Wilber

Probably, the police should be far faster on the draw. Better a dead criminal than a dead police officer. Somewhat agree, hence my opposition to the latest Tazer trend. If the officer feels his/her life is in danger, shoot. Easy for you to say Geoffrey but no police officer wants to shoot people and they are grateful for such things as pepper spray and Tazers because they give them options when before they had none, other than putting themselves at severe risk or using a firearm. These days they are just as likely to be used on out of control meth addicts who are more of a threat to themselves and innocent bystanders than the police.

This is nothing new with the EEC. There has always been commerce. The EEC is an economic union, don't confuse it with a military alliance. All the members maintain their own independent military and have independent governments and foreign policies. That is precisely my point. Independent militaries can be maintained. When faced with war, they co-operate to defend their own interests. Do they? Give me an example. So you believe we would be better off if each Province maintained it's own independent military?

Better get out of the 17Th century. A group of farmers would have a snowballs chance in hell against a modern military unless you are talking about guerrilla warfare in which case your country has already been occupied. Look at countries where this is going on. Would you want that for your family? In Canada none of the arms that a military use are legal to own by civilians. Would you change that? That is a matter of opinion. Regardless, it is better to do your fighting on someone else's soil than on your own. No it can't. That's how empires were built. Only if they felt that uniting was in their own self interest, otherwise everyone would be on their own. Even then there would have to be a great deal of coordination in the military's structure and command. Any military person would tell you that anything else would be a recipe for disaster against a well organized opposition. I would remind you that the biggest reason Canada was formed in the first place was to counter the threat of being taken over by our neighbour to the south who ironically became our greatest protector. Just goes to show that you can't count on things remaining the same.

This is nothing new with the EEC. There has always been commerce. The EEC is an economic union, don't confuse it with a military alliance. All the members maintain their own independent military and have independent governments and foreign policies.

If there was a common threat to all of the provinces, I believe both the populations of Quebec and Alberta would take up arms to fight together. That is what Europe did in the last century. With what? Are they all going to maintain their own independent military? A united Canada has enough trouble trying to maintain an effective military. What chance would individual Provinces have? In NATO, some countries pulled their weight and others didn't. Even if they could, do you think they could agree on what constituted a common threat? If it was only one Province that was threatened do you think that the others would support it and who would command? If you have no common country it is much less likely that there will be a common threat or a common interest. In the last century and the several proceeding it, Europeans spent their time fighting against each other not with each other. Yes they had alliances but they were always changing according to the interests of the nations involved. France and Germany to dominate depending on the era, Britain to maintain a balance that would prevent either one of them from dominating. Their allies and enemies came and went accordingly.

I lived in Edmonton for several years and still remember the rivalry with Calgary. Kind of like Athens and Sparta but then they had a war that lasted over 20 years to decide who was top dog.

That doesn't sound like a problem at all to me, but rather a reason why nationalism isn't needed any more. I have read that 'nations' as such were only created in the last 400 years or so, and came out of the standardization of language. If so, that would further justify the idea that it's a fake construct. It doesn't sound like a problem as long as there is no danger but if a situation arises where this country is threatened it could become a very big problem unless we are protected by a real nation like the US who by the way is the big reason this country has never been threatened for the past 60 years. Before nations we had empires. Egypt, Rome, Greece, Persia etc etc. If Canada comes apart it will be as many little nations or parts of it will be absorbed into someone else's nation or empire. If nationalism is not needed in Canada why would it be needed in a separate Quebec or Alberta? Why not split them up into city states like ancient Greece?

That's standard practice. Are you suggesting that if you are from Manitoba you can only work as a Mountie in that province? Actually, I think this is a good idea for patrol officers who are working with the public on a daily basis. Certainly, they should be able to take other types of jobs wherever they are available. BC had a provincial police years ago and now there is talk of doing it again. One problem with the RCMP is getting enough officers. A few years ago Surrey (the largest municipality in BC) was despirately short of officers and wanted to increase the size of the detatchment but the Federal government couldn't supply them. You are dependant on another government for recruiting. The RCMP has also been reluctant in the past about sharing information and resources with municipal forces, although this is slowly changing.

Thank you, Geoffrey, and we should also add 'too new'. How can a country that's only 130 years or so old compete with countries that have been around for thousands of years ? And why feel more loyalty to a country, anyway, than to a region or local area ? The answer is that tribal loyalty and pride is programmed into our biology, which makes us prone to exploitation by those who use these things to their own ends. Nationalism only works when it's drummed into our heads and repeated by everyone around us. The US seems to manage just fine. They have two States which are separated from the rest of the country by thousands of miles. They are less than 100 years older than Canada yet none of them have a problem putting their country first. Canada's problem is that it hasn't been in danger or had to act like a unified country since WWII and most Canadians from that era are no longer with us. Unfortunately, most Canadians don't have a clue what that means.

Winnipeg Pay Scales It wouldn't surprise me at all if a constable earned 106K in a year because they can work a tremendous amount of overtime. Just because a newspaper colomnists wants to make a point he picks one officer that did and insinuates that this is their base pay. Most police officers work 4 day weeks, 12 hour shifts. Pick up one shift a week and you have increased your salary by 25%. The justice system now forces them to spend a large amount of time doing paper work if they expect to get any convictions. Much of their court time is also overtime on their days off. If this guy earned 106K in a year, you can bet he earned it.

Point taken, it is a judgement call and for some reason there may have been a couple of tragic lapses lately.

I am not trying to be difficult but I will not say myself that they are under paid. However, I do insist that if you want more people in the military, then you should first raise their pay. That is the best way to increase enrollment. Now, I am going to be a smart-ass: Do those trade figures include the "anti-drug policing" market as well? I ask the question because I firmly believe that the reason why we do not de-criminalize many street drugs is because it would put a lot of drug enforcement agents out of jobs. It would be like making cuts to elementary school education: the first people to complain are teachers unions not parents or students. It wouldn't matter what we did because 80% are for export to the US and until they change their laws, it won't affect the drug trade at all. Most of your average police departments time is spent dealing with crime resulting from people trying to get money to buy drugs, not those who sell them. Do you think your city council is more interested in keeping its police force's drug enforcement teams in business than they are in providing you with schools and other services? I don't.

As a lawyer, you know it is not simply a question of losing a suspect. It is not just losing a suspect , it is killing a human being. If that is not enough on its own, you know the kind of scrutiny they come under any time they shoot someone and there is the slightest question that there may have been an alternative. However the question of why so many and why are most of them RCMP is a good one and needs to be answered.

No and I did not say that. Oh, really? Tell us how much more money. Again, I did not say that. No you didn't. My mistake, sorry about that. We do agree that our military is under payed however. How much more money? It is estimated that that monetarily, the drug trade is the second largest industry in BC.

Police in Winnipeg receive $106,000 after five years. That's less than the RCMP or Calgary or Edmonton police. What would be a fair wage? Where did you get that. Taken from the department websites, Constable annual salaries range from: Calgary 43K to 67K Edmonton 41K to 72K Vancouver 44K to 71k Winnipeg 33K to 63K RCMP 43K to 70K Of course many can work tons of overtime and make a lot more if they want, but to say their salary is 106K after 5 yrs is just not true.

I would not say we need it but I would say that if you want to ensure that people will join the military, paying them more would be the most effective method. Relying on patriotism is not stable. I don't disagree that paying our military and police more would get more people applying but if you think money is the reason the majority of people join these organizations, you are very wrong. There is a lot more money in crime than there is trying to fight it. Relying on mercenaries is even less stable. They are for sale to the highest bidder. On one side one day, the other side the next.

Sure they do, they fund the military.I still don't see what increased loyalty and flag waving would really do to change mine or anyone else's standard of living. If everyone thought like you, who would join the military? Probably nobody. We would have to pay our military more than we currently do and people would enlist. Simple. So you think that all we need is a bunch of mercenaries for our military and police? Money being their only motivation for joining?

Jerry is right. A war is not a court room. Its victims do not have due process and innocent people die as a result. It has always been this way. As far a these victims are concerned, it looks like the only thing they are guilty of is taking their vacation in the wrong place at the wrong time. It's my understanding that all the children who died were born in Canada. It could just as easily been a Canadian Jewish family visiting northern Isreal being hit by a Hezbollah rocket.

Sure they do, they fund the military. I still don't see what increased loyalty and flag waving would really do to change mine or anyone else's standard of living. If everyone thought like you, who would join the military?

Any country could decide to use Canadian dollars as their currency. They would not be able to print their own money or control their own monitary policy. They would have to get those dollars on the open market and what would they buy them with? US dollars, Euros, Yen, Sterling? There is more than one country in the world that uses US dollars as their currency and I think the US could care less what happens to their economies. That doesn't sound much like independence to me.

Well, I am free to choose which store I want to give my money to. I pay government taxes in a slightly different way.But Wilber, your remark confuses me a little. If the American government decides to subsidize American corn producers (and Charles noted above how difficult it is to define a "subsidy"), that doesn't concern me or Canadians. If the Chinese are willing to build a car and ship it to Canada and sell it for $9000, should we start an investigation to discover how this is possible? I know it confuses you.

FTA A question for you. Can or has a child who is severely handicapped due to a parent taking drugs when pregnant ever sued that parent and if so what was the result? I think they should be able to. I also think they should be able to press charges for assault.

When are you guys going to learn the difference between a store and a government. I give up.

Charles you are repeatedly telling us that our farmers should not be protected from a foreign subsidy because it infringes on your right to buy those products at the artificially low price it provides. One can only conclude that you approve of that subsidy and your right to take advantage of it takes precedence over those other Canadians who are its victims.

A tariff equal to a subsidy, or no tariffs or subsidies at all results in something being sold at it's real value and there is no difference to the consumer. In the case of a tariff equaling a subsidy, it's a wash for the producers but one government wins and the other loses. One taxpayer wins, the other loses. Charles, as you approve of a foreign government manipulating a market for its farmers benefit with subsidies that allow you to buy something for less than it is worth, you should have no objection to the Canadian government doing the same for Canadian farmers. After all by your logic, the more farmers that are subsidized the less you will have to pay for your food. Let's take it all the way. You go into the supermarket and get what you want but don't pay. The government then adds a percentage to everyones income tax to cover the cost. The problem with that is now you are treading on my freedoms. I have a certain amount of freedom when it comes to what I buy but almost none when it comes to paying taxes. Are you a Communist or just in favour of subsidies as long as they come out of another persons pocket and don't victimize you? Just another sufferer of that Canadian disease of looking for someone else to pay your way