Boges

Not sure but if someone said don't wear the cross to work, you can't really call that an infringement of religious freedom. That person is wearing it to be fashionable, nothing wrong with that but no religious text requires it. Remember WWJD bracelets? Someone who wears a headdress likely does as a mandatory part of their religion. So it's a bit different IMHO.

No Christian doctrine I know of requires someone to wear a cross. It's just a fashionable thing people do. e. Some Jews do wear a hat but would the government really ban civil servants from wearing a yamaka? People wear headdresses because it's something they believe they must do. Even if the Burka isn't in the Quran people who require women to do it, do it for religious reasons. I don't see how this can be seen as a way to ban burkas and turbins. We already saw this in Quebec with an attempt to ban headdresses playing soccer.

I can't believe this thread has been turned into a debate about whether "suicide by cop" happens or not and how can we verify if it happened. :-/

I was more referring to evidence that this was a suicide by cop, not the fact that it ever happens. Since we're floating theory's I think it's far more likely Yatim was under the influence of some drug. This was a Friday night afterall. Would be interesting to know what was in his tox report.

But you have no evidence to support that theory. I would think, had he really wanted to commit suicide by cop, he'd run outside the streetcar wielding the knife instead of just taunting them from the inside.

Well some would view Jews as a racial group but ultimately it doesn't. That's why I'm asking the question, is this simply about promoting a secular environment or is it a veiled attempt to prevent people from cultures that wear head-dresses from wearing those head-dresses. Also most would agree Niqabs, Hijabs and Burkas have nothing to with religion but is more of a cultural phenomenon. But Turbins are religious.

To those that don't think pot possession is pretty much already decriminalized there's this. http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/canada-s-police-chiefs-suggest-tickets-not-charges-for-pot-possession-1.1419047 30g is about an ounce right? I'd imagine if you're walking around with more than that much you're not just a simple user. Cops want to be able to give tickets because criminals charges just aren't worth their time that it's more pragmatic to just ignore it. I think most would rather they just ignore it right? I'd argue giving tickets is a round-a-bout way of taxing use, which is what legalization advocates want.

Perhaps but this was just a mock-up and in what other job does the employee have any say in what their uniform is? Do Hockey players protest is their uniform is changed?

I know this is just a matter of tens of thousands of dollars but it's an example of why arms length government organization can't really be trusted with properly using government money. Why are organizations like Metrolinx sponsoring private events anyway? http://www.torontosun.com/2013/08/18/metrolinx-bureaucrats-score-premium-tickets

I'd like some evidence that Sun News has no actual news. Sure from 5pm on they show a list of opinion shows. I don't think their 6pm show Battleground is to heavy on the opinion but Levant, Coren, Adler and Lilley's shows are all heavy on the opinion. And I guess their early morning show with David Menzies is probably heavy on the opinion too. Though I've never seen it. BUT from 8pm to 5pm there's news similar to what you'd see on CBC Newsworld. I know LOL that's so funny you're just a Sun News sycofant. But seriously when I do watch, which I'll admit isn't to often but that's because I have a job and stuff, they try to do the news throughout the day.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/08/20/pol-cp-quebec-identity.html Are we really going to see people wearing crosses as jewellry or Jews wearing yamaka's being told they can no longer enter public building wearing such a garb or is this just a veiled attempt to ban turbans, head scarves, niqabs and burkas? We have freedom of religion in this country. How can a province unilaterally try and hinder how someone exhibits that faith? There are reasonable arguments about people showing their face for ID purposes but this is just an attack on religous and cultural garb. Will this be a vote winner in Quebec or evidence that the PQ is out of touch?

The Union uses cost as an excuse because it would seriously hamper getting its members on the Sunshine list. I've heard the Union head say on the radio he opposes lapel cameras because that money could go into proper training. Kind of laughable actually.

I've always been led to believe cops are trained to shoot centre mass IOW shooting to kill. Yep and evidence neither of us are privy to should highlight whether he was or not. Only in Ontario are suspended cops entitled to full income if suspended for a suspected improper action. I'm more offended with the fact that he was arraigned in less than a day. That's not something anyone usually gets.

Only a public service union would bitch about something like this. http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/transportation/2013/08/20/ttc_workers_say_new_uniform_colours_are_too_habslike.html You sure it's not cuz it looks American Bob?

Cite? If he didn't "intend to kill Yatim" why would he fire upon him? Cops aren't trained to fire to wound. That being said, are you claiming that continuing to shoot after Yatim posed no threat (YEAH I KNOW! that's my opinion but it appears he is on the ground in an isolated street car in the video) has no baring on the future ruling? As for his treatment, here in Canada at least, we're not supposed to have tiered systems of justice. It appears he was treated preferably because of his occupation.

Anyone put off by the kid gloves Officer Forcillo has been treated with? No Perp Walk, No Arrest. Will the mug shot be released? He was allowed to surrender and apply for bail the same day. His union is paying his legal costs and transported him to and from the courthouse. He also gets full pay for the years it'll take for a trial to be concluded. No civilian would get such treatment had they been charged with 2nd degree murder.

What about conservation vs agriculture? Most have don't have a huge moral issue eating an animal raised to be eaten but do have issues with endangered animals being hunted purely for sport and not being used for food. Is that hypocritical as well? What about hunters here in North America that hunt animals like deer or water foul for food but are keenly in-tune with conservation. They hunt them for sport but also eat them and pay for permits that go to keeping the ecosystem vibrant. Sure dogs are exploited for human enjoyment and for practical purposes but they've also been linked to the fate humans across the globe, same with horses. That's why many in the West oppose eating dogs and horses. They're seen as special animals. Some might find that hypocritical but it's certainly a popular opinion in the West. It's purely cultural too because other cultures find dogs dirty, others eat them. As for the comparison with a large, non-native, predator. I can see your point but there's a difference when you pluck an animal from the wild and keep it in a cage in an apartment. At least dogs have been genetically trained to have a kinship with humans, most breeds would likely have trouble surviving in the wild. Up until humans the industrial era people owned dogs as tools. The other problem, as mentioned before, is the ecological crisis owning an non-native apex predator has on our eco-system should it get free. Again see the problem they're having in Florida with Pythons let free by people who no longer wish to care for them.

You would also likely oppose using animlas for any purpose. For example food or transportation. If that's your opinion then it's not surprising that you oppose keeping animals as pets. Comparing it with human slavery would indicate that to me. There's a huge difference if you believe humans are meant to be created equal. Up until the Victoria Age dogs were bred for a purpose. So their plight is similar to that of the horse. Western civilization was built on the shoulder of the horse. Do you also see that as immoral enslavement?

Bail Granted. Not a surprise. Now we have to wait a year, two or even three for a trial. There's a publication ban so no new evidence will be put forward until the verdict so I guess everything from now on, on both sides will re-hashed.

So you're implying people should never have an opinion on someone's guilt before a trial? Based on the evidence made public it's reasonable to believe that the officer is guilty. The public's opinion isn't legally binding. A court will still have its say on the ultimate fate of this officer.

Why are you talking about Ed Snowden in a thread about a Toronto Cop Shooting a kid. Did this cop shoot Snowden too?

Archeology would indicate wolves first approached humans and the garbage they left out. The ones that weren't afraid of humans bred and comfort with humans became part of their instinct. I would disagree with the argument that the creation of the dog is an example of "enslavement". It's a mutually beneficial partnership. One could argue dogs get a far better deal out of the relationship, they're provided for while we as humans get a companion or an animal that gladly does a job that was bred into them. Sure humans have done cruel things by breeding dogs that are genetically unsound or creating breeds that are appreciated for genetic mutation. But that doesn't mean dog ownership on the whole is a bad thing.

I try to use proper grammar when texting but it's hard sometimes. You can't replace using a proper qwerty keyboard to form thoughts. Auto correct sometimes makes stuff worse. Quite frankly texting is replacing using a phone for actually making phone calls. If I want to reach a friend, I don't call them, I send off a text message.

I find that hard to believe. What is "functional" defined as? You would need to have at least a basic ability to read to successfully use the internet.

I don't think any of us are saying he's guilty. But the video doesn't look good. Why else would he be charged and other separate investigations announced above and beyond the SIUs. He's entitled to due process and he's receiving it. He's getting better than most. He's not getting cuffed and put into the back of a car. But someone stating their opinion on the evidence that has been made public isn't denying him anything. It's just an opinion. Ultimately the only opinion that'll matter is that of a jury.