Robbins SCE Research
Home| British Columbia Polls| Canada Polls| US & the World Polls| Contact| Register| Search| Donate
ROBBINS REASONS-BCer's take Cops over Courts
  Feb 22, 2007

Methodology-This is a random telephone sample of 525 British Columbians in the lower mainland of the Province conducted between February 21 to 23, 2007. This poll features a margin of error of between 4.5%, 19 times out of 20 @97% competency/confidence. This poll has been paid for by Jim Van Rassel, proprietor of New Trend Optical, (604) 942-9300, (604) 328-5398

Question #1
Two government institutions are available to investigate sexual harassment complaints, the R.C.M.P. and Police, and BC Human Rights Tribunals. Of these two, whose findings and determinations would you trust more?
RCMP and Police    76 %
BC Human Rights Tribunal    24 %
Question #2
On Vancouver’s waterfront Longshoreman who enter administrative buildings where predominantly female employees are working, are permitted to look directly at any female employee for no more than three seconds, or they are potentially liable to a sexual harassment complaint. Is this BC Human Rights Convention a fair one?
Yes    03 %
No    97 %
Question #3
A UBC Professor entertains a mature student from his class at his home including a romantic dinner with wine. In your opinion is this sexual harassment?
Yes    31 %
No    69 %
Question #4
-It is a generally accepted principle of Human Rights Groups in British Columbia that only men sexually harass women in the workplace. Do you accept this principle as most likely to be true?
Yes    19 %
No    81 %
Question #5
A local elected official is investigated by the BC Human Rights Tribunal for sexual harassment. Should he/she resign from his/her elected job?
Yes    23 %
No    77 %
Question #6
A local elected official is being investigated by police for criminal sexual harassment. Should the elected official resign?
Yes    23 %
No    77 %
Question #7
A local elected official is charged by police for criminal sexual harassment. Should the elected official resign?
Yes    64 %
No    36 %
Question #8
Which of the following statements BEST describes your overall impression of sexual harassment laws in British Columbia?
They are likely overstated and often subject to abuse    53 %
They are necessary    47 %
Question #9
The former federal Liberal government directed approximately 1 million dollars in research monies to Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, B.C., to fund a study following the brutal beating death of Reena Virk in Victoria, B.C., by her peers including a young woman named Kelly Allard who was later convicted of the crime. The study in part would determine outcomes relating to rising teenage bullying among young woman. The study concluded that this type of activity is indicative of a rise in aggression among young woman. In your opinion is an assault by one woman against another person indicative of?
aggressive behaviour    32 %
violent behaviour    68 %
Commentary
ROBBINS REASONS Observations: Respondents in this poll trust decisions of investigations by RCMP and Police 3 to 1 over the investigations of so-called ‘quasi’ courts.
The current ‘staring’ convention of BC Human Rights Code is seen as “ridiculous” by respondents.
A majority of the BC public does not believe that UBC Professor ought to have been convicted of sexual harassment. Most respondents pointed to the age of the woman who complained against him.
The accepted notion by social engineers {who dream this stuff up}, that only men sexually harass women in the workplace is seen as “rubbish” by respondents. In fact of the minority of respondents who accept as true, more men than women believe that men are the more likely culprits.
Our elected official in question should not resign at the investigative stage of either a Human Rights Tribunal complaint, or a criminal one. If a criminal charge is laid then a majority of respondents expect a resignation.
Despite a lack of confidence in Human Rights Tribunals, respondents are split on whether sexual harassment laws are necessary.
A majority of respondents are of the opinion that the moment you strike another person or invoke some physical attack where pain or injury occurs, you are violent. Women and men equally agree that violence is violence no matter the gender performing the violent act. Only a handful of respondents queried the difference between our term used “assault” as opposed to “criminal assault”.
Commentary: The BC Attorney General’s Office oversees more lawyers and other social engineering ‘kooks’ than society will ever require. The BC Human Rights Tribunal houses many of these ‘kooks’ (reference: Former BC Attorney General Geoff Plant) who advocate and preside over every conceivably stupid complaint imaginable. There really isn’t a need for a Human Rights Tribunal. There is little due process; outcomes are public, so why not use the regular courts? Respondents in this poll believe the RCMP and police over the BC Human Rights Tribunal.
The trouble (what’s new?) is with lawyers. One half of their incomes (or close to it) comes from easy money from personal injury, and because large firms don’t want to pay proper wages to articled students (but want to charge clients exorbitant amounts for work the articled students perform), and there isn’t enough real legal work to supply the torrent of new lawyers flooding society, they need to devise new areas of work under Trudeau/Charter administrative law to fill up the cascade of new lawyers dockets. Whether or not this work is necessary or is even beneficial is doubtful. Also, even the Canadian Bar Association is concerned with the lack of pro bono work conducted by lawyers. AT ROBBINS, we’re not buying. Neither are British Columbians. Remember all these taxpayer paid for ‘kook’s are appointed to positions, not elected. (Oh Bill G. I can equate tax cuts to BC Hydro rate increases because both are instituted by a government body-let’s try to be more honest in these discussions please).
Since 1982 however the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (really about 1992) has probably encumbered and enslaved more Canadians than it has ever emancipated. Considered sacred amongst the legal crowd, this document though (only perhaps) well intended has had only disastrous consequences for our rights and freedoms.
Under Trudeau’s administrative law did you know that a mid level bureaucrat can issue garnishment Orders of 10’s of thousands of dollars without ANY Notice? A small business owner can wake up the next morning to find that his bank accounts have been raided. How do you make payroll? How do you pay your bills? If you don’t negotiate with the ‘legislated mafia’ or take weeks to get in front of a judge, too bad. Yet the nuts at the Supreme Court of Canada want to make sure suspected terrorists get all of their rights, or multiple rapists get theirs? Nice country Canada!
Who is more important to Canadian society, a small business owner or a lawyer or government worker or bureaucrat? One creates the tax base, the other spends it!
Did you know that a lawyer can file a Small Claims lawsuit against a defendant; tick a box on the form alleging a debt is owed and that is sufficient to obtain an Order to garnish the amount sought in the lawsuit from each an every bank account of the defendant? Big and small business has been extorted by these sick laws developed under the BC NDP and ex BC Attorney General and rising ‘young and restless’ star {see hospital scene} Ujjal Dosanjh, and kept by the provincial Liberals Geoff Plant and now Walter Oppal.
Any wonder Liberals don’t want law abiding Canadians to have firearms?
One of the main culprits behind BC’s current ‘perverted’ BC Human Rights Code, former BC Human Rights Commissioner, Mary Woo-Sims, an openly gay activist believed that alleged ‘staring’ at a woman or in the general direction of a woman must constitute sexual harassment. She also championed the only men can harass women in the workplace ‘craze’. One might reasonably ask, how a lesbian person would possibly understand the nuances of sexual interaction between heterosexual people even if we ignore long accepted psychological beliefs that gay woman ultimately have underlying issues with their fathers.
Gay people represent (arguably) 4% of the population, with all due respect how can a gay person possibly have empathy or understand the experiences of heterosexual persons particular as this relates to matters of sexuality. Certainly a person’s sexual orientation has to be considered when selecting Judges. A Judge has to consider all aspects of society and on balance a heterosexual Judge will be able to administer Reasons for most of society, whereas a homosexual Judge cannot possibly be expected to perform this function as fairly. Laws are mere words, they are meant to be applied to people in society, not in the abstract. If the latter were the case we should all be expected to follow the Bible or other religious readings literally. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the Bible to people who love the law.
If the courts stuck to ensuring the safety of Canadians including the gays that are beaten and pummeled by sick criminals, rather then social engineering our democratic freedoms away, this country would be a much better one. The BC Human Rights Commission and BC Human Rights Tribunal and the hundreds of men and businesses that were ‘tortured’ by these ‘crazed ideologues’ under the BC NDP, Glen Clark, and ‘rising soap star’ Ujjal Dosanjh is enough to make any reasonable person say “No” to an NDP government, (until that is we look at the provincial Liberal government). Yikes!
Respondents are becoming more and more cynical about problems that befall elected officials. Many see these as political. If the BC Human Rights Tribunal finds its way into an investigation of a political person, the respondents are more than suspicious. Even a police investigation does not provide absolute comfort, but most respondents believe that the vetting process with the police is far better than with the kooks at the BC Human Rights Tribunal. {Credibility might be lost when Sex change Shirley needs to get a government funded penis}.
Like the courts and government, academia is seen as another part of the problem in society. Many respondents in this ROBBINS poll found the outcome of the study to be “preposterous”. Politicians love to use curriculum vitaes and taxpayers money to fund studies which often accommodate outcomes that invariably prove nothing new (the study in this question followed a similar one under former Prime Minister Mulroney}, or in the alternative make conclusions that most right thinking individuals would classify as asinine. This helps them stall for time between elections or to get results they need politically. Academics don’t mind, because so many of them would write virtually anything to ensure grant monies were made available.
If a man strikes a person he should be charged with assault because he is violent. If a woman strikes a person she should be charged with assault because she is violent. The ROBBINS jury has common sense over these issues, only idiotic social engineers and ‘grey area’ Liberal proponents are willing to prostitute their integrity and our money with such bizarre findings as they so often do. We’ve been deluding ourselves on domestic abuse for decades, time to be totally accountable.
Left to its own devices the BC Attorney Generals Office has proven to be a place where dangerous ideas about justice are (too often) married with social engineers and other ‘kooks’ (Ref: former BC Attorney General Geoff Plant). The Attorney General’s Office should not be political, but should be overseen by the Solicitor General’s Office. This ROBBINS poll goes some distance to proving the public would likely accept this as well.

Home| British Columbia Polls| Canada Polls| US and the World Polls| Contact| Register| Search| Site Map
Copyright Robbins SCE Research Inc. ©2017