They Took All The Rights, Put 'Em In A Rights Museum

ssoooo...that means I can visit these 'judges' homes and wear golf shoes on their hardwood floors ?

Well, if you are looking for the silver lining in the cloud, you could say that these evil rights tribunals certainly draw out the losers are in society. Mr. Hiking Boots is an ass.

There are some stores in BC that will refuse to serve a customer if they are wearing Hells Angles colours. How long do you think it will be before a Hells Angle takes the matter to a tribunal.

In the end you can boil it down to one simple problem: today we have *far* too much government in our lives, and for all the government we have it does not work very well.

Is there no way we can be rid of these ridiculous patronage appointments who are telling all of us how to live - of course, by their standards. They are generally lifetime political people who have never made their own way in life but who live on the public teat. Barbara Hall is the quintessential Human Rights person. She has moved from one government job to another and one patronage appointment to another. I would like to see her try to earn a living in the real world, not working in some sort of social services position. It would be an eye-opening event for her and others who sit on these disgraceful boards punishing people for imagined slights and for having a different mind set than them. I cannot understand how they are even legal.

His physiotherapist told him he could continue to do lunges as long as he wore hiking boots. Which brings up the point--why not do his lunges while he's...well...hiking? Or outdoors? Or in his own living room?

Sounds like both parties are being asses here. The complainant was wearing the hiking boots for a particular exercise on the advice of a medical practitioner. The gym should have made an attempt to meet his needs. Kind of like how service dogs are permitted in places that normally have a "no dogs" policy.

But, in taking the gym to the HRC, the complainant made an ass of himself. Seems to me that small claims court would be a much more appropriate venue for a dispute of this nature.

Bemused nails it.

If I were the gym I could have thought of a better use for those hiking boots

rest easy though..the warriors for 'rights' never sleep...they just won't fight for yours.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/05/23/amnesty-international-george-bush-canada_n_1541054.html

OTTAWA – Canada’s failure to arrest former U.S. president George W. Bush during a visit to B.C. is cited by Amnesty International in its annual report on human rights atrocities around the globe.

...Canada’s record of alleged human rights violations pales in comparison to the litany of torture, mass executions, and violent suppression of protests cited against countries like Syria and Uganda.

But Amnesty Canada spokesperson John Tackaberry says the organization makes no attempt to rate the magnitude or seriousness of human rights abuses among the 155 nations listed in the 2012 report.

...And it says a proposed crackdown on refugee claimants who arrive en masse, employing the services of human smugglers, violate "international norms" for the treatment of asylum seekers.

Yeah,the gym could have accommodated the guy,if he showed a Doctor's letter proving his case, would have saved everyone a lot of trouble.

Now,what authority does the HRC have to enforce the fine? Anyone know?

We non-HRC users should be ever diligent to seek out rights violations by governments and organizations we disagree with,and use their own methods against them.

"IF he did lunges at the gym" the man was supposed to wear hiking boots to support his arthritic toes.

Brings forward the questions: Could he not do lunges elsewhere? And...are there not equally good exercises to strengthen the quads and hamstrings which do not require lunging? Did the fellow offer to wear gym shoes for everything else but only put the boots on for lunges? I'm imagining the treadmill bed after being stomped on by vibram-soled, steel-shanked boots.

If the client had athlete's foot and wasn't supposed to wear closed shoes, would the gym have been asked to relax their sandals policy? Accommodation should go both ways. He could have accommodated to the gym's policy too without compromising his exercise routine.

I'm finding it hard to equate "service dogs" with "service boots".

How could someone who goes to an HRC have any dignity to lose?

On the same page, there is a link to a case that was actually dismissed by the BC Tribunal--but only after 4 years and over $100,000 in legal fees. http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/08/b-c-human-rights-tribunal-dismisses-discrimination-complaint-against-downtown-ambassadors/

The charge (against the Downtown Ambassadors who wear red jackets and caps, provide directions to tourists and address “‘quality of life’ issues such as panhandling, litter, theft, illegal vending, and graffiti, was first levied four years ago by the Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users (VANDU) and Pivot Legal Society.

Ultimately, the case against the DVBIA fell apart because Pivot was unable to recruit enough homeless or mentally ill people to act as witnesses.

The whole story has little to do with boots. Someone hurt his feelings and in Canada that's a punishable offense.

Yeah,the gym could have accommodated the guy,if he showed a Doctor's letter proving his case, would have saved everyone a lot of trouble.
Posted by: dmorris at May 24, 2012 12:20 PM
-------------------------------------------------

How about the time wasting potential of gym employees who have to explain to other users why this particular guy is permitted to do what they can't?

"The whole story has little to do with boots. Someone hurt his feelings and in Canada that's a punishable offense."

In a nutshell, I'd say!

The "old" saying still applies.

Fire. Them. All.

right own, I have an old pair of spikes I've been dying to try at the gym...

Pretty sure the key word here would be dying after the maintenance guy got done with me!

What are lunges??

For all those who are suggesting the gyn 'could have made an exception', note the following from the article:

He says his footwear hasn’t been a problem at other gyms.

This 'accomodation' crap sticks in my craw. Why couldn't the complainant accomodate the gym, and go elsewhere?

Grandad, a lunge is where you hold a barbell on your shoulder, and take a big step foreward, then step back again.

It's a cold rainy day here in Calgary, think I'll lace up my size 11 work boots and head over to Curves to self-identify as a arthritic lesbian of colour.

Should be worth at least 5k.

You should Syncrodox, just to show the utter hypocrisy via wimmen's rights as opposed to no rights for white men. I hate everything those fake human rights stand for.

The gym should have said "Ok you're allowed, but there's a $200/month fee for use of boots in the gym".

That would have solved the issue right then and there.

The gym doesn't have to accomodate anyone. It's a private business. The BC HRC is a fascist organization.

Ezra Levants book says it all by Title. Shakedown.
Its easy money by cons against anyone they think they can score off of. Just look at the people running them.

GOOD GAWD.

What next? No naked swimming in the public pool because wearing a swimsuit is destructive to my dignity?

BC HRC (sic): FIRE. THEM. ALL.

Virtually every gym in which I've worked out has a policy against outdoor footwear because the dirt and grit tracked in are a real nuisance when you're down on the floor trying to do crunches or or other groundwork.
If this thing were supposed to go to any court, it should have been a small claims court wherein the client could have asked for a pro rated refund for the time remaining on his membership because he was unaware that the gym wouldn't accommodate his "need" at the time he purchased that membership. He could then apply the money to a membership at another gym that would accommodate him.
"Human Rights" tribunals seem viscerally incapable of dealing with the idea that some people should simply have nothing to do with each other -- what used to be called, "Live and let live."

"There are some stores in BC that will refuse to serve a customer if they are wearing Hells Angles colours. How long do you think it will be before a Hells Angle takes the matter to a tribunal." (TJ)

When hell freezes over?
Just can't picture that, somehow...:)

No wonder the Muslims see us as weak kneed weenies that roll over to any threat. When unelected bureaucrats re-define logic and common sense and the victims of this star chamber simply accept a judgement against hurt feelings and actually agree to pay for this kangaroo courts ruling, our real enemies must wonder if Allah has already paved the way for Islamic take over. I can just hear new Muslim immigrants........they cannot ride bicycles without helmets ?, lawn darts are too dangerous ?, they panic at second hand smoke ? the biggest problem they face is obesity ?, their human rights tribunals will only prosecute white people ? Allah be praised , as we will take over the country and then hold a true weenie roast. The analogy may seem far fetched but we are not the country we were a mere 40 years ago. Accepting these HRC rulings is not much different than accepting sharia law once we are properly pussyfied. Activists and the nanny state are destroying a once proud independant country. While we sit back and watch there are others that are making plans and know they are immune to all the social engineering. They will stay true to their 13th century ideology and get rid of the activists and social engineers when the time is right.

The right to impose a dress code comes along with property rights.

Plus "dignity" is not a legal concept, and has no place in any legal decision.

If I was the gym owner I'd refuse to pay and then have the matter resolved in a real court. A property owner has the right to set policies that people who use their properties have to adhere to. There's no shortage of gyms in Vancouver.

Perhaps the gym owner should make an exception to the "no work boots" rule -- they are only allowed to be worn when used to kick moonbats or anyone employed by the HRC in the head.

Human Rights Commissions and Tribunals all across the country have time to investigate and prosecute assinine cases such as this yet where are all the Human Rights groups and mouthpieces when a Kitchener man is arrested on gun charges because his 4 year old drew a crayon picture of her daddy fighting monsters and bad guys? The man was strip searched and held without being charged while his pregnant wife was questioned at the police station and his children were put into foster care by family services but not a peep from anyone.
What a joke.

Chris,the HRC's will not lay charges,they are not(thank God) Crown prosecutors. A person has to make an application to them, which can be easily done by downloading the complaint forms online.

If the chap who was railroaded in Kitchener DID make a complaint, the HRC just MIGHT do the job on the school,teacher,social services,and cops,that they richly deserve.

BUT, HE has to initiate the complaint.

lol

I've gotten annoyed when a gym wouldn't let me wear my preferred footwear, but you mean I could have made 2 grand over it?

Gee. That would buy some mighty fine hiking boots!

>>> His physiotherapist told him he could continue to do lunges as long as he wore hiking boots. Which brings up the point--why not do his lunges while he's...well...hiking? Or outdoors? Or in his own living room?

Maybe he's going to the gym because they have weights. Ever think of that?

Progressive resistance -- you know?