The article talks about a white guy who got away with the same crime, the Premier of Saskatchewan. Killed a mother when he failed to stop at a highway crossing. He had multiple charges for drunk driving before that and even fled the scene without helping the victim. He got a traffic ticket for it.
It's not 1997 anymore, I shouldn't have to tell you things have changed much in 25 years.
Scott Moe got off way too easy, but he wasn't a Premier at the time, or even in politics, so we can't really chalk it up to 'muh privilege'. I am disgusted with drunk drivers but if the powers that be don't enforce the law, you have to hold them accountable to apply the standards.
Not to mention it has nothing to do with the Humboldt guy. I am sure there are careless drivers who have had the book thrown at them, why not use those examples? Maybe a more recent incident, you know, after 1997? Nope, simply brought up for political reasons.
Whataboutism is a common tactic used by commies and leftists. They employ it when they do not have a coherent argument and instead say "look over here, injustice occurred, therefore we can allow more injustice" which is ridiculous when you think about it for more than a microsecond.
I am disgusted with drunk drivers but if the powers that be don't enforce the law, you have to hold them accountable to apply the standards.
So if the Humboldt Pajeet won't get deported and he stays in Canada (after serving his sentence), you won't be angry at him?
I am sure there are careless drivers who have had the book thrown at them, why not use those examples?
Because you made it only about white people. The Humboldt guy got the book thrown at him and he isn't white. So why do you make it about race? Simply for political reasons.
Whataboutism is a common tactic used by commies and leftists.
And playing victim telling people only white people are punished and immigrants get off free is a common tactic used by Nazis.
I don't know the guy, so why would I get angry at him? He doesn't get to choose whether he's deported or not. Personally if you are an immigrant and you commit a serious crime, deportation should always be considered.
I didn't make it about race, they did. They used the Scott Moe example to deflect. I simply made the observation.
-'Playing victim', lol strawman argument. If you don't understand that the left sees whites as demons and everyone else has helpless victims (and this rhetoric is increasing every year) then I would simply ask you to shake your head and take a look around. Guess who is in charge in Canada - you guessed it: lefties. Ignore this rhetoric at your own peril. I have extended family who have experienced this firsthand in Zimbabwe.
And 16 families would like to have their loved ones back.
Who am I kidding, Justine will push for this guy to stay, and Canadians will do nothing as usual.
e: the comments in the article seem to be Reddit-esque, with a few people commenting against everyone who is for deportation. Shills, paid shills everywhere.
As far as I can tell he hasn't fought a single part of the process this far. He wants to stay in Canada, after serving his sentenced debt to our society as deemed by our courts. Voicing the desire to stay is definitely not fighting it in my opinion.
It's hard to pull away from the heart wrenching part of the deaths involved. Looking at the whole picture, it seems to me, and not just based on this article alone, that it was all a terrible, terrible accident.
Translation: Laws only apply to whites.
The article talks about a white guy who got away with the same crime, the Premier of Saskatchewan. Killed a mother when he failed to stop at a highway crossing. He had multiple charges for drunk driving before that and even fled the scene without helping the victim. He got a traffic ticket for it.
A few things:
It's not 1997 anymore, I shouldn't have to tell you things have changed much in 25 years.
Scott Moe got off way too easy, but he wasn't a Premier at the time, or even in politics, so we can't really chalk it up to 'muh privilege'. I am disgusted with drunk drivers but if the powers that be don't enforce the law, you have to hold them accountable to apply the standards.
Not to mention it has nothing to do with the Humboldt guy. I am sure there are careless drivers who have had the book thrown at them, why not use those examples? Maybe a more recent incident, you know, after 1997? Nope, simply brought up for political reasons.
Whataboutism is a common tactic used by commies and leftists. They employ it when they do not have a coherent argument and instead say "look over here, injustice occurred, therefore we can allow more injustice" which is ridiculous when you think about it for more than a microsecond.
So if the Humboldt Pajeet won't get deported and he stays in Canada (after serving his sentence), you won't be angry at him?
Because you made it only about white people. The Humboldt guy got the book thrown at him and he isn't white. So why do you make it about race? Simply for political reasons.
And playing victim telling people only white people are punished and immigrants get off free is a common tactic used by Nazis.
I don't know the guy, so why would I get angry at him? He doesn't get to choose whether he's deported or not. Personally if you are an immigrant and you commit a serious crime, deportation should always be considered.
I didn't make it about race, they did. They used the Scott Moe example to deflect. I simply made the observation.
-'Playing victim', lol strawman argument. If you don't understand that the left sees whites as demons and everyone else has helpless victims (and this rhetoric is increasing every year) then I would simply ask you to shake your head and take a look around. Guess who is in charge in Canada - you guessed it: lefties. Ignore this rhetoric at your own peril. I have extended family who have experienced this firsthand in Zimbabwe.
So how does that fit with your "laws only applies to whites" comment, when Moe a white guy didn't get punished by the law for killing someone?
Seems like you only see white people as victims and anybody else as demons.
Ah yes, my apologies, I mean Southern Rhodesia :D
Different rules for different people at different times/ https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/drunk-driver-who-killed-family-of-4-moved-to-healing-lodge-after-serving-1-month-1.3300680?cache=esojovbbggirjp%3FautoPlay%3Dtrue%3FautoPlay%3Dtrue
Is he a white guy?
So you would also get away with killing a mother in a car accident (while having multiple charges of drunk driving)?
Is brutana_dilewski a racist for saying that the law only applies to whites?
Translation: he's staying,
And 16 families would like to have their loved ones back.
Who am I kidding, Justine will push for this guy to stay, and Canadians will do nothing as usual.
e: the comments in the article seem to be Reddit-esque, with a few people commenting against everyone who is for deportation. Shills, paid shills everywhere.
Deportation should be the least of this guys problems.
Killing him would be justice. Deporting him would be a mistake.
Absolute disgrace.
Scott Moe is doing great for Sask.
He stills belongs in prison for that.
As far as I can tell he hasn't fought a single part of the process this far. He wants to stay in Canada, after serving his sentenced debt to our society as deemed by our courts. Voicing the desire to stay is definitely not fighting it in my opinion.
It's hard to pull away from the heart wrenching part of the deaths involved. Looking at the whole picture, it seems to me, and not just based on this article alone, that it was all a terrible, terrible accident.
I'm just not sure the guy should be deported too.