Comment 78343

By Pattern (anonymous) | Posted June 11, 2012 at 22:53:05

Excellent points by Unindustrial.
Maybe it's time to take the charge and get a Supreme Court ruling on what trumps what: private property protection or freedom to visit your elected representatives office (ie. expression). (Doing this before Harper nominates the balance of the Court would be a good idea.)
I would suggest that if Mr. Sweet takes his position seriously, he should, first, explain to his landlord that there may be some inconvenience related to his tenancy (called the expression of democratic rights) and, second, if the landlord can't abide by that, find another more open space to conduct his business.
By way of comparison, check out what happened in Peterborough where Dean Del Maestro, the arbiter of all that's actually the truth, closed his office deeming protesters a threat to staff: http://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/2012/06/05/del-mastro-locks-doors-to-protestors-saturday
Seems to be a pattern here.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds