-cut than was being claimed, restricted the activities of antiquarians, arrested Coke for treason
    ...
    Sir William Blackstone published a critical edition of the 1215 Charter in 1759, and gave it the numbering system still used today.[199] In 1763, Member of Parliament John Wilkes was arrested for writing an inflammatory pamphlet, No. 45, 23 April 1763; he cited Magna Carta continually.[200] Lord Camden denounced the treatment of Wilkes as a contravention of Magna Carta.[201] Thomas Paine, in his Rights of Man, would disregard Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights on the grounds that they were not a written constitution devised by elected representatives.
    ...
    In 1638, Maryland sought to recognise Magna Carta as part of the law of the province, but the request was denied by Charles I.
    ...
    In the late 18th century, the United States Constitution became the supreme law of the land, recalling the manner in which Magna Carta had come to be regarded as fundamental law.[210] The Constitution's Fifth Amendment guarantees that "no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law", a phrase that was derived from Magna Carta.[211] In addition, the Constitution included a similar writ in the Suspension Clause, Article 1, Section 9: "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it."
    ...
    in the 19th century clauses which were obsolete or had been superseded began to be repealed. The repeal of clause 36 in 1829, by the Offences against the Person Act 1828 (9 Geo. 4 c. 31 s. 1),[229] was the first time a clause of Magna Carta was repealed. Over the next 140 years, nearly the whole of Magna Carta (1297) as statute was repealed,[230] leaving just clauses 1, 9, and 29 still in force (in England and Wales) after 1969.

    -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Carta

    Only chapter 29 of the 1297 Magna Carta remains unrepealed in Australian law.
    -- https://freemandelusion.wordpress.co...ill-of-rights/

    “The contention that a law of the Commonwealth is invalid because it is not in conformity with Magna Carta is not one of serious refutation.”
    -- Australia, Griffiths CJ in Chia Gee v Martin (1905) 3 CLR 649 at 653:

    “The validity of laws enacted by the Commonwealth Parliament falls to be determined by reference to the proper construction of the Australian Constitution. It is not open to base an argument for validity by reference to alleged inconsistencies between laws of the Commonwealth and either Magna carta or the Bill of Rights.”
    -- Australia, Wilson J. Re Cusack (1980) 60 ALJR 302

    “The supremacy of Parliament to make laws contrary to what had been the Common Law is expressly recognised by the Courts.
    ...
    champion of the Common Law, Chief Justice Coke, had in his Institute of the Laws of England in the early 17th century accepted that Magna Carta could be altered by English Parliament. Indeed he referred to Bills of Attainder which allowed for trial contrary to Magna Carta as being lawful enactments.
    -- Australia, Carnes v Essenberg [1999] QCA 339

    I understand that and persons who have not had full legal training often think of Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights as fundamental documents which control governments, but they do not. After all, Magna Carta was the result of an agreement between the barons and King John and the barons themselves had their own courts, had their own armies, they, in effect, levied what we would call taxes today and they were concerned to protect themselves against the growth of the central power of the royal government, the central government, and that is how Magna Carta came into existence, but modern Parliament did not arise until late in the 17th century and the early struggle was between the King and the barons. We are dealing now with the question of the legislature. I mean, Parliament established its authority over the monarch after the struggles which led to the execution of Charles I and the flight from the kingdom of James II in 1688. But Parliament – some people would regard it as regrettable – can, in effect, do what it likes. As it is said, some authorities could legislate to have every blue-eyed baby killed if it wanted to.”
    -- Australia, McHUGH J, Essenberg v The Queen [2000] HCATrans 297: 7

    “In earlier times many learned lawyers seem to have believed that an Act of Parliament could be disregarded insofar as it was contrary to the law of God or the law of nature or natural justice, but since the supremacy of parliament was finally demonstrated by the Revolution of 1688 any such idea has become obsolete”
    -- Australia, Gargan v Director of Public Prosecutions and anor [2004] NSWSC 10: 8

    above quotes from
    https://freemandelusion.wordpress.co...ill-of-rights/

  2. #22
    Senior Member Doug_M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Nova Scotia
    Posts
    12,520
    Quote Originally Posted by Big-Boss-Man View Post
    thanks RB your post shows people how important the interview was.
    And shows those nay-sayers that we do indeed have a right to arms, it's just been suppressed.
    Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times [#uc# you CCP!]

  3. The Following 4 Users Like This Post By Doug_M

    3MTA3 (06-05-2020), Big-Boss-Man (06-06-2020), Billythreefeathers (06-06-2020), stevebc (06-05-2020)

  4. #23
    Canadian ForcesMember Billythreefeathers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Vesper Sask
    Posts
    12,687
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug_M View Post
    And shows those nay-sayers that we do indeed have a right to arms, it's just been suppressed.
    dis aliment through a liberal education system
    CSSA

  5. The Following User Liked This Post By Billythreefeathers

    Lee Enfield (06-06-2020)

  6. #24
    Senior Member CLW .45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    3,387
    Quote Originally Posted by Billythreefeathers View Post
    if a simple layman as myself can read this and understand that it is UN CONSATUTINAL why cant the liberal justass minister

    we're just not buying it,,,
    He doesnít care!
    To show that men can travel to the moon and return, use the American experience.

    To show that public safety isnít hurt by responsible individuals carrying to protect life, use the American experience.

  7. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    595
    Quote Originally Posted by CLW .45 View Post
    He doesn’t care!
    bingo

    laws are what they say they are, and rights are what you are granted

    privileges
    a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group.
    see we have rights.

  8. #26
    Senior Member RangeBob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    47,186
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug_M View Post
    And shows those nay-sayers that we do indeed have a right to arms, it's just been suppressed.
    The Quashed Right.

  9. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    595
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug_M View Post
    And shows those nay-sayers that we do indeed have a right to arms, it's just been suppressed.
    I wish I could get my hunting rifle "suppressed"

  10. The Following 2 Users Like This Post By Big-Boss-Man

    awndray (06-07-2020), Doug_M (06-07-2020)

  11. #28
    Senior Member CLW .45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    3,387
    Quote Originally Posted by Big-Boss-Man View Post
    I wish I could get my hunting rifle "suppressed"
    If you are one of those who intends to keep it after it is banned, you will certainly be able to get it suppressed.
    To show that men can travel to the moon and return, use the American experience.

    To show that public safety isnít hurt by responsible individuals carrying to protect life, use the American experience.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •