Black Dog Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 How many people need to be shot or run over before we consider this a problem? Do you think we are immune to the much worse attacks that have happened elsewhere? Are you going to completely ignore the other people who have been caught and stopped before they followed through on their plans? The Toronto 18 wasn't real? It isn't also true that after being released one of those men went to fight in Syria and died there? Was it all imaginary? Are all of those things simply not real for you, or is it that you have other boogeymen or countries to blame for the roots causes? Other conspiracy theories to believe in? Do you think the mass shooting in France can't happen here? Or if that it did, it simply wouldn't be impressive enough for you to think that we maybe should try to prevent it from happening again? What is the personal level of terrorism that you are willing to accept? Of course if we had this discussion say about our defunct gun registry most of you against new terrorism laws would happily cheer for the registry's return, but then the main target of that law was legal middle aged white male gun owners, Christians most of them, those scum, who statistically harm people with those firearms very, very rarely. Aw @#$% them, and their freedoms. The thought that we just shouldn't get involved and pretend the world outside this country doesn't exist is so silly and immoral that it isn't worth addressing, ask Japan how that worked out for them As for seeing jihadists in the tree tops, well that's just another ridiculous comment made by someone attempting to diminish real issues at hand and also not worth addressing, it's simply not a serious opinion or statement. What the hell does this little rant have to do with the proposed terror legislation? Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 I don't need to see them in tree tops. I've seen them shoot up the Parliament building in Ottawa, and a newspaper office in France just recently. The folly of your concern is trying to take these isolated incidents, carried out by a couple of crackpots and fashion it into some major conspiracy theory which has no basis in fact nor statistic. Crime in Canada is lower than it has been in 40 years, including violent crime. Dont get sucked in and jump under your bed while voting for Harper to get you back out. Quote
Boges Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 Anti Terrorism is a good wedge issue. Opponents either have to downplay the fear or create their own sentiment of fear over Big Brotherish government oversight, making them sound silly. I'm not scared of terrorism, but I do like the idea that there are people tracking people that may want to participate in terrorism. Quote
eyeball Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 Good answer. I take it that you don't have one then. It was an acknowledgement to a statement not an answer to a question. Want to try again? Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Big Guy Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 Last year there were a number of needless deaths. The following are approximate figures; Obesity - 3,000 Suicide - 4,000 Traffic Accidents - 2,000 Homicides using a gun - 200 Terrorists -2 What we really need is freedom restricting legislation to keep those terrorist death rates down. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Shady Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 The folly of your concern is trying to take these isolated incidents The problem is, is that they're not all that isolated. And potentially can be significant. Quote
Shady Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 Last year there were a number of needless deaths. The following are approximate figures; Obesity - 3,000 Suicide - 4,000 Traffic Accidents - 2,000 Homicides using a gun - 200 Terrorists -2 What we really need is freedom restricting legislation to keep those terrorist death rates down. The issue is that a terrorist attack can potentially kill thousands, tens of thousands or even more. If somebody wants to eat themselves to death, that's their choice. I'm sure you can see the difference in your non-apt comparisons. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 Last year there were a number of needless deaths. The following are approximate figures; Obesity - 3,000 Suicide - 4,000 Traffic Accidents - 2,000 Homicides using a gun - 200 Terrorists -2 What we really need is freedom restricting legislation to keep those terrorist death rates down. Interesting point and perspective.......none the less, I hope the NDP and Liberals campaign against the anti-terror laws well doubling down on their views over the lack of threat posed by ISIS........ Quote
Shady Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 It was an acknowledgement to a statement not an answer to a question. Want to try again? Yes, let's try again. What Harper aggression are you referring to? Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 Last year there were a number of needless deaths. The following are approximate figures; Obesity - 3,000 Suicide - 4,000 Traffic Accidents - 2,000 Homicides using a gun - 200 Terrorists -2 What we really need is freedom restricting legislation to keep those terrorist death rates down. Good point. Just be careful who you remind of those stats, it used to be illegal to kill yourself in this country and we dont want to see a addition to C 51 where you could be arrested if you might kill yourself. Quote
Shady Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 Good point. Just be careful who you remind of those stats, it used to be illegal to kill yourself in this country and we dont want to see a addition to C 51 where you could be arrested if you might kill yourself. Killing yourself only kills other people too if you're a suicide bomber. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 The issue is that a terrorist attack can potentially kill thousands, tens of thousands or even more. If somebody wants to eat themselves to death, that's their choice. I'm sure you can see the difference in your non-apt comparisons. I'd like to see similar statistics from September of 1939, and replace terrorists with Nazis......... Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 The issue is that a terrorist attack can potentially kill thousands, tens of thousands or even more. If somebody wants to eat themselves to death, that's their choice. I'm sure you can see the difference in your non-apt comparisons. Now there is a tin hat response if ever I heard one. A meteorite could strike earth and do the same thing. What to do about that. More to the point, read BGs stats. Terrorists 2. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 I'd like to see similar statistics from September of 1939, and replace terrorists with Nazis......... Therein lies the problem, you have to go back to such times to get stats to support all this current freaking out. Quote
Shady Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 Now there is a tin hat response if ever I heard one. A meteorite could strike earth and do the same thing. What to do about that. More to the point, read BGs stats. Terrorists 2. You're not being intellectually honest. Quote
poochy Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/3-ottawa-men-with-alleged-isis-ties-face-terrorism-related-charges-1.2943313 See, that also isnt real, it's not happening, live and let live. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 Killing yourself only kills other people too if you're a suicide bomber. Um a law against suicide has nothing to do with killnig others. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 You're not being intellectually honest. No idea what you are trying to get at. Are you disputing the stats per chance. Quote
eyeball Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 The problem is, is that they're not all that isolated. And potentially can be significant. Well sure, if we ask for it hard enough. We could potentially invite thousands of deaths. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Black Dog Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 The issue is that a terrorist attack can potentially kill thousands, tens of thousands or even more. Large scale terror attacks like the kind you describe aren't the concern as those are complex and difficult to carry out. The big threat will be from lone wolf types and even then, the amount of damage such actors can do is quite limited. Frankly, the low number of terrorist attacks indicates the current system is doing a pretty good job of meeting such threats which begs the question of why more powers are needed. Quote
Black Dog Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/3-ottawa-men-with-alleged-isis-ties-face-terrorism-related-charges-1.2943313 See, that also isnt real, it's not happening, live and let live. So what you're saying is the system works as it stands. Quote
Big Guy Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 As for allowing people to leave Canada to fight for a cause; How many Canadians are fighting in Ukraine for Kiev? For the rebels? How many Canadians are fighting in Syria for the rebels? For the Syrian army? For ISIS? For the good guy Kurds? For the bad guy Kurds? How many Canadians are in Libya fighting for the Libyan government? For the rebels? For Al Qaeda? By the way - who are the good guys and the bad guys in Libya? Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Boges Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 Large scale terror attacks like the kind you describe aren't the concern as those are complex and difficult to carry out. The big threat will be from lone wolf types and even then, the amount of damage such actors can do is quite limited. Frankly, the low number of terrorist attacks indicates the current system is doing a pretty good job of meeting such threats which begs the question of why more powers are needed. Awesome Wedge issue is Cuz. Quote
Black Dog Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 Awesome Wedge issue is Cuz. You know that. I know that. Some of the True Believers here think it's actually about public safety/the terr'sts. Quote
Boges Posted February 3, 2015 Report Posted February 3, 2015 BTW there's little difference between Harper re-affirming Anti-Terror Policies and JT deciding to re-open the discussion about Abortion by saying nominees have to be Pro-Choice. Not once has Harper even approached discussing Abortion since he became PM. But JT decided to rile up both bases by talking about Abortion. There was no reason for it. Harper is doing the same here. He's capitalizing on the sentiment following the France Shooting to rile up the base and rile of the opposition's base so he can target opponents as pro terrorism. Good Politics. Quote
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.