Questions for Canadians - Page 3 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Yakk · 03-07-2005, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by inhalo

This is something I have never heard of.......Do you have any more examples of similar "crimes"?

Not that I know of.

Basically, endorsing genocide in Canada is a criminal act. We consider it yelling fire in a crowded theatre: it does get people killed.

Here is the law:
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/c-46/41491.html

Quote:

318. (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

Definition of "genocide"

(2) In this section, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part any identifiable group, namely,

(a) killing members of the group; or

(b) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.

Consent

(3) No proceeding for an offence under this section shall be instituted without the consent of the Attorney General.

Definition of "identifiable group"

(4) In this section, "identifiable group" means any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion or ethnic origin.

There is also Public incitement of hatred, Wilful promotion of hatred

Quote:

Public incitement of hatred

319. (1) Every one who, by communicating statements in any public place, incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Wilful promotion of hatred

(2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Defences

(3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2)

(a) if he establishes that the statements communicated were true;

(b) if, in good faith, he expressed or attempted to establish by argument an opinion on a religious subject;

(c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be true; or

(d) if, in good faith, he intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in Canada.

The entire law isn't included here. Follow the link if you want to get the procedural nitty-gritty and some term definitions.

Charlatan · 03-08-2005, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yakk

I can think of many reasons why someone would not want to move to Canada.

1> Their relatives/family aren't here, and they like their relatives.
2> They have a love of their current country, and don't want to leave it.
3> They dislike the weather in Canada.
4> Their values don't line up with Canadian values (for example, Canada makes genocidal speech a crime -- some people put the bar of free speech higher or lower)
5> They like lower/higher marginal tax rates and the government services levels thus provided
6> They can't get in
7> They enjoy hearing about their nation engage in military conquest, or are more pacifistic than the Canadian government
8> They are working in a niche field where employment isn't availiable in Canada, gets paid more elsewhere, or is otherwise superior
9> They are in a close relationship with someone with one of the above reasons to not want to come here
10> Inertia

That's a good list Yakk...

Janey · 03-08-2005, 05:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by inhalo

How much cold are we really talking about here? I can not imagine your winters being that much worse than those in Wisconsin. Winter rolls up its sleeves and clenches its fists in November and pounds through to about now. Granted winters here are very unpredictable. Yesterday it was HOT 50°F....... today it is 20°F and snowing. I would say that about half the winter is below zero with the wind chill. It is never really above freezing for very long if ever.

Sorry bout the °F

What are the usual summer temps (°C is fine)

yesterday in Toronto it was 5 degrees C. or 41F. All the snow was melting. Overnight it dropped to 5F or -9 F with the windchill. the sidwalks are like skaitng rinks now, and the wind is biting. typical winter temperature swing for Toronto.

In the summer, a pleasant 25 to 30 C (77F - 86F) is quite common, with humidex reading pusing the temp up to 40 or higher (104F or higher ) for several days in a row.

inhalo · 03-08-2005, 06:18 AM

10th Question.

C*NS%RSHIP! I am sure you are all well aware of the controversy over Janet Jackson's star studded nipple. The states have a really hard time dealing with nudity in the public. What are the Canadian views on the human body? What are the limits of decency? Is sex worse than violence? It is here!

Janey · 03-08-2005, 06:29 AM

on canadian tv, the word mother-fucker is censored so that it comes out as ***-*** before 9 pm and ***-fucker after 9 pm.

it's true, I've seen it.

There seems to be proper nudity on basic (non pay) cable in the evenings after prime time usually in sex shows. No hardcore. The nipple thing was so humourous from our perpsective. Fashion-Television (usually broadcast in early evening) showed that kind of stuff regularly all throught the '80's & '90's. I personally couldn't get over how much reaction Janet got down there. I thought the entire dance routine was more lewd than the final rip.

Charlatan · 03-08-2005, 06:33 AM

Our media is much more liberal than what you would find in the US.

For example, The Sopranos is broadcast on CTV (the equivalent of NBC or CBS) in prime time, uncensored. You can regulary here words like Shit and Fuck on the air and on the cable channels, nudity is not uncommon.

The main reason for this, as far as I can see, is that we do not have the puritanical history that the US has. We don't have the same numbers of fundamentalists in our societal make up. They are there but the numbers are much smaller. We are fundamentally a secular society. Politcians who talk about God the way that George Bush does, do not get elected or re-elected.

Quite frankly, most of us were scratching our heads over the whole wardrobe malfunction. It was just a nipple...

aberkok · 03-08-2005, 06:38 AM

Well, several years ago it became legal for women in Ontario to go topless in public as men do.

Otherwise I don't notice too much more liberalism on the subject. I don't think there would have been quite as much public outcry if Janet revealed herself here, and I don't notice our T.V. having that much more nudity. I'm gonna have to say sex and violence are treated about equally over here, with a slight lean towards being like you, our Southern neighbours.

We just don't get as upset about stuff, eh?

inhalo · 03-08-2005, 06:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

Politcians who talk about God the way that George Bush does, do not get elected or re-elected.

I think I am in love!

Daoust · 03-08-2005, 08:40 AM

In regards to censorship, all the above being said, while I do think we're definitely a more relaxed nation when it comes to saying fuck on television and showing titties, the question I ask is, how does that make us a more advanced country? Are we more evolved because we don't care what kind of crap our children are exposed to on television. Should we be recognized because we 'embrace our sexuality' in a European kind of way and shamelessly showcase it on CTV?

I really don't think we're polar opposites to the US when it comes to censorship. I think we could stand to benefit from some of their restrictions and guidelines.

Now, I'm a fiercely patriotic Canadian, one who'd fight tooth and nail to forever be independent of increased U.S. influence, but I'm also quite weary of where unchecked liberalism in the media can lead us.

BigBen · 03-08-2005, 08:47 AM

Our strippers go down to the bare skin.

I went to the peelers in the US, and these girls were dancing around in g-strings. Okay I thought, the g-string goes on the 3rd dance of the set. No big deal.

Only, they didn't ever take tham off. I said, "I am going back to Canada, where the weather is cold, the beer is cold, and the strippers are hot."

How's that for censorship?

Janey · 03-08-2005, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daoust

In regards to censorship, all the above being said, while I do think we're definitely a more relaxed nation when it comes to saying fuck on television and showing titties, the question I ask is, how does that make us a more advanced country? Are we more evolved because we don't care what kind of crap our children are exposed to on television. .

Of course we all know that children should be in bed by 9 pm. As responsible citizens of Canada, there is widespread understanding that minors (i.e. everybody who is too young to participate in this forum) require their 10 hrs of sleep at night in order to be good, effective students at school.

That being said, parents who renege on said responsibility put their children at risk of dirty words and exposed titties, if they also allow these children to watch television outside of prime time. But I'm sure that doesn't happen, as any children who are not in bed at after 9 pm are studiously completing their homework.

Charlatan · 03-08-2005, 10:28 AM

Daoust... have you watched TV lately? Before every show start and after every commecial break the broadcasters have warnings that come up: This program contains nudity and foul language. Viewer discretion is advised.

As Janey points out, it isn't like these shows are on at 4:30 in the afternoon and marketed to children. They are generally on after 9 pm and aimed at mature audiences. If you don't like the show. Don't watch it. If your kids are up at 9 pm and watching these shows without your knowledge... that is a whole other issue.

Our media is not "unchecked" it is quite responisble. They do, however, assume that viewers, and more importantly parents, will share in that responsibility.

snowy · 03-08-2005, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janey

The nipple thing was so humourous from our perpsective. Fashion-Television (usually broadcast in early evening) showed that kind of stuff regularly all throught the '80's & '90's.

Hahahaha...my dad used to watch that show when I was a kid to look at the boobies.

Growing up near the border I watched a lot of Canadian and American TV. I can say Canadian TV is a lot less violent than American TV, not as censored, and definitely allows more sexuality to come through. I'd much rather my children watch people love each other than kill each other.

I distinctly recall being about 12 and staying up to watch some show about doctors in a Toronto clinic because it had sex scenes. Naughty, I know, but we definitely didn't have that on American TV at the time. NYPD Blue changed that a bit.

I'd also like to thank all of you fabulous Canadians for taking the time to answer all of these questions. It's been quite an education.

inhalo · 03-09-2005, 08:40 AM

11th Question.

BANG! BANG! BANG! The question of the day today is about guns. The states are flooded with weapons and not just rifles for hunters. Given the wilderness in Canada, guns must be somewhat common. What types of regulations control the guns. The states have a 5 day waiting period to allow for background checks and so that angry people can't just pick one up on a whim and start spraying bullets. The Bush administartion also lifted the ban on assault weapons recently. Have there been any High School shooting like Columbine up there?

Janey · 03-09-2005, 08:54 AM

BIG Issue of the day is the Federal Gun Registry programme. While it was an initiative born out of tragedy (the multiple shooting of women in a university in Montreal) it has typically spiralled out of control. A simple registry programme which will track ownership of firearms is costing hundreds of millions of dollars to develop, and seems to be ineffective (recent news about the shooting of 4 RCMP members in Alberta points the finger at this registry and why it didn't help to identify the problem before it could happen) and doesn't get at the root of the problem: the criminal element who will not register their weapons anyways.

Yes this is a big issue. You will get a lot of discussion on it. I personally think that there is an Urban/Rural dichotomy here. As a city girl, I have no problem with registering such lethal tools. After all I do the same withmy vehicle. Yes, it costs money, but so what? There is nothing fundamentally wrong, no loss of freedom involved. If i got a gun I would gladly register it. Especially since it would help to track it if it got stolen.

Rural Canada has s different view. I'm not sure that I can comment on it, but my understanding is that why should law abiding citizens have to be penalized for owning firearms and have to pay out just because they have them. They are a requirement for rural life, whether they are used for hunting or maintaining a farm, or large property. Actually, I still don't understand the resistance, as it seems to be only $$$ that are the problem. maybe somebody could state the opinion from that side.

To summarize:

- Gun registry good because it tracks the ownership of these weapons
- Gun registry bad because it is over-priced (close to a billion $)
- Gun Registrybad because criminal element will by pass it anyways.

Daoust · 03-09-2005, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janey

...Rural Canada has s different view. I'm not sure that I can comment on it, but my understanding is that why should law abiding citizens have to be penalized for owning firearms and have to pay out just because they have them. They are a requirement for rural life, whether they are used for hunting or maintaining a farm, or large property. Actually, I still don't understand the resistance, as it seems to be only $$$ that are the problem. maybe somebody could state the opinion from that side.

To summarize:

- Gun registry good because it tracks the ownership of these weapons
- Gun registry bad because it is over-priced (close to a billion $)
- Gun Registrybad because criminal element will by pass it anyways.

I fit into the law abiding citizenry who enjoy hunting for sport (dodges tomatoes from tree huggers) and think that the government is just picking on us. My family has been hunting for generations. The laws and restrictions placed on firearms and game hunting are so ridiculous, and expensive, it has all but ruined the sport. I have taken all the courses, and paid out all the ridiculous monies required so I can hunt. I know how to operate a firearm. I don't plan on using it to kill innocent people. But because of the idiocy of a few inbred idiots I have to suffer.
The gun registry is one of the biggest wastes of taxpayers money in recent decades. How the government has been able to sweep that whole fiasco under the rug is beyond me. And it hasn't even been effective, in my mind. All it has done is ruined years of family tradition by making it too expensive to hunt.

Charlatan · 03-09-2005, 10:29 AM

This is a big issue that is roiling beneath the surface a present and occasional on the surface. Janey paints a pretty accurate picture of urban vs. rural.

My brother in law is a Toronto cop and works one of the more dangerous areas of the city (the Malvern area in the North East) and there are a lot of guns on the streets. Most of which are coming in from the US illegally.

That said, Canada just doesn't have the gun culture that the US has... I've only known one person who collected guns and had pistol. It was a P38 pistol from his time in the military. I know a few hunters that have rifles.

The average person just doesn't carry. There is not a general feeling that I need to get a gun to protect myself (and the stats bear this out - the number of murders by handguns are much lower per capita than what you have in the US).

Janey · 03-09-2005, 10:31 AM

post deleted

replaced with happy thoughts.

to everybody in TFP....

Janey · 03-09-2005, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daoust

I fit into the law abiding citizenry who enjoy hunting for sport (dodges tomatoes from tree huggers) and think that the government is just picking on us. My family has been hunting for generations. The laws and restrictions placed on firearms and game hunting are so ridiculous, and expensive, it has all but ruined the sport. I have taken all the courses, and paid out all the ridiculous monies required so I can hunt. I know how to operate a firearm. I don't plan on using it to kill innocent people. But because of the idiocy of a few inbred idiots I have to suffer.
The gun registry is one of the biggest wastes of taxpayers money in recent decades. How the government has been able to sweep that whole fiasco under the rug is beyond me. And it hasn't even been effective, in my mind. All it has done is ruined years of family tradition by making it too expensive to hunt.

Can you give me the costs of registering one gun? I cant find it anywhere. that would certainly help to illustrate the problem. Also, if youcould compare it to the costs/obligations of pre-registry gun ownership costs, it would helpful.

Daoust · 03-09-2005, 10:39 AM

I haven't actually done alot of this stuff in a long time, but I'm sure I took a hunters safety course for close to $100, did a written and performance test that I'm sure cost more money, got a hunters game card for something like $10 plus $10-50 every season for bird/game stamps.
That's all the before hand stuff.
To be a lawful gun owner I had to take ANOTHER course so I could get my Firearms Acquisition and Possession Certificate, and this course would have cost something close to $100 and then to register my firearms cost another amount that I am actually unsure of, but I know there's a cost for each firearm. I know that was the piece of info you were looking for and I gave you a bunch of other crap info, but I hope it lends some insight into how costly it is to hunt/own a firearm these days.

Yakk · 03-09-2005, 10:45 AM

The federal gun registry was and is a debacle. It was implemented extremely poorly.

A friend of mine worked on the registry v2.0 or v3.0 -- multiple revisions before it even became operational. Under the terms of the law, they need a computer network that is secure, nation-wide, and independant of every other network, and present in every police office. This is expensive, difficult and error-prone.

As an aside, the program seems to have run out of funding. Under the current minority government, it probably won't be getting more.

I remember reading vaguely that Canada has more guns per capita than the USA.

I find your comment about 'lots of wilderness' funny. =)

Janey · 03-09-2005, 11:11 AM

well, speaking as an IT contractor, it sounded like a dream project while it lasted... To bad i missed that gravy train.

Sticky · 03-09-2005, 11:33 AM

sounds like they made it awefully more complicated (from a development stand point) then it should have been.

No surprise there.

I have see government requests for proposals for some projects and just the actual writen request for proposal is ridiculously complicated and overdone.
I could only imagine what an actual project is like.

vox_rox · 03-09-2005, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daoust

In regards to censorship, all the above being said, while I do think we're definitely a more relaxed nation when it comes to saying fuck on television and showing titties, the question I ask is, how does that make us a more advanced country? Are we more evolved because we don't care what kind of crap our children are exposed to on television.

This is interesting when we compare the amount of sexuality expressed on television the the amount of violence. I remember watching a movie on TBS several months ago that I had already seen on video some time ago. In one scene, this guy points his gun at the head of another guy, says "Adios mother-F****R," and shoots him in the forehead.

Well, on TBS, they edited out the audio for the expletive, but kept the video of the guy getting popped in the head.

So my question: Do I want my kids seeing nudity and sex on TV or violence and murder on TV? The networks have made up their minds, and I think it's crazy that the violence is rubber stamped with the ridiculous reason that we all the V-chip - talk about passing the buck! Yet, sexuality always seems to raise the ire of the public.

Our priorities have gotten badly skewed somewhere along the line, and I don't like where it is now. For that reason, I would just rather not watch television at all, and stick to renting movies when I have time. At least there is some control over the quality of entertainment on my screen, and I'm not tied into the advertising/programming whims of some MBA grad in a distant large city to determine what's good for me and for evrey single other household as well.

Peace,

Pierre

Charlatan · 03-09-2005, 12:03 PM

TBS is an American channel that originates in Atlanta. They censor their films all the time. I watch TBS quite a bit and have noticed that they also trim some of the excessive violence as well. Are you sure you saw the head shot or did you see the shot and then a dead body... I find it hard to believe that TBS would show a bullet slamming into someone's head. They are usually more careful than that...

I agree about the violence vs. sexuality trend in general but it something that I see on American TV vs. Canadian.

Yakk · 03-09-2005, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sticky

sounds like they made it awefully more complicated (from a development stand point) then it should have been.

No surprise there.

I have see government requests for proposals for some projects and just the actual writen request for proposal is ridiculously complicated and overdone.
I could only imagine what an actual project is like.

They wanted it to be secure, so theives couldn't get at weapon locations and use them as shopping lists.

They wanted it to be seperate from the police networks, so that gun ownership wouldn't show up in the same kind of searches as for criminals.

Basically, they let the practical simplicity of the situation get overrun with 'but, what about' exceptions. That is the problem when you try to make controversial legislation more paletable.

kramus · 03-09-2005, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by inhalo

6th Question.

The questioning of today deals with concepts like unemployment compensation and welfare programs. What do Canadians do when they lose their jobs? What types of programs are out there to help the economically challeged? With the winters up there it must suck to be homeless.

Important tidbit, but I don't know the details. If you quit your job you get nothing. If you are fired for just cause you get nothing. You get nothing while the system decides if you were fired for just cause or otherwise. Personally, I've had the same job since 1984 so I can't supply any up to date stuff, but my brother-in-law got canned a year ago for a policy infraction and he went without $ until he got hisself a jawb.

Sticky · 03-10-2005, 07:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yakk

They wanted it to be secure, so theives couldn't get at weapon locations and use them as shopping lists.

They wanted it to be seperate from the police networks, so that gun ownership wouldn't show up in the same kind of searches as for criminals.

Basically, they let the practical simplicity of the situation get overrun with 'but, what about' exceptions. That is the problem when you try to make controversial legislation more paletable.

Even with all the 'but, what about' exceptions I still don't see the complication. In fact it is easier to have a secure system if is not connected to any other system.

Of course I don't know all the requirements in detail, but I can't imagine how they even considered spending what they budgeted to spend.

inhalo · 03-10-2005, 11:26 AM

12th Question.

Hmmm, I am kinda unsure how to ask this. I am wondering what the difference in price is of common goods between Canada and America. Like a pack of Marlboro, a 12er of Molson, Milk, A new Jeep Wrangler, gas, ect. It would be nice to have actual costs, but honestly I don't even know how much I pay for milk. So, give me what you can. If you know of products in Canada that are cheaper and/or more expensive than in the states please list them. Otherwise, heck, a general "we pay a little more for......" will do just fine.

Again I appreciate your continued help.

Charlatan · 03-10-2005, 11:34 AM

Not sure I can answer this as I don't know what Americans pay for things... I would bet there is a price discrepancy between NYC and small town Iowa as well...

I do remember seeing a study a few years back that compared Boston to Toronto (they are arguably very similar in their make up) I'll see if I can Google it...

I couldn't find the article but I found these:

http://www.cita.utoronto.ca/webpages/livingin.shtml

http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html

vox_rox · 03-10-2005, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

Not sure I can answer this as I don't know what Americans pay for things... I would bet there is a price discrepancy between NYC and small town Iowa as well...

And also, to take it another step further, we can only really give you an idea in terms of Candian $, not USD unless you want to do the math. A good current example is the new Mac Mini from Apple. In the US it retails for $499 US, in Canada it retails for $629 CDN. If we (optimistacally) assume a Canadian $ is worth 80 cents US, then the price should actually be closer to $598.80 CDN. But then there's duty, shipping, etc. Also, we pay 7% GST (Goods and Services Tax) so the Mac Mini actually comes to $673.03 once all is said and done.

Right now gas in Calgary just jumped from 80.5 cents/litre to 85.9 cents/litre, but if you don't know what a litre is, this may not help you much. But really, a fucking nickel over night?! Come on! What's up with that?

Sorry for the rant, I'm just a little confused.

As for cars and that kind of thing, you can check out some Canadian Websites for that, keeping in mind tha tprices represented are in $CDN so the prices aren't necessarily grossly inflated.

As for food, that changes from place to place, from season to season, and even from BSE outbreak to BSE outbreak, so there is absolutes here, and I would hate to state something misleading. Or at least, more misleading.

Hope this helps.

Peace,

Pierre

ps. Charlatan, thanks for the kind words in the Exhib forum. You're TOOOO kind!

inhalo · 03-10-2005, 11:52 AM

[QUOTE=Charlatan]Not sure I can answer this as I don't know what Americans pay for things... I would bet there is a price discrepancy between NYC and small town Iowa as well...
QUOTE]

Yes this was my fear in asking. I know New Yorker pay over $5 for cigs while I can by a pack for $3-$4 in wisconsin. I think they give them away in Tennessee.

Thanks for the links though!!!!!

inhalo · 03-10-2005, 12:03 PM

Hey guys dont sweat converting currency. Just give me canadian dollars.

Do you guys have 2litre jugs of milk or is the common size bigger or smaller?

Charlatan · 03-10-2005, 12:24 PM

I get my milk in either 1 or 2 litre cartons or 3x1 litre bags... I think milk in bags is covered somewhere here in the Canadian thread and in one of Averett's photo visits to Canada...

inhalo · 03-10-2005, 12:32 PM

We have milk bags in WI too, I thought it was only a Dairy State thing.

hossified · 03-10-2005, 01:57 PM

3 bags of milk run you about 4.00 cdn

jeep wrangler with 6 cyl, brand new (not a rubicon model) approx $28000.00 cdn Case of beer - bottles (domestic) 33.00 cdn, but you get back 2.40 if you return the empties

Sticky · 03-10-2005, 06:42 PM

I am pretty sure that there are times during the year when you can get a case of domestic (blue, Ex, Canadian...) for about $21.00

Demeter · 03-10-2005, 06:51 PM

A pack of cigs here in Alberta will run you over $9. A 4 litre (US gallon = 3.78 litres) jug of 1% milk, about $3.50. Don't have milk bags here, not for many many years.
Gas locally runs around 82 cents/litre ($3.09/US gallon).

CandleInTheDark · 03-10-2005, 08:53 PM

The farther north you go, the more things cost. Head to The Pas, and you're paying $20 for a 6 pack, and you aren't even into the territories yet!

inhalo · 03-11-2005, 07:45 AM

13th Question.

I have already asked about health care service in general, now I must dig in a little deeper. In the states, dental coverage and vision are seperate plans. Do these services operate any different than your regular Health coverage? What about birth control and programs like Planned Parenthood?

03-08-2005, 06:29 AM	#85 (permalink)
Janey Junkie Location: Toronto	on canadian tv, the word mother-fucker is censored so that it comes out as *-* before 9 pm and **-fucker after 9 pm. it's true, I've seen it. There seems to be proper nudity on basic (non pay) cable in the evenings after prime time usually in sex shows. No hardcore. The nipple thing was so humourous from our perpsective. Fashion-Television (usually broadcast in early evening) showed that kind of stuff regularly all throught the '80's & '90's. I personally couldn't get over how much reaction Janet got down there. I thought the entire dance routine was more lewd than the final rip. Last edited by Janey; 03-08-2005 at 06:33 AM..*

03-08-2005, 06:33 AM	#86 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	Our media is much more liberal than what you would find in the US. For example, The Sopranos is broadcast on CTV (the equivalent of NBC or CBS) in prime time, uncensored. You can regulary here words like Shit and Fuck on the air and on the cable channels, nudity is not uncommon. The main reason for this, as far as I can see, is that we do not have the puritanical history that the US has. We don't have the same numbers of fundamentalists in our societal make up. They are there but the numbers are much smaller. We are fundamentally a secular society. Politcians who talk about God the way that George Bush does, do not get elected or re-elected. Quite frankly, most of us were scratching our heads over the whole wardrobe malfunction. It was just a nipple... __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

03-08-2005, 06:38 AM	#87 (permalink)
aberkok “Wrong is right.” Location: toronto	Well, several years ago it became legal for women in Ontario to go topless in public as men do. Otherwise I don't notice too much more liberalism on the subject. I don't think there would have been quite as much public outcry if Janet revealed herself here, and I don't notice our T.V. having that much more nudity. I'm gonna have to say sex and violence are treated about equally over here, with a slight lean towards being like you, our Southern neighbours. We just don't get as upset about stuff, eh? __________________ !check out my new blog! http://arkanamusic.wordpress.com Warden Gentiles: "It? Perfectly innocent. But I can see how, if our roles were reversed, I might have you beaten with a pillowcase full of batteries."

03-08-2005, 08:40 AM	#89 (permalink)
Daoust "I'm sorry. What was the question?" Location: Paradise Regained	In regards to censorship, all the above being said, while I do think we're definitely a more relaxed nation when it comes to saying fuck on television and showing titties, the question I ask is, how does that make us a more advanced country? Are we more evolved because we don't care what kind of crap our children are exposed to on television. Should we be recognized because we 'embrace our sexuality' in a European kind of way and shamelessly showcase it on CTV? I really don't think we're polar opposites to the US when it comes to censorship. I think we could stand to benefit from some of their restrictions and guidelines. Now, I'm a fiercely patriotic Canadian, one who'd fight tooth and nail to forever be independent of increased U.S. influence, but I'm also quite weary of where unchecked liberalism in the media can lead us. __________________ I have faith in a few things - divinity and grace But even when I'm on my knees I know the devil preys

03-08-2005, 08:47 AM	#90 (permalink)
BigBen Comedian Location: Use the search button	Hey, You guys forgot the most important point! Our strippers go down to the bare skin. I went to the peelers in the US, and these girls were dancing around in g-strings. Okay I thought, the g-string goes on the 3rd dance of the set. No big deal. Only, they didn't ever take tham off. I said, "I am going back to Canada, where the weather is cold, the beer is cold, and the strippers are hot." How's that for censorship? __________________ 3.141592654 Hey, if you are impressed with my memorizing pi to 10 digits, you should see the size of my penis.

03-08-2005, 06:18 AM	#84 (permalink)
inhalo Tilted Location: Purgatory	10th Question. C*NS%RSHIP! I am sure you are all well aware of the controversy over Janet Jackson's star studded nipple. The states have a really hard time dealing with nudity in the public. What are the Canadian views on the human body? What are the limits of decency? Is sex worse than violence? It is here!

03-08-2005, 10:28 AM	#92 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	Daoust... have you watched TV lately? Before every show start and after every commecial break the broadcasters have warnings that come up: This program contains nudity and foul language. Viewer discretion is advised. As Janey points out, it isn't like these shows are on at 4:30 in the afternoon and marketed to children. They are generally on after 9 pm and aimed at mature audiences. If you don't like the show. Don't watch it. If your kids are up at 9 pm and watching these shows without your knowledge... that is a whole other issue. Our media is not "unchecked" it is quite responisble. They do, however, assume that viewers, and more importantly parents, will share in that responsibility. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

03-09-2005, 08:40 AM	#94 (permalink)
inhalo Tilted Location: Purgatory	11th Question. BANG! BANG! BANG! The question of the day today is about guns. The states are flooded with weapons and not just rifles for hunters. Given the wilderness in Canada, guns must be somewhat common. What types of regulations control the guns. The states have a 5 day waiting period to allow for background checks and so that angry people can't just pick one up on a whim and start spraying bullets. The Bush administartion also lifted the ban on assault weapons recently. Have there been any High School shooting like Columbine up there?

03-09-2005, 08:54 AM	#95 (permalink)
Janey Junkie Location: Toronto	BIG Issue of the day is the Federal Gun Registry programme. While it was an initiative born out of tragedy (the multiple shooting of women in a university in Montreal) it has typically spiralled out of control. A simple registry programme which will track ownership of firearms is costing hundreds of millions of dollars to develop, and seems to be ineffective (recent news about the shooting of 4 RCMP members in Alberta points the finger at this registry and why it didn't help to identify the problem before it could happen) and doesn't get at the root of the problem: the criminal element who will not register their weapons anyways. Yes this is a big issue. You will get a lot of discussion on it. I personally think that there is an Urban/Rural dichotomy here. As a city girl, I have no problem with registering such lethal tools. After all I do the same withmy vehicle. Yes, it costs money, but so what? There is nothing fundamentally wrong, no loss of freedom involved. If i got a gun I would gladly register it. Especially since it would help to track it if it got stolen. Rural Canada has s different view. I'm not sure that I can comment on it, but my understanding is that why should law abiding citizens have to be penalized for owning firearms and have to pay out just because they have them. They are a requirement for rural life, whether they are used for hunting or maintaining a farm, or large property. Actually, I still don't understand the resistance, as it seems to be only $$$ that are the problem. maybe somebody could state the opinion from that side. To summarize: - Gun registry good because it tracks the ownership of these weapons - Gun registry bad because it is over-priced (close to a billion $) - Gun Registrybad because criminal element will by pass it anyways.

03-09-2005, 10:29 AM	#97 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	This is a big issue that is roiling beneath the surface a present and occasional on the surface. Janey paints a pretty accurate picture of urban vs. rural. My brother in law is a Toronto cop and works one of the more dangerous areas of the city (the Malvern area in the North East) and there are a lot of guns on the streets. Most of which are coming in from the US illegally. That said, Canada just doesn't have the gun culture that the US has... I've only known one person who collected guns and had pistol. It was a P38 pistol from his time in the military. I know a few hunters that have rifles. The average person just doesn't carry. There is not a general feeling that I need to get a gun to protect myself (and the stats bear this out - the number of murders by handguns are much lower per capita than what you have in the US). __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

03-09-2005, 10:31 AM	#98 (permalink)
Janey Junkie Location: Toronto	post deleted replaced with happy thoughts. to everybody in TFP....

03-09-2005, 10:39 AM	#100 (permalink)
Daoust "I'm sorry. What was the question?" Location: Paradise Regained	I haven't actually done alot of this stuff in a long time, but I'm sure I took a hunters safety course for close to $100, did a written and performance test that I'm sure cost more money, got a hunters game card for something like $10 plus $10-50 every season for bird/game stamps. That's all the before hand stuff. To be a lawful gun owner I had to take ANOTHER course so I could get my Firearms Acquisition and Possession Certificate, and this course would have cost something close to $100 and then to register my firearms cost another amount that I am actually unsure of, but I know there's a cost for each firearm. I know that was the piece of info you were looking for and I gave you a bunch of other crap info, but I hope it lends some insight into how costly it is to hunt/own a firearm these days. __________________ I have faith in a few things - divinity and grace But even when I'm on my knees I know the devil preys

03-09-2005, 10:45 AM	#101 (permalink)
Yakk Wehret Den Anfängen! Location: Ontario, Canada	The federal gun registry was and is a debacle. It was implemented extremely poorly. A friend of mine worked on the registry v2.0 or v3.0 -- multiple revisions before it even became operational. Under the terms of the law, they need a computer network that is secure, nation-wide, and independant of every other network, and present in every police office. This is expensive, difficult and error-prone. As an aside, the program seems to have run out of funding. Under the current minority government, it probably won't be getting more. I remember reading vaguely that Canada has more guns per capita than the USA. I find your comment about 'lots of wilderness' funny. =) __________________ Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

03-09-2005, 11:11 AM	#102 (permalink)
Janey Junkie Location: Toronto	well, speaking as an IT contractor, it sounded like a dream project while it lasted... To bad i missed that gravy train.

03-09-2005, 11:33 AM	#103 (permalink)
Sticky	sounds like they made it awefully more complicated (from a development stand point) then it should have been. No surprise there. I have see government requests for proposals for some projects and just the actual writen request for proposal is ridiculously complicated and overdone. I could only imagine what an actual project is like. __________________ Sticky The Stickman

03-09-2005, 12:03 PM	#105 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	TBS is an American channel that originates in Atlanta. They censor their films all the time. I watch TBS quite a bit and have noticed that they also trim some of the excessive violence as well. Are you sure you saw the head shot or did you see the shot and then a dead body... I find it hard to believe that TBS would show a bullet slamming into someone's head. They are usually more careful than that... I agree about the violence vs. sexuality trend in general but it something that I see on American TV vs. Canadian. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

03-10-2005, 11:26 AM	#109 (permalink)
inhalo Tilted Location: Purgatory	12th Question. Hmmm, I am kinda unsure how to ask this. I am wondering what the difference in price is of common goods between Canada and America. Like a pack of Marlboro, a 12er of Molson, Milk, A new Jeep Wrangler, gas, ect. It would be nice to have actual costs, but honestly I don't even know how much I pay for milk. So, give me what you can. If you know of products in Canada that are cheaper and/or more expensive than in the states please list them. Otherwise, heck, a general "we pay a little more for......" will do just fine. Again I appreciate your continued help.

03-10-2005, 11:34 AM	#110 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	Not sure I can answer this as I don't know what Americans pay for things... I would bet there is a price discrepancy between NYC and small town Iowa as well... I do remember seeing a study a few years back that compared Boston to Toronto (they are arguably very similar in their make up) I'll see if I can Google it... I couldn't find the article but I found these: http://www.cita.utoronto.ca/webpages/livingin.shtml http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke Last edited by Charlatan; 03-10-2005 at 11:40 AM..

03-10-2005, 11:52 AM	#112 (permalink)
inhalo Tilted Location: Purgatory	[QUOTE=Charlatan]Not sure I can answer this as I don't know what Americans pay for things... I would bet there is a price discrepancy between NYC and small town Iowa as well... QUOTE] Yes this was my fear in asking. I know New Yorker pay over $5 for cigs while I can by a pack for $3-$4 in wisconsin. I think they give them away in Tennessee. Thanks for the links though!!!!!

03-10-2005, 12:03 PM	#113 (permalink)
inhalo Tilted Location: Purgatory	Hey guys dont sweat converting currency. Just give me canadian dollars. Do you guys have 2litre jugs of milk or is the common size bigger or smaller?

03-10-2005, 12:24 PM	#114 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	I get my milk in either 1 or 2 litre cartons or 3x1 litre bags... I think milk in bags is covered somewhere here in the Canadian thread and in one of Averett's photo visits to Canada... __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

03-10-2005, 12:32 PM	#115 (permalink)
inhalo Tilted Location: Purgatory	We have milk bags in WI too, I thought it was only a Dairy State thing.

03-10-2005, 01:57 PM	#116 (permalink)
hossified face f$cker Location: canada	3 bags of milk run you about 4.00 cdn jeep wrangler with 6 cyl, brand new (not a rubicon model) approx $28000.00 cdn Case of beer - bottles (domestic) 33.00 cdn, but you get back 2.40 if you return the empties

03-10-2005, 06:42 PM	#117 (permalink)
Sticky	I am pretty sure that there are times during the year when you can get a case of domestic (blue, Ex, Canadian...) for about $21.00 __________________ Sticky The Stickman

03-10-2005, 06:51 PM	#118 (permalink)
Demeter Psycho	A pack of cigs here in Alberta will run you over $9. A 4 litre (US gallon = 3.78 litres) jug of 1% milk, about $3.50. Don't have milk bags here, not for many many years. Gas locally runs around 82 cents/litre ($3.09/US gallon).

03-10-2005, 08:53 PM	#119 (permalink)
CandleInTheDark Addict Location: Where the music's loudest	The farther north you go, the more things cost. Head to The Pas, and you're paying $20 for a 6 pack, and you aren't even into the territories yet! __________________ Where there is doubt there is freedom.

03-11-2005, 07:45 AM	#120 (permalink)
inhalo Tilted Location: Purgatory	13th Question. I have already asked about health care service in general, now I must dig in a little deeper. In the states, dental coverage and vision are seperate plans. Do these services operate any different than your regular Health coverage? What about birth control and programs like Planned Parenthood?