46 (1) Every one commits high treason who, in Canada,
(a) kills or attempts to kill Her Majesty, or does her any bodily harm tending to death or destruction, maims or wounds her, or imprisons or restrains her;
(b) levies war against Canada or does any act preparatory thereto; or
(a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;
(b) without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada;
(d) forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; or
(e) conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) or forms an intention to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) and manifests that intention by an overt act.
(a) kills or attempts to kill Her Majesty, or does her any bodily harm tending to death or destruction, maims or wounds her, or imprisons or restrains her;
Not really, or at least not entirely. Here’s a link that goes into some detail. It basically comes down to: referendums are fine and legal; secession has to be agreed to by the area leaving and the country as a whole; and subgroups of the region seceeding likely have the option to not seceed depending on their legal status. The Supreme Court has already determined that unilateral declarations of independence are unconstitutional in Canada, and I suspect the notwithstanding clause won’t apply, either.
I ask because even the most left leaning of you all keep making light of this shit and it’s actually driving me crazy. I have American coworkers making 51st state jokes and it’s actually making me hate all of you
So Charles is fair game?
I was going to comment something similar. The law is still worded as “her majesty” when we now have a male monarch?
Do yourself a favor and execute your traitors before they become president
fr. look at your neighbors down south and ask yourselves if this is what you want. pro-tip: you fuckin’ don’t
I absolutely agree. I was just joking about the specific verbiage in that law because it was written for Elizabeth.
deleted by creator
Does separation (possibly via a referendum) fall into any of these cases?
Not really, or at least not entirely. Here’s a link that goes into some detail. It basically comes down to: referendums are fine and legal; secession has to be agreed to by the area leaving and the country as a whole; and subgroups of the region seceeding likely have the option to not seceed depending on their legal status. The Supreme Court has already determined that unilateral declarations of independence are unconstitutional in Canada, and I suspect the notwithstanding clause won’t apply, either.
So… not treason?
Whatever the legal definition, this guy should go straight to Yale
How is this not treason? Are you American?
I ask because even the most left leaning of you all keep making light of this shit and it’s actually driving me crazy. I have American coworkers making 51st state jokes and it’s actually making me hate all of you
Did you read the definition of treason? I don’t see where they intersect