450 THE ADVOCATE
VOL. 79 PART 3 MAY 2021
No, the public is not safe from
gangsters and criminals who kill
their prey in sprays of bullets.
They may be targeting a rival, but
they are not target shooters. If they
are known to the police, why are
they not apprehended and charged?
Your editorial got it exactly right.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
James Garrett-Rempel
Retired member
Dear Editor,
Re: “Entre Nous”
(2021) 79 Advocate 169
I was saddened to read the editorial
in the latest edition of the Advocate.
Do Canada’s law schools no
longer teach the basic principles
on which the rule of law rests and
by which we are supposed to practise?
May the Advocate no longer
publish controversial articles for
fear of losing its funding?
The answer to those who seek to
muzzle the Advocate lies in s. 2(b)
of the Canadian Charter of Rights
and Freedoms:
2. Everyone has the following
fundamental freedoms:
… (b) freedom of
thought, belief, opinion
and expression, including
freedom of the press and
other media of communication.
These are not new concepts.
Voltaire, that 18th century French
philosopher, playwright and general
intellectual busybody, is reputed
to have said, “I disapprove of
what you say, but I will defend to
the death your right to say it.”
Yours faithfully,
David Roberts, Q.C.
Vancouver
Dear Editor,
Re: “Entre Nous”
(2021) 79 Advocate 169
Thank you for the recent “Entre
Nous”.
Regardless of what side of the
issue is taken by members at all, I
congratulate you for trying to
uphold what journalism should
strive to do.
Steven Cope
Fort St. John
Dear Sir/Madam/Mix/Whomever,
Re: “Entre Nous”
(2021) 79 Advocate 169
I write to express my sympathies
for the position the pronoun
police have put the Advocate in.
I believe the core problem here
is that undue influence, to coin a
phrase, is being put on you by
advocates of both sides of the
debate.
Many of us (myself included)
line up staunchly on one side of
the debate to the complete exclusion
of other. But this is not the
point.