Derek 2.0

Perhaps, but it also gives them an out for their membership if political pressure becomes present.

It is rhetorical garbage (as you put it) because you either don't know all the facts of this case or choose not to include them in your spin? Here they are: A "social activist", Bill Clennett, wanted a non redacted copy of the LGR containing further personal information from the RCMP.....when the RCMP told him to pound sand, he complained to the Information Commissioner.........what isn't mentioned in this latest faux outrage, is that the Ottawa Citizen and Global News also ask for a redacted copy of the LGR and the RCMP gave it to them.......with personal information withheld (You can find this version online for download if you want it).... The actual spinning is from the those making the noise of this becoming Harper's Banana Republic because the RCMP didn't give a "social justice warrior" a shopping list of firearms across Canada...........

What wrong doing? A ATIP was submitted in March 2012 to obtain LGR information, even though Bill C-19 (to abolish the LGR) was passed in February of 2012, receiving Royal Assent in April of 2012.........and the RCMP started destroying data in October of 2012........no spin, but a factual timeline.

What law was broken and to whom does it effect?

Why though? I see it as one large piece of legislation that some will oppose versus smaller pieces that will also be opposed........same endgame.

That's not so, though the margins differ with different types of crime, for the most part, policing is both reactive and proactive at the same time. ------ I think one of the sole justifications for increased costs for firefighters, versus say a generation ago, is the growing number of firefighters that are now fully qualified paramedics, in essence filling two required roles for society..........likewise, though the instances of regular house fires are dropping in part to better prevention and building codes etc, we're also building far denser and taller cities that directly result in an increase in difficultly in fighting such fires. Furthermore, we're packing far more cars today on roads that were designed for less, hence more car accidents. If one is looking to find cost savings, I think the natural solution is combine the roles of paramedic/EMT into that of firefighter......I see no reason why ambulances can't be crewed by two qualified (Rescue) firefighters with their turnout gear and equipment to respond to car accidents -or- an elderly person with chest pains, leaving fewer fire fighters to respond to fires with the more traditional fire apparatus. Furthermore, looking for greater efficiency, one could also increase the paramedical qualifications of certain members from within the police. Both the RCMP and OPP do this to a very small (yet differing) extent with their Emergency Response Teams, there is no reason this too couldn't be expanded.

Exactly.........An ATIP attempt to gain the latest personal information prior to CTRL-ALT-Delete being pressed on the former LGR.......What I find ironic, is that many are now chastising the Harper Government/RCMP for protecting/withholding the personal information of ~2 million Canadians...... Damned if you do (C-51), damned if you don't (C-59)......

Omnibus:

Right, expediency in a majority Government is their only purpose.......

I largely agree, but so too is the American medical system........

We've got it partially right......those injured at work go to the front of the line via Workers Compensation, other than that, the motto of the Canadian Healthcare system is hurry up and wait.

I don't know that it would be that much cheaper in India though........we have a family friend that last Spring had rotator cuff surgery in India, and with the surgery itself, airfare and accommodations etc, he saved roughly 2/3rds the quoted cost for the same surgery in Arizona.........but was able to get the surgery two years sooner than waiting in Canada..... I'm not so far motivated by pricing, but more so wait times for "elective" or non-emergency surgeries........which is a farce in a great many cases. If we wanted to reduce costs at home, we'd speed-up the foreign credential assessment process to both address staff shortages and inflated wages in healthcare.....that is after all where most of the healthcare dollars are spent.

I don't know that it would be cheaper, versus what is billed to the Province for our "free healthcare".........but it would be far quicker. Its without a doubt cheaper then what Canadians pay in private clinics/hospitals in Canada, and I wish both my wife and I had of known this prior to her having a minor surgery (paid out of pocket) here in BC...... It comes down to cost/benefit/quality of life.......

And since? Exactly, despite differing gun laws in each country, hence the presence (or absence) of gun violence. No, that's not what I'm saying, as licence holders in the States are not the ones committing gun violence (as proven in data I already provided) Huh? So what you're saying, is that I, a current licensed handgun owner, would be more likely to commit a crime with my legal firearms because I would then transport in a waistband holster instead of in a carrying case? What data? I provided data proving the opposite. What data? So you feel Canadians can defend themselves at home, but not outside the home.........I'd very much like to see this data you keep speaking of..... All European nations that allow their citizens to carry handguns, after obtaining a permit/license, for self defense ........like I was saying. Yes it does, Swiss law is very similar to Canadian laws, except the Swiss are aloud to carry handguns for self defense with a CCW permit........it proves my point exactly. So what? That wasn't the point as to what I proved. Who's talking about the United States? As I said, Canadians, like those in the five nations highlighted, should be afforded the same right to defend themselves and their family with a handgun....... Yes, because you keep failing to make the leap............ You suggest, despite very strict gun laws, gun violence in Mexico is still present because of criminals. On the inverse, gun violence is present in the United States because of the numbers of guns......... Gun Crime in Mexico = criminals Gun Crime in the United States = too many guns.........

If they have the coverage/money........Americans and Canadians can (and do) receive superior treatment in India, for Americans it is vastly cheaper, and Canadians vastly quicker..........The medical tourism industry in India is by far one of, if not the best place to receive high-acuity medical treatment in the World.

On what grounds can American or Canadian police prevent lawful citizens from entering a restaurant? None the less, despite the claim by another poster, police never stated they knew something was about to take place at that particular time (The incident was reported to have flared from an altercation between rival members in a washroom)...... With that said, playing into the OP's Darwinism theme, why would any ordinary citizen dine/drink in a restaurant frequented by bikers?

I get what you're saying, its just a poor conclusion.......in your cited example, gun violence both decreased and increased back again, despite the firearms laws. Likewise, during this period, nationwide, both the Assault Weapons Ban was allowed to lapse and the issuance of CCW permits increased throughout the United States, yet gun violence continued to trend downwards (as it has since the 1970s)..........a clear indication that gun rights and gun control play little into actual gun violence. You're creating a strawman.........I never suggested society as a whole should have the right to legal concealed carrying of firearms for self defense.......as I've said, I fully support licensing. Furthermore, you argument is devoid of logic......You've stated that you're ok with Canadians owning handguns, in addition you've stated, under dire circumstances, you're ok with Canadians defending themselves with such firearms in their homes.........you've yet to explain your leap from Canadian handgun owners being allowed to own, transport (to a range) and defend themselves if needed (in extreme circumstance) in their home, but oppose licensed Canadians from being able to defend themselves outside of their home with handguns.... How do you concede a scenario in which a Canadian could lawfully defend themselves (or their family) in their home, but not defend themselves in public........that makes no sense. I already listed five European countries (Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Italy and the Czech Republic) that allow their citizens to apply for concealed carry permits. And you're wrong about Switzerland It is not a surprise, as these five European nations are also World renowned manufactures of firearms, including handguns (the Austrian Glock is one of the most popular handguns on the planet, and is considered by most as "America's handgun" despite being Austrian), yet require their citizens to obtain a license/permit to carry firearms for self defense, but still have very little gun crime...... As I've said, gun control or gun rights play little into gun violence within a given society......case in point Mexico.

Right, I "view it" as real world policing "constrained" by Individual Rights, not as The Minority Report....

The police in Texas, like in the other States or Canada, can not detain both known or suspected bikers in a restaurant "just because", the whole 4th Amendment comes into play..........and there was an "escalated police presence", that is how the local Sheriff's office and DPS were able to respond and contain the violence, and in turn make so many arrests so quickly......

Perhaps not include, but the Bandidos have a "working relationship" with both the Los Zetas cartel and Barrio Azteca.......both Hispanic groups.

The same, Texas DPS/Texas Rangers categorize the Bandidios as a tier 2 gang, like the Aryan Brotherhood of Texas (White), the Bloods and Crips (both Black) and MS-13 and Chicano Brotherhood of Texas (both Hispanic)........all gangs get equal treatment.

California is near bankrupt and over the last several years were forced to make drastic cuts to both healthcare, education and welfare, so I doubt your claim holds true.....likewise, California currently has a $72 Billion dollar sword hanging above its collective neck in the form of unfunded retiree benefits....... California, though nice to visit, is probably not the best example of fiscal prudence and makes the Ontario government appear viable.....

Exactly, and when then Governor Perry proposed doing exactly that, mysteriously, the Pentagon culled resources to various Guard units across Texas...

Right and is why the impoverished counties in Texas are in the South-East of the State.

No uprights were moved at (soccer is a Commie plot in Texas) all, I highlighted the present day news coverage ....which one would assume, if such a large segment of the population feared a Yankee invasion, media coverage would reflect it.......instead, the biggest stories are that Perry is going at it again, Tony Romo has joined Twitter and that Texas stalwart Blue Belle is laying off 1/3rd of it staff after a listeria outbreak. Does it though? Or does the poll demonstrate a goodly present of Americans don't fully trust Government/Obama.......which is not a shocker. I don't find it grating at all, quite the opposite, I find people's ignorance quite funny......in this case, the depictions of an ignorant Texas by people that actually know little of it...........telling how it is. One thing is certain, most in Texas though would be quite offended if they were considered "mainstream" by outsiders...