Brainiac

That is one of the many jobs of a Police Constable. The emotional outburst by the Peel Region Police Chief was however, unprofessional. The police MUST be seen as being objective even though at times that is very difficult to do.

All I am saying Morgan is that it wouldn't be the first time the Liberals ripped off an Alliance idea and spun it to suit their own needs. Martin will flip flop till the cows come home. It won't matter, because people perceive the Liberals as the 'safe' vote. How many times did they vote in Chretien after he had lied his ass off? You know why? It was because he was the safe vote. People were ready for a change years ago, but there was no one they could feel comfortable voting for other than the Liberals.

The difference is that they would have a choice of who to vote for. Many people didn't see the old Alliance as a viable alternative to Chretien, so they voted for Chretien. That is what I think might happen if Harper wins the leadership this early in the parties lifetime. It is going to take time to shake off the mistakes made by certain Reform/Alliance members of the past. There is no doubt in my mind that people want change, it is just a matter of making that change a little more 'safe' so that they feel good throwing their votes in a particular direction. Harper is doing well when he tries to pain the Liberals as the party of the wealthy and not the 'common man'. Untested, but a seemingly safe alternative. I don't disagree, I just think he needs time to shed the baggage of his previous party. I actually think he would make a great leader, but I think people in the urban areas (where most of the votes are) need time to see him grow out of the old stereotypes that dogged his old party. He is seemingly unsmearable(is that a word?), and he seems to think before he speaks...all excellent indicators that the Liberals will have a difficult time smearing his personal reputation...however, they will have no trouble smearing his former party and that could send Harper into political oblivion. As for Harper using the gay marriage thing for political leverage, I don't think it will work...Martin can do the exact same thing...after all he had nothing to do with the original bill, it was his 'crazy' predecessor. I think that there is a need for some long term strategy, and try to resist the quick fix.

What the new conservative party has to do for this coming election is set the groundwork for their newly merged party to appear merged and seperate from any extreme ideas. So that in the election to follow the coming one they will have improved their perception amongst voters. Electing Stronach as leader may actually be a wise choice at the moment to ensure this future success. To have a socially conservative leader this early in the parties life will surely spell disaster. Once this new party is pegged with the 'crazy social con' label it will be absolutley useless. Social Conservatives need to bide their time and be patient. If not they might as well just form Alliance part two and continue to split the conservative vote.

Well the decriminalization legislation that was brought forward earlier this year actually raised the penalties for people who sell or grow drugs. The decriminalization aspect of the legislation is meant for users of 'small' amounts. So I don't understand how the above scenario could work out to damage the PM, if that is what you are suggesting. The PM introduces tougher penalties on pushers and growers and then some people in his party get caught selling pot, or using drug money to finance political activity. That would make it look like the PM didn't know what they were up to, making him no part of the illegal activity. Now whether or not that is a bad thing I wouldn't know. Is the PM suppose to have tabs on everyone who works for them?

Dunno? Why don't we? I am sure the gay bars and resorts (didn't know there was such a thing)wouldn't mind, good way to make some extra cash. Good idea. I think the reason we don't is because breeders don't feel they need to have a parade. Be nice to see though. Maybe the pregnant and nursing mothers could get a float so they didn't have to walk. I do that already. I have them love the fact that I am straight and not asshamed to let people know!

If you say so. Criminals probably don't read a lot of things. What is your point? No. I never said that corrections statistics give Toronto Metro a greater sense of confidence. Do you think they should? Do you think Toronto Metro lacks confidence? I personally don't know any Toronto Police Officers who are terribly worried about the rise in the number of homicides in the city anymore than they need to be to solve the crime. It isn't a daily reality for them. The Statistics however might help some people who read the Sun chain of newspapers on a regular basis get a better perspective on the homicide situation in the country, that is what I am getting at. I point out the Sun because they have a tendency to really play up crime issues in the paper more than other news outlets. Life must seem so simply when your world is painted with such broad brush strokes. As for the report that you cited from the Fraser Institute, you gave it a misleading title. The report said very little about the increase of violent crime in Canada. It was a report on how the gun registry is a failure. I would have to agree with that conclusion, but that is another issue. As for the one section of the report that talks about the violent crime increase in Canada, it gets its info from this source Crime Statistics in Canada, 2001 Juristat 22, 6, Statistics Canada I suggest you read it to put the claim the report made into perspective, and to see what sorts of violent crime are on the increase. So what should we do to all the people who commit minor assaults? Kill em? I don't recall ever saying there was a large or small number of anti-death penalty advocates. The idea that the death penalty is a partisan issue is almost as retarded as the idea of partisan politics itself. Trying to pigeon hole someones beliefs is pointless, that is unless they are a mindless fool who just takes in whatever idea their particular wing believes in. What about 'conservatives' who don't agree with a death penalty? Or do only liberals believe that it is a bad idea and conservatives think that it is the best thing in the world. If only everything was that simple, life would be so much more BORING!

Yeah, I am starting to realize that. I hear a lot of talk about how the media is biased to the left and then when it comes to crime and legal issues the media is all of a sudden not a bad place to look.

I will refer you to the Correctional Services of Canada website. This is what they say about the above myth. Myths and Realities This link may also help some other people on this thread get a better idea of what the real facts are concerning our Corrections system in Canada. The media has failed in just about every attempt they have made to try and get across information regarding crime in Canada. The reason being is that it is too complex of an issue to be blurted out during the evening news cast or to fill a column on a page in a newspaper. I see that lack of understanding a lot in these threads. Udawg, serial rapists do not commit that many rapes here in Canada...the majority are commited by men that the women know and who are more than likely on a date with. To use serial rapists as an example is nothing more than some lame shock tactic that holds little water. It is like saying everyone who commits a murder is a serial killer. Completely ludicrous. Here is a Statistical Overview done by the Correctional Services of Canada The Safe Return of Offenders to the Community It is very recent and dispells a lot of the rhetoric that gets shot around on a topic such as this. The CSC website is very helpful in trying to get a better idea of the corrections situation in Canada. That being said, it will probably not change anyones position on the death penalty, but it will give them better information to base their opinion on.

Jeffery Dahmer was a cannibal. Sado-Masichism is not the same...it is a sexual kink that is performed between consenting adults. As for the counsellor being fired...on its face that is a little extreme, but I am curious what was written in the letter to the newspaper...what if a gay student wanted to talk to the counsellor? Would his beliefs effect his job? Are his beliefs Christian or just bigotted? Did the bed and breakfast owners allow couples with no children and who were not married stay at their place? Did the gay men say they wanted to stay there so they could screw all night? I find that difficult to believe. Again, the whole story might help shed some light on the situation. Also, are the owners Christian or just bigotted? Did the school allow straight couples to go to the prom? Was there going to be sex at the prom? If the two guys were straight would they still be allowed to go to the prom together? The Catholic church doesn't condone premarital sex, so what is the schools position on dating? I didn't understand why a gay guy went to a Catholic school in the first place though. She did not want a gay pride parade in the town. So she personally had a problem with gay people. You say she was forced to resign, but just because the gay people in town got to have a parade she resigned? Or did they make her resign? There are also plenty of cases of people using religion as a reason to discriminate against people. These people are the problem with religion today. I am a Christian (Baptist) and I don't understand why people think they can push their religious beliefs on others in society. Being a Christian I have never had anyone tell me I should shut up about my beliefs...but then again I don't use them to discriminate against my fellow citizens...and try to force my beliefs on people. If gay people want to have a parade, who cares. They pay taxes too.

Capital punishment, just like any other punishment for a crime is only so good as the publics perception that they will be caught and the punishment will be dealt out. You can raise the traffic fines to whatever amount you wish, but if people think they can get away with it, they will still continue to speed. People will still shoplift if they know they could lose their hands for doing so if they don't think they will get caught. Criminals are not smart people, if they were they would not be criminals. Some criminals commit crime for things such as survival (ie.stealing), but most do it because they aren't smart enough not to. They also have very little respect for their fellow citizens. I don't agree with having a death sentence because there is no guarantee that only guilty people will be put to death and its effectiveness as a deterrent is unfounded. As for the emotional aspect of killing a killer, sure it might make some people feel good that that person is dead, but that doesn't change the harm that they did to the victim and quite honestly, I believe death would be a pretty good sentence if I raped and murdered a little child...it is better than having to live with yourself for the rest of your life and have nothing to do but think about what you have done all the while knowing that life is passing you by on the other side of the wall that you get one hour a day to walk around inside of.

I suspect the reason that the Canadian Government may have been keeping quiet about this case at the beginning is because of an ongoing investigation by the RCMP and CSIS into friends and associates of Mr. Arar. Him being arrested by the United States may have compromised an operation that the Canadian authorities had going on Mr. Arar and his cohorts. Not to mention it turned the whole thing into some political circus that the Canadian Government had no choice but to make some kind of stand on. Intelligence work is best done outside of the view of the public...the US arresting this man and sending him to Syria possibly screwed up a seemingly successful operation by forcing the issue into the eyes of the public. This damages intelligence sharing relationships between governments. Watching a suspect is not a method used as a protective measure so much as it is an intelligence gathering measure. When you watch someone you have two goals. You are trying to determine what he is up to and how many people are in on this with him. Making sure he doesn't act out his plans is a by product of the surveillence. Intelligence Agencies purposly try to make themselves appear incompetent to an extent in the eyes of the public. That is a large part of their effectiveness. The US probably should not have arrested Mr. Arar for the simple fact that it probably alerted a number of sleeper agents he may have been working with. Some of these agents were probably known to Canadian authorities, but I bet there were ones that were not yet. Intelligence is a game that requires patience in order to win big. There is no place for politics in such a situation.

I know some see the old Alliance as either being a party full of racists or that they are hell bent on making Canada more 'American', whatever that means. I can't say I agree with either of these sentiments, but that is the reasoning behind why some people distrust the old Alliance. Having them change their name is a start, but the perception is still there. As for your predictions, I suppose only time will tell. As for the resentment being based on them not doing well I can see how that would come from people who voted for them, but how does that explain the resentment from people who didn't vote for them?

Morgan, I got your point. I just don't believe that there are only two BSE cases in North America and I think it is useless to blame one country or the other for this 'outbreak'. The fact of the matter is both countries have been less than thorough with their measures towards stopping this problem from happening here. The fact that the States has an equally shoddy system is not moot to the broader picture. Cattle does not just flow from Canada to the States. What if the feed that the cow in Canada ate was from a rendered cow from the States? It is an integreated system that demands cooperation and openness from both sides of the border. Just because the second cow came from Canada doesn't mean Canada is the reason for the problem alone. I agree that the idea that these are spontaneous is utterly ridiculous. I haven't heard that explanation myself, but I am sure it was the idea of the beef industry who has a lot of influence in both Canada and the United States.

The Charter is a legal document thus it is law. Being a law is where it gets its power from. If it wasn't a law there would be no way for people to have their rights enforced. As for rights being unchanging, I disagree. Any right that cannot change with a changing society is basically useless. Note, changing doesn't mean that anyone loses their rights, they are usually extended. A gay man being able to marry has no effect on my right as a straight man to also be married. As for the issue that started this thread...it appears that the group wants to extend sharia law to Family Law in Ontario if both parties agree to it. There is a Muslim womens group that sees it as being a waste of time. I think I agree with the Muslim Womens group.

This is in large part to the zero tolerance policies put in place by schools. Everytime there is a fight in a school yard the police are called and that is added to the youth violence stats. Youth aren't getting more violent, they are just becoming more visible to the police through these policies. As for all the lyrics about hating the police, that originally came from a part of the United States that suffered from a very public racist police department problem. People like NWA were writing songs about their situation...as for the 'artists' these days it is mostly just another form of rebellion. What better authority figure to rebel against than a police officer...especially when you see them on a regular basis. The racist police officers that worked for the LAPD should share responsibility for the sentiment towards the police in todays pop culture, and every power tripping or racist officer out there just adds to it making it that much more difficult for the rest of us who just want to do our job.

Cameron said: I second that! Now if only North America could have gotten serious about this before it happened here.

Taken from The Health Research Group Looks like both countries implemented some tough talk, but were a little slow on the action.

There is no doubt that Harper is a skilled politician...but I don't necessarily think people here in Ontario really give a crap so long as he is associated with the Alliance. I know people don't like to hear that, but the fact of the matter is people in Ontario tend not to vote for people that leave a bad taste in their mouths...look at the provincial NDP(that is if you can still see them). The Alliance most definitely has left a bad taste in a lot of peoples mouths here in Ontario. I hope the new Conservative party can pick up some more seats in this province, but I don't think they will win this coming election. it would be nice to have a little less Liberal and a little more of anyone else in the Federal government.

I don't think they are trying to destroy our economy. They just have some concerns about the beef that flows between our two countries. The finger pointing is getting a tad retarded. As for President Bush having some kind of vendetta against Canada, I would very much doubt it. They are concerned just like we would be if the tables were reversed and for that I can't blame them.

Good thing you don't draft laws. Every law in Canada is subject to interpretation because no one can write a law that takes into account every situation that can possibly happen. The rights are not changed or modified. In the case you cited they were interpreted to include a group that was not specifically spelled out in the Charter, thus rendering the law that was in question unconstitutional. The Charter was not rewritten for this it...in fact the wording of the Charter includes them anyway, just not specifically. The decision does not affect the rights already held by straight people to marry, it just extends those rights to gays.

Canada introduced its feed bans in 1997 along with the United States. CFIA Feed Ban It appears that Mr. Vanclief must have misspoke or was misquoted in the article you cited. I agree. I think that it is irresponsible for anyone to do any finger pointing or to wish ill will towards the States. Where the animal came from is not as important as how the animal was infected. The cattle industry in both countries is so interwoven that it is in the best intrest of both countries to try and figure out how the animals were infected in the first place. I don't understand why they don't kill every cow born before the bans were put into place. It would be costly, but I think the cost is worth it for the long term. Craig Read wrote: When did I say Canada is perfect? I didn't think I ignored any of your post...some of it I agreed with, some I didn't and the rest I asked for some clarity. What major points did I miss? The thing is Craig, the cattle industry in North America is pretty interwoven between the two countries. So it only makes sense that countries would ban US beef as well as Canadian beef. When the outbreak happened this summer, the US was faced with bans from Japan as well. I wouldn't be surprised if there are a few more incidents of this type in the next couple of months or years. We need to find out how the animals were infected, that is what is important here. Then we can try to fix it.

I suppose you know this for a fact. Yes it is a telling sign that Canada hasn't had a huge problem with BSE in the past. I don't recall Canada asking the US for help when we had that outbreak in May. If I recall correctly we also asked the Brits for help on that issue. Going to a third, uninvolved party is only common sense, especially when that third party has a lot of experience on the issue at hand. To read anything into that is moronic. If it did come from Canada that doesn't mean it was infected in Canada. How does the cow coming from Canada have anything to do with the incompetece of Canadian authorities? Please explain that.

'Cop' is also considered a derogatory term by a lot of police officers I know. Not trying to be a dink, but I thought I would point that out for you. Don't worry about the police officers being harassed by the kids in your school. Being a police officer requires a very thick skin and the ranting of a bunch of little kids is not going to hurt their feeling. They have heard it all before. Also, I agree with Hugo and Mod...they make some very good points. Some might also argue that violent music is actually a cathartic release for people. It allows people to deal with anger in more harmless ways. If all music was cheery, happy and positive I think I would probably go crazy. Life is not all cheery and positive.

Hi Hugo, I am not sure homosexuals had a 'powerful and vocal' lobby when the Charter was first introduced. I imagine if the Charter was introduced today sexual orientation would probably be included in the 'list'. Why it wasn't we can only guess, but 'every individual' means everyone, as a sort of catch all so they were included. That is why the Charter is written in such a way that they have the ability to adapt to changing Canadian society. I personally don't know how 'powerful' this homosexual lobby is, but I don't think it is the most powerful one in the country. As for people with three arms, who knows what the future holds for them. I agree that things have changed for the better, but I think affirmative action type programs have helped a lot in making those changes. In my profession, when women started to get hired they were met with very sexist attitudes that came from the top all the way down. As more and more women started to get hired and move up through the bureucracy that attitude started to change, and it is for the most part gone, but there are still a couple of people who hold their old prejudices to this day. Affirmative action can cause some people to feel threatened, but that isn't so much the fault of the policies as it is their own prejudices. Some people just can't cope with change. I guess that would depend on your political leanings and which channel you watch. I think they dwell too long on a lot of stories, but I don't find them to be particularily partisan. The fact of the matter is that most Canadians do not like the Alliance/Reform because they view them to be racist. Knowing this the members of the Alliance/Reform should probably try to keep a lid on some of their wing nuts no matter how minor of a role they play because that person ultimately is a representative of that party and it just fuels peoples fears. The Liberals, PC, and NDP don't have that reputation so when one of their idiots goes off it is perceived as being an isolated incident. Is that fair, no, but it is reality and that is what matters. Only a fool would think that the Alliance/Reform is the only party in Canada to have bigots in its fold, but that is the image that they have been painted with early on due to the fact that it is a party made up of social conservatives from the PC party who went and made their own party.