roy baty

Yeah, I do. Thanks for replying though.

Not that I believe the Quran or anything Mohammed wrote but I think DoP indicated this may take a few generations so obviously these percentages and ratios will grow as Christianity and Judaism decline in the West. I for one think radical Islam will continue and grow as a menace in the short and long term both @ home and abroad and there certainly is _risk_ of some forms of Sharia law infiltrating even our own laws if Muslims are put into political and judicial posts of power in the west. The reasons I say this is that Muslims are much more likely to put Allah before country and countrymen/women than any Christian or Jew so it would not surprise me if Islam does play a bigger role in the West as other faiths decline.

Like I said before, non-believers think the Bible is nonsense. Thanks for confirming that and also the predictable arrogance that comes from them when the Bible is mentioned as well.

One could easily add the word "yet" to your first sentence above. Many students of the Bible will tell you that it is prophesied in Daniel 11 that some Isalamic nations south of Jerusalem will form an alliance of Arab nations (King of the South) that would, for a period of time form a pact (trade perhaps?) with the king of the north (Europe). If this does occur and Europe becomes the power it is prophesied to become, that would indeed give them a lot of power. Of course for a non-believer the Bible is all nonsense. Believer or not, it still does not make it impossible to be true..

This is the truest and only statement in this thread that applies to everyone, believers and non-believers alike BTW.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying about Islam but where are you getting this from? We're not there yet. The only mainstream Christian church goers I know that don't believe the entire Bible is the inspired word of God through the hands and minds of his prophets are liberalized Christians who only choose to believe whatever is most convenient for them to believe to suit them, and discarding the rest. Other than that, most mainstream Christian churches indeed still believe that the Bible is the divine word of God just as Muslims believe the Quran is. How long that will go on depends on how fast mainstream Christianity liberalizes of course. In contrast, liberalization is a phenomenon that Islam is not experiencing. As for you claiming that the world will be dominated by Islam because God and Mohammed said so is ONLY true if you believe the Quran is the true word of God. I say that it is not going to completely dominate, because I choose to believe what is in the Bible. What the Bible teaches is much different, it teaches that the world will be dominated by yet another final united European superpower strongly influenced by a warped version of Christianity/Catholicism for a short time before Christ's return. So according to the Bible, Islam will not dominate all religions but eventually fail just as will most warped or perhaps liberalized mainstream Christianity religions and others will be in the end. I believe biblical Christianity as I interpret it is the only ideology that offers most hope for humanity so I choose to believe it as the truth for my life. I suppose other religious followers and agnostics/atheists would disagree with me but it still doesn't change my beliefs. So basically, what I am saying that what I believe/interpret above in the Bible would be no more true to a non-believer than what the Quran says will happen with Islam. It is ONLY true to those who believe what each book or ideology teaches. I think that's what people are missing here who are disagreeing with you so fervently. They don't believe what you say because they don't believe the Quran as the truth just as I don't. However I do understand where you are coming from for the most part. I personally believe that radical Islam will continue to grow to be even more of a global menace thanks in part to the growing Liberal (and IMO) blind PC mindset in a rapidly declining North America and before this European empire emerges out of our failure, Europe will become more conservative and perhaps even pass laws harsher than Quebec to deal with the growing Islamic trend that many in Europe already see happening. They will even outright someday exile or eliminate Islam from their empire and culture. Anyhow, that's how I see it. Whether it's true or going to happen is all relative to what theology you choose to believe.

BS? Islam is growing ironically your graph confirms my theory more than denies it.

I have to agree with you on this. Within a generation or 2, if we allow it, some if not many of our laws and will contain some form of Sharia law. For those who believe in the Christian Bible, it speaks about the future for Christian nations: Deuteronomy 28:43 “The alien who is among you shall rise higher and higher above you, and you shall come down lower and lower". Alien in this case I believe are immigrants of another religion/theology. I just think what Quebec is doing is the ultimate in hypocrisy in this case regardless if I agree with it or not.

This is correct. On The National last night, during the interview with him he said he AND the Liberal Party,

One could argue a chronic alcoholic who drinks a 40 ouncer of rum daily but just has 6 beers instead is fine to drive. Technically, he probably is fine from an impairment point of view due to the tolerance level but he'll still get a DUI. I smoke occasionally and I can tell you without a doubt that it definitely causes impairment and anyone who drives within a couple of hours is a threat on the road. Does it impair you as much as booze has the potential to? No. Should the inability to detect it as easy as alcohol roadblock legalization? It is definitely is a concern. Funny thing is, you're probably less likely to drive too impaired by weed for the reason you just described and because when you are in the worst state of impairment you're lucky to have enough energy to leave the couch let alone walk to a car.

You'd be surprised how many do everyday and how many don't get caught doing it. They'd likely not make it through that roadblock.. The stoner likely would. Hence the difference in enforcement abilities between the 2 drugs.

Right now, it's officer judgement w/visual indicators and potentially an ordered blood test Some countries use saliva testing but no roadside device like a breathalyzer. If it heads to court, if the suspect has a good lawyer the charge is easier to beat than a DUI charge. The thing about weed, it is far easier to get through a random roadblock with a stick of gum than if you had a pint of rum. Much harder to enforce for sure..

So you're saying that breathalyzers are not important for convictions? Based on what study or evidence? Perhaps you're still hung up on "charging" and not "convicting". Ask any cop that without that specific evidence it is harder to convict on DUI than it would be with it. Here's one of many arguments found about the importance of the Breathalyzer: http://www.divinecaroline.com/life-etc/culture-causes/how-important-are-breathalyzers-dui-court-cases Again, I am not arguing that an officer can charge you with anything they want, it's the conviction that is the challenge. In fact, I don't know why this is even being debated.. Hard scientific evidence is, was, and always will be better than an "officer's judgement" and this is why if they legalize cannabis there should be an equivocal method roadside to the breathalyzer and currently there is not. The tests available now can show if THC is in your system but not pinpoint the level of toxicity you are under the influence of at the time of being pulled over and that is dangerous for not only the public, but for the guy being charged unjustly because he smoked a joint 8 hours ago. You could potentially see many false convictions and many guilty people walk.

The funny thing in all of this is the utter hypocrisy of the PQ and by proxy Quebec itself. The same people that feel their minority language and culture should be protected federally are the first ones to be intolerant of minorities within their own province.

So why then are breathalyzers very critical to convict a drunk driver? Just reasonable suspicion can give an officer a reason to charge you with impaired, it's the convicting of it that can prove difficult if it heads to court w/o real medical evidence.

I am not sure I agree 100%. It may not be the same but is still nevertheless physically and mentally impairing and just like alcohol it impairs a driver relative to the driver's tolerance for it. For this very reason, they need to perfect a roadside test before they legalize it. Proposing that we just "trust" police officer judgement, as in the past w/alcohol is just not enough to hold up in court anymore.

I just saw Gupta's special. It was an excellent and balanced report. Amazing what it did for that little girl w/her seizures.

If they can roadside test for THC levels as reliable as breathalyzers then legalize it. Until then, decriminalize small amount possession until they can reliably test it roadside. Right now I think the best they have are saliva tests for the "presence" of it.. Unless that has changed, that is not a fair enough test.

I betcha all the unethical $$ Trudeau has earned that the Conservatives use this issue in their smear ads though. Coming soon to a TV near you.

The examples posted in here are obviously unacceptable but still represent the minority of law enforcement officers. There are and always were cops that abused power. Thanks to the likes of mobile phone cameras we get to see more of it. What gets me is you'd think these cops would be a bit wiser nowadays with every Tom, Dick and Harry carrying a video camera.. Dummies..

I assume you are referring mainly to BC due to the gold rush etc? I thought most other Western Canadians were not American Settlers but migrants from Ontario and immigrants from the UK and Central to Eastern Europe..

You're right, nationally the homicide rate has dropped. However, there is a rise in Detroit and Chicago inner cities the past 2 years with many factors discussed here contributing to it. Bravado and emotion aside there is no denying that the issue of crime being so disproportional in the Black communities compared to White and Hispanic communities is still a problem that needs to be fixed with serious changes and not ignored with "status quo" mentality many would prefer.

Yes, that's correct you didn't say it increased crime. Hard to find a good solution to this though isn't it? All sides have arguments that seem good but perhaps we're a society that is beyond helping ourselves anymore... Frustrating problem to say the least.

Forget to a renew a permit? Gimme a break. You're getting into worst case scenario margin of error. Obviously if someone forgets to renew, they are still the original registered owner. You possess a weapon illegally obtained, yes perhaps throwing the book at it will help. Liberal ideas that are in place for solving these problems haven't seemed to help now have they? Instead, more dead black kids in black neighborhoods and the #s are climbing. Have any better ideas? Please share.

Ha. Nice reminder. Heavy metal of the 80s or even current metal doesn't come close to the lyrics coming out of some rap so-called artists that specifically target black youths and has a far more negative impact than metal ever did. That whole Dee Scheider business was a farce where lyrics weren't even properly analyzed before some loons blamed teenage suicides etc on it. Ironically metal appealed to an audience of over 90% whites. Anyhow, my point is that drastic measures are needed. Even the music should be examined. Some black rappers are doing no favors to unguided kids in these communities by glamorizing a gangster lifestyle, promoting anti-authority and female degradation. Of course banning is no longer an option but black leaders should criticize some of these artists more in the very least because they certainly don't help the problem. Instead Obama invites Jay-Z over for a WH party..