Canadian Blue Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 (edited) http://www.pnj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?A...321/1006/NEWS10 No, tell us of what police services and fire departments have been privatized. By the way Rural/Metro is a private corporation. Edited December 10, 2007 by Canadian Blue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikedavid00 Posted December 10, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 What did you do with the Air Force?Well the police never deal with homicides, Extremely rare and the average police officer will not be whitness to this. robberies, Police will not be whitness to this. The very, very odd police chase to catch the robbers happens maybe.. oh i don't know.. twice a year in Toronto and makes the news? Look at how your grasping at straws. sexual assaults Yes someone has to file the papers at the police station AFTER it happens. , fraud cases That's a legal matter.. although the office might be needed to arrest someone. , domestic disturbances Now finally this is where most of the action is. Police get called, crazy husband is drunk and yelling. The man of the household gets arrested regardless. And the cop might have to take him down if he doesn't cooperate. , and a a large portion of other offences. Not really. The most action they see are civil disputes. Go speak to a cop. Cops are around AFTER offenses happen. They don't actively 'protect you'. What stops many from crime is the knowledge of what will happen to them if they get caught by the court system. Not the actual police. The police are around mainly to give law abiding citizens a hard time via traffic regulations and offences. I will always stand by those statements. However can you tell us how the police will "remove" the homeless? It's called forceful removal. It involves putting on the rubber gloves and arresting them if they don't move on. Our welfare system will not issue these people cheques becuase we have too much money being tied up in social workers and rules and gov't pork. As well under your plan their will be no police officers out on the street since all of them will be doing paperwork, They would be around to response to serious crime, not going after law abiding citizens communitng to work. Well go live in Somalia, and be happy that the police their don't bother good law abiding citizens like yourself. The police will certainly come and shake you down for money if they know you have it. Yes, crime is all a myth, the World Trade Center attacks were all a myth, and the Red River flood was all a myth. And who was around to protect us? That's right. No one. Not your police, not your air force, not your gov't beuacracy. The ONLY thing the US could have done to protect themselves is the ONE thing that actually works - stop letting the 3 worlders from Islamic terrorist hosting nations into their country. But you can't do that. You'll be labelled a bigot and racist. Well, 9-11 was the price paid for these illogical policies. So let me get this straight, you mean people like Clifford Olsen and Paul Bernardo was simply the TV and movies talking, not a "reality" of civilized society. Your missing the point. The police didn't save anyone. They were there AFTER the fact. Plus you'd think that law enforcement would be needed to ensure we live in a civilized society, but once again logic is obviously not your friend. Law enforcement doesn't mean cops sitting around doing nothing all day and harassing/entrapping law abiding citizens. They need to be cut to 1/4 of the size. Do you know from experience, apparently the police don't look to fondly on things like drunk driving and going 100 kilometers per hour. Again, very, very rare that they catch people doing this. When they do get caught driving like these, they always end up driving again anyway. Some groups of people will break laws, others will not. Most are somewhere in the middle. What deters people from breaking laws is the 0 tollerence, tough punishments that you will get if you break the law. Just look at japan. The police have very little to do with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Blue Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 (edited) Extremely rare and the average police officer will not be whitness to this. I think you mean deal with homicide. Police will not be whitness to this. The very, very odd police chase to catch the robbers happens maybe.. oh i don't know.. twice a year in Toronto and makes the news? Look at how your grasping at straws. Well I'm not sure what "whitness" has to do with this. But I think that you have no clue what goes on with law enforcement since you are basing everything on what you watch on TV. Yes someone has to file the papers at the police station AFTER it happens. So they don't deal with the sexual assault and launch an investigation to find out who did it. Not really. The most action they see are civil disputes. Go speak to a cop. I don't think you've ever spoken to a cop, outside of getting arrested for an offence or better yet ticketed. Cops are around AFTER offenses happen. They don't actively 'protect you'. What stops many from crime is the knowledge of what will happen to them if they get caught by the court system. Not the actual police. Well the police don't go out and catch the criminals, or anything like that. However I'm sure that police patrolling the streets has no effect on crime. The police are around mainly to give law abiding citizens a hard time via traffic regulations and offences. I will always stand by those statements. Exactly, because you have nothing inside that skull of yours. It's odd how people can't figure out that the police arrest people and then bring them to the courts. It's called forceful removal. It involves putting on the rubber gloves and arresting them if they don't move on. Where do you suppose we put them? They would be around to response to serious crime, not going after law abiding citizens communitng to work. Well don't drive drunk and don't speed. However serious crime does not result in any paperwork at all. Once again think before you type. The police will certainly come and shake you down for money if they know you have it. Really, are you that much of an idiot, honest to god. A real James Roszko type here folks. Law enforcement doesn't mean cops sitting around doing nothing all day and harassing/entrapping law abiding citizens. They need to be cut to 1/4 of the size. I thought it was 50%, now it's 1/4. However I'm glad to see that some people can't take responsibility for the fact that they broke the law when going 50 over the legal limit. What deters people from breaking laws is the 0 tollerence, tough punishments that you will get if you break the law. Just look at japan. Japan has more police per capita than Canada. So you're point is completely moot. So would you then argue that we should be on par with Japan in terms of the amount of police officers since their approach seems to be working? http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_pol_...lice-per-capita Once again Mikedavid your ignorance is really shining through here. Edited December 10, 2007 by Canadian Blue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 The police will certainly come and shake you down for money if they know you have it. I don't know about today but when I spent six glorious months in Somalia there were no Somali Police. Lots of warlords and thugs, but no Police. So am I to believe that you think we'd somehow be better off without the Police? That without Police the crime rate would just somehow dissipate into thin air in a fresh Lavender smelling cloud? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Blue Posted December 11, 2007 Report Share Posted December 11, 2007 The really idiotic thing is that Mikedavid used Japan as an example of what Canada should follow, yet for some reason Japan has more police per capita than Canada. This guy doesn't work around reason, here are a few examples of what he has stated in the past: -MMP will give way to "Islamic Parties" even though that has not happened in New Zealand or Germany. -Told people to vote against John Tory, then after the election said that 100% of "minority ridings" went to the Liberals, and then later stated he did not include NDP and Tory ridings. Either way his statistics were obviously skewed. -Has stated that Ruby Dhalla hijacked the Liberal Party nomination for MP in her riding through support from minorities, despite the fact she was appointed by Paul Martin and not nominated. -Supports implementation of the electoral college so as to ensure the Bloc never wins seats, even though under the electoral college the Bloc would win all of Quebec's seats. -A belief that immigrants are stealing all of the housing from Canadian's, yet once again without any proof to back this up. -Believes that the Zamboni drivers are immigrants, thus they have caused the Leafs to play shitty this year. [made this one up, but you get the point] So am I to believe that you think we'd somehow be better off without the Police? That without Police the crime rate would just somehow dissipate into thin air in a fresh Lavender smelling cloud? Mikedavid believes that since he saw a police cruiser pull a car over for speeding, then that must be all the police do all day. None of what he says is based on any kind of logic or reasoning. It's kind of like how he can't comprehend how criminals get from the street to the courtroom, it's automatically assumed that the police had no part in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted December 11, 2007 Report Share Posted December 11, 2007 Our village, our Village MikeDavid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcinmoka Posted December 11, 2007 Report Share Posted December 11, 2007 In case anyone has never seen it (and I strongly recommend) The Human Cost of Immigration http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEedZJka1HQ P.S. Mike David and anyone else who may be inclined, it is SATIRICAL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted December 11, 2007 Report Share Posted December 11, 2007 I wish I had speakers....or youtube had subtitles...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcinmoka Posted December 11, 2007 Report Share Posted December 11, 2007 (edited) I wish I had speakers....or youtube had subtitles. With a mortgage (gage a mort i.e wages till death) in Forest Hill, one needs to make sacrifices. Though I'm sure I could toss you a pair of headphones. This clip is worth it. I suggest noting it for future reference. Edited December 11, 2007 by marcinmoka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted December 11, 2007 Report Share Posted December 11, 2007 With a mortgage (gage a mort i.e wages till death) in Forest Hill, one needs to make sacrifices. Though I'm sure I could toss you a pair of headphones.This clip is worth it. I suggest noting it for future reference. I hope I haven't implied that I have a forest hill mortgage. I may be thick but I know the value of a buck and I would not pay 2 million for a McMansion........no, I live in FH and have for almost 20 years.......but I don't own there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.