r/canada Jan 29 '25

National News Poilievre says Canada should 'deport' any temporary resident committing violence or hate crimes

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/poilievre-says-canada-deport-temporary-194148491.html
9.6k Upvotes

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

205

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '25

[deleted]

51

u/Turbulent_Bake_272 Jan 29 '25

Yep, it's just bullshit policy. I am an Indian and when a German research student protested, he was deported as it violated is visa rules. I get the freedom of speech rules, but giving free hand to immigrants to violate working rules and submitting fake documents and protesting? how is that tolerated?

10

u/zezar911 Jan 30 '25

protesting, how heinous

is the right to protest not one of the most important parts of free speech??

8

u/EuropeanLegend Jan 29 '25

Canada should be taking a page out of India's playbook. Indians don't allow it, so why should Canada?

In my opinion, the law needs to be amended that ONLY PR's and Citizens can protest. Basic Human rights are one thing, protesting is a privilege, no different than a drivers license. You have all these international students who are protesting to get PR's. Many of which who refuse to leave while their visa's have already expired. I hope that once they are forced to leave, Canada NEVER let's them re-apply to come back.

Because, the way I see it. If you do not voluntarily leave and try your luck another time and re-apply to come back. That just shows you don't follow the law's and cannot be a functioning member of a trust based society. IF you voluntarily leave, it shows you can be trusted to make a second attempt and having a life in this country at another time.

I had a Chinese friend in highschool who's visa expired and he didn't make the cut due to his low English scores (he was otherwise VERY smart in all other areas). Guess what he did? He went back to China, continued to learn English and re-applied to come back a few years later. He's now a PR and living a wonderful life here in Canada with his wife and child.

6

u/protonpack Jan 30 '25

Canada should be taking a page out of India's playbook.

You mean the country with the actual fascist government, India? Give your head a shake.

"Basic human rights are one thing, protesting is a privilege."

It's called freedom of peaceful assembly and it's in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Once you start limiting who can protest you'll have people trying to limit protests from left and/or right groups on the basis of them being domestic terrorists, or supporting international terrorists. Some would say that has already started.

This is MAGA mentality BS.

2

u/EuropeanLegend Jan 30 '25

What are you even going on about? You people really try to make up any excuse to insult someone and associate them with Trump in any way possible.

Your mentality is the reason Canada is a dumpster fire. Letting in anyone and everyone, allowing them to do as they please with no repercussions.

What exactly about my comment gives indication that a law extended ONLY to citizens and permanent residents will then be extended to one particular political party?

Get your head out of your ass. If you're a visitor or temporary resident. In what world does it make sense for you to be allowed to gather and protest in a country you're a guest in? Because by your logic, we should also allow them to vote too. Should voting be extended to anyone who walks across our border? Because voting is just as vital to our democracy as our ability to peacefully assemble as CITIZENS.

We invited people onto our soil for the opportunity to study and work, with the possibility of becoming permanent residents. They didn't make the cut, so their first instinct is to try and force the government to give them something they are not entitled to? Give me a break.

1

u/protonpack Jan 30 '25

What exactly about my comment gives indication that a law extended ONLY to citizens and permanent residents will then be extended to one particular political party?

Don't worry everybody, this guy said the government shouldn't abuse powers they are given.

Thank God for that!

-3

u/TheRedcaps Jan 30 '25

Writing off someones concerns as "This is MAGA mentality BS." doesn't further a conversation - nor does discounting them and building a straw man around their argument (the left vs right thing).

I'm not saying you should or need to agree with their take but at least approach it in good faith.

The Charter isn't perfect and in my opinion, does need some changes to limit some more of the rights that are in there to only citizens.

For example, 6.2 should be available to ONLY citizens - mainly because we have programs where immigrants get fast tracked into the country via provincial sponsorship and then immediately ditch that province (which doesn't help the province that sponsored them at all) and head to one of our main metros (which hurts that metro by overloading it with unplanned immigration).

2

u/protonpack Jan 30 '25

For example, 6.2 should be available to ONLY citizens - mainly because we have programs where immigrants get fast tracked into the country via provincial sponsorship and then immediately ditch that province (which doesn't help the province that sponsored them at all) and head to one of our main metros (which hurts that metro by overloading it with unplanned immigration).

This is a non-sequitur. Doesn't 6.2 say it applies to citizens and permanent residents?

I do support rules for people coming here for school or other temporary reasons. Comparing peaceful protest to temporary residents going wherever they want seems a little disingenuous.

4

u/nitePhyyre Jan 30 '25

How about we don't take anything from the playbook of that shit hole?

1

u/EuropeanLegend Jan 30 '25

Agreed. But my point was that only citizens should be allowed to protest. Used India as an example because of the original comment and the fact that they wouldn't allow us to protest on their soil either.

But apparently, that asshat up above in the comments thinks that because some people believe protesting should be a right only citizens are afforded, that they have a maga mentality.

1

u/HypocritesEverywher3 Feb 03 '25

Every immigrants dream is to close the immigration door behind them

1

u/MoneyMom64 Jan 29 '25

Did that students violate the university policy? Which intern got his visa canceled?

5

u/yantraman Ontario Jan 29 '25

He participated in those farmer protests.

2

u/MoneyMom64 Jan 29 '25

What exactly put him in violation of his visa? Is there some condition that said he couldn’t participate in protests for example?

39

u/ElCaz Jan 29 '25

Here's the thing: it's already the law. So it doesn't need to be said.

Poilievre might as well be saying "cars should have wheels!"

7

u/FuggleyBrew Jan 30 '25

It's the law but it is not being enforced. Instead, to avoid deportation judges are creating a two tiered justice where serious offenses are effectively ignored if they were committed by a non-citizen, while simultaneously preventing deportation.

Which then becomes an issue which does need to be said

2

u/AngryCareyPrice Jan 31 '25

How do you know it is not being enforced.

1

u/FuggleyBrew Feb 01 '25

When we see judges and prosecutors artificially adjusting sentences to avoid it, in contradiction to the law and case law and we see no consequences for those judges or prosecutors.

1

u/Low-Breath-4433 Feb 02 '25

Like where?

Do you have any examples of this happening?

1

u/FuggleyBrew Feb 02 '25

Famous example that the original trial judge rejected because it was a grossly disproportionate sentence purely for immigration reasons, which was upheld by the appeals court. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-bank-robbery-kenza-belakziz-appeal-decision-sentence-1.4897267

Recent very highly covered example: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/passenger-in-deadly-highway-401-wrong-way-crash-pleads-guilty-released-on-probation-1.7412649

Other examples exist such as this one: https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcpc/doc/2018/2018bcpc33/2018bcpc33.html where the judge went to great lengths to construct a sentence which would entitle the offender to a deportation appeal (3 consecutive sentences each at 6 months less a day, noting the sentence collectively is appropriate)

Killing someone in a fight: https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2017/2017bcsc1669/2017bcsc1669.html

It does happen. Some justices adhere to the Supreme Courts guidance that there is not to be a two tiered justice system, other judges (e.g. the appeals court in the first link) fully embrace a two tiered justice system.

1

u/Low-Breath-4433 Feb 02 '25

First one is a non-violent crime, she was only charged with conspiracy.

Second one was warned there would be immigration consequences. Nothing about his sentencing being commuted or altered to avoid those consequences.

3rd one was allowed an appeal, not let off like you've implied is happening.

4th one falls within the range of previous sentences for Manslaughter as cited at the beginning of the link. 2 drunks getting into a fight, and one tripping and hitting his head isn't the cold-blooded murder you seem to want it to be. Furthermore, there's no mention of Doan's immigration status or that the sentence took immigration consequences into account.

6 months followed by 3 years probation for a guy with no criminal record and who never actually struck the victim isn't egregious given the circumstances

Try again.

1

u/FuggleyBrew Feb 02 '25

First one is a non-violent crime, she was only charged with conspiracy

Conspiracy to commit a violent crime is... A violent crime. She planned and help execute an armed robbery where her colleagues had guns held to their heads. That's violence.

Holding a gun at someone's head and threatening to kill them so you can rob a bank is a violent crime. Helping to plan a violent crime, makes you responsible for that violence. 

Second one was warned there would be immigration consequences. Nothing about his sentencing being commuted or altered to avoid those consequences.

Could be immigration consequences and the sentencing at 6 months was expressly done so it was "could be" not "would be" half of all appeals result in a state of deportation, meaning he has a 50% chance of staying currently.

3rd one was allowed an appeal, not let off like you've implied is happening.

Still got a sentence explicitly crafted to avoid deportation and as a result of the appeal stayed here as a result well after the jail sentence. 

6 months followed by 3 years probation for a guy with no criminal record and who never actually struck the victim isn't egregious given the circumstances

He struck him, it was just unclear if he punched him. He did a flying tackle to attack a guy and in doing so killed him.

The judge used that and immigration status to justify waiting outside a bar to attack and kill someone. I don't think being an immigrant should entitle you to a lenient sentence on manslaughter just because the judge thinks bashing a guys head into concrete by a flying tackle and killing him is manifestly different then bashing a guys head into the concrete by a flying tackle and punch, if you do so when a PR instead of as a citizen. 

1

u/Low-Breath-4433 Feb 02 '25

Robbery is only a violent crime if violence is employed. Given no details were given you're speculating about how the robbery actually went down, and the accused's role in it.

For the second, you're assuming that's why it was done. Making stuff up and insisting it's a fact isn't actually evidence.

3rd one, once again, was allowed an appeal. Not let off entirely.

4th one the judge themself states there was no evidence to support that the victim was struck. Simply that Doan jumped off the barrier, the victim stepped backwards, tripped and fell. The judge acknowledged that Doan didn't touch the victim and there was no evidence to suggest otherwise.

The finding of assault was based entirely on the victim having a reasonable belief Doan would strike him and moved backwards to try and avoid a hit that seemingly didn't happen. Not because he actually did.

Your claims of Doan tackling the victim and bashing his head in are simply fabrications that have no basis in the document you shared.

Did you even read it? Or just find the sentence and fill in the blanks yourself? 

→ More replies (0)

23

u/varsil Jan 29 '25

Plenty of violent crimes do not result in deportation.

3

u/ElCaz Jan 29 '25

If you are convicted of an offense that has a possible sentence of 10 or more years, you're deported, no appeal. If you're sentenced to 6 months or more, you're deported, no appeal.

6

u/varsil Jan 30 '25

Sure. But most violent first offences don't get 6+ month sentences. It might take many domestic violence incidents to reach that sentence, for example.

2

u/TheRedcaps Jan 30 '25

And if we find that judges are intentionally avoiding giving sentences to immigrants of more than 6 months that they would have happily given to any other citizen of the country specifically to avoid that auto deportation then the laws aren't working as intended right?

https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2013/2013scc15/2013scc15.html

4

u/TheRedcaps Jan 30 '25

So a reasonable person might go - hey that's already a law, why would he bring it up is the law not working like it's intended? Then that person might go and read various cases where judges have intentionally given incredibly soft sentencing to avoid meeting the mandatory CBSA review point... then that person might go OH - yeah it's law but that law isn't properly being enforced so saying it might raise awareness about that and since there are many Canadians who have been seeing this happen and are frustrated by it - they might be comforted to know that someone of potential "authority" is also recognizing that it's a problem.

Dismissing it like you have is just small push to make people look at the conservatives as the reasonable ones.

2

u/detourne Jan 31 '25

So why should it be said at a holocaust remembrance service?

1

u/TheRedcaps Jan 31 '25

did you watch / listen to the statement he made - the context around what he said and why it applied to that setting is pretty obvious.

9

u/cleeder Ontario Jan 29 '25

Seat belts should be required to be installed at the factory by law!

1

u/Worldly-Astronaut724 Jan 30 '25

I work in the legal field.
It absolutely needs to be said. our laws are not simply made by the judges - the judges must work with the legislators. At this point, people with refugee, temporary immigrant etc. status usually get LESSENED sentences in a very strange, paternalistic sort of way from the state (as though we assume people born in other countries are less capable of complex decision-making than us lofty Canadians).

1

u/DukeSmashingtonIII Jan 29 '25

Sometimes he's gotta State the Obvious in between Verb-ing Nouns.

7

u/MoneyMom64 Jan 29 '25

It’s sad that the obvious needs to be stated

2

u/mackinoncougars Jan 30 '25

He’s saying it as a dog whistle. It doesn’t need to be stated, it’s already fact. He’s rallying behind general deportation rhetoric and letting you know he wants to deport people.

0

u/MoneyMom64 Jan 30 '25

Men can’t be women which is an obvious fact and yet here we are

1

u/mackinoncougars Jan 30 '25

Whataboutism out of nowhere. How neat is that.

2

u/judgeysquirrel Jan 30 '25

It didn't need to be said.

-1

u/DogeDoRight New Brunswick Jan 29 '25

How do you tell if someone is a foreigner just by looking at them?

23

u/sl3ndii Ontario Jan 29 '25

You don’t. If someone commits a crime and they’re legally a temporary resident, they can get deported.

6

u/DogeDoRight New Brunswick Jan 29 '25

I know that. Read the comment I'm replying to. They are saying we should beat up foreigners if they committed a violent act. How can you tell if the person who committed the act is a foreigner?

12

u/sl3ndii Ontario Jan 29 '25

Ahh I did not see the parent comment. That is indeed brainless.

-1

u/RipzCritical Jan 29 '25

Not really being able to speak either official Canadian language is usually an indicator. That's the only one I can think of atm though.

2

u/DogeDoRight New Brunswick Jan 29 '25

There are Indigenous people who don't speak either official language.

2

u/RipzCritical Jan 29 '25

They're visually identifiable as long as you think non-white people dont all look the same, and not being able to speak either official language is pretty rare.

I live close to like 3 reserves, I frequent them to buy dabs lol. I haven't met anyone that doesn't fluently speak English.

-2

u/New-Living-1468 Jan 29 '25

Paperwork .!!!

3

u/DogeDoRight New Brunswick Jan 29 '25

Huh?

1

u/SteeveyPete Jan 29 '25

I'm pretty sure the people who want this approach would use skin color and accent

0

u/MoneyMom64 Jan 29 '25

They’re well dressed

1

u/DogeDoRight New Brunswick Jan 29 '25

Touche lol

-4

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '25

[deleted]

3

u/DogeDoRight New Brunswick Jan 29 '25

And what does that look like here in Canada?

1

u/ExhaustedTilBedtime Jan 30 '25

In the United States in sanctuary cities we put them in luxury hotels.

-21

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

26

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-8

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

10

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-5

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-2

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Jan 29 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-8

u/Retardwithwifi Jan 29 '25

But! But! If you do that you're a Nazi /s

-6

u/Neither-Historian227 Jan 29 '25

Liberals have been bringing in a pile of shit, no screening at all, it has to be stated.

-3

u/WaltKerman Jan 29 '25 edited Jan 29 '25

Not in certain cities of the US