Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 2
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
crazymamma





Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 1011
Reputation: 71.8
votes: 14
Location: The kitchen

PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 7:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bear Pepper spray Mace is some pretty sweet stuff, it can spray at a serious pressure for up to 30 feet. it'll stop a grizzly dead and then it'll run like the dickens away from you, so imagine what it will do for your average B&E boy. A bit bulky for your purse, but a little decoupage and it is lovely on the bedroom night stand.

Best part about it is it is still legal in Canada.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 9:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Louise M. wrote:
What frightens urban residents, women especially, if that they don't know where the guns are located. Many live in apartment buildings and for all they know their neighbours have guns, registered or not. There is also the fear of being an innocent bystander caught in the middle of a gun fight on the street. I've always been a city dweller and felt these fears myself. I don't think these fears exist so much in rural settings.

Another reason urban dwellers are frightened of guns is lack of familiarity. They have freaky unrealistic ideas of what guns can do, based mainly on Hollyweird schlock and the very sight of guns makes them uncomfortable. It's totally illogical and irrational... typical left...

Louise M. wrote:
It's all part of the twisted leftist ideology of creating a non-violent society. There sill always be violence in society. It's time to deal with the real world.

I couldn't have said it better. Blame the gun for the actions of the person holding it. Blame the crime on poverty. Don't hold anyone responsible for their actions.

Louise M. wrote:
I think this comes back to the point that urban dwellers feel more threatened by guns than rural dwellers. Rural dwellers are more trusting of their neighbours than are city dwellers.

Rural folks aren't any more trusting but they actually know their neighbours which means they know who they can trust. Urban folks? Not so much...

Louise M. wrote:
Having raised two boys, been there and done that. I was so tough on them they both joined the military to ramp down the discipline. LOL. As for getting tough on criminals, I think women's attitudes are changing.

I hope you're right... and I hope the Conservatives start getting the message to them.

-Mac
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

crazymamma wrote:
Bear Pepper spray Mace is some pretty sweet stuff, it can spray at a serious pressure for up to 30 feet.

Make sure you know the direction of the wind... Over-spray hurts...

-Mac
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 1:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
...But coupled with that, citizens actually have to be allowed to defend themselves...


I think that is the single largest problem to deal with, even before allowing various tools of self-defense. Successive court rulings have placed pretty stringent limits on the use of force in defense of person or property. It would be nice to see 'Castle' and 'Stand Ground' doctrine vigorously applied in Canadian law.
casper35





Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 99
Reputation: 25.7Reputation: 25.7Reputation: 25.7

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am not sure that most women are naturally NDP or LPOC. I think that women are conditioned to be by the media. The TV media overwhelmingly pushes progressive ideas in news, advertisement and entertainment. I hate to say it but I think that women are more susceptible to this marketing than men. (I mean how else does one explain the appeal of high heeled shoes and hair waxing).

I think that conservatives have some very appealing messages for women, if only they had as much free media coverage to sell it. Since that won't change in Canada, they have an uphill battle. Best to target women on an issue by issue basis, as mentioned, crime and safety is one. Despite what the media portrays, the CPC childcare allowance is very popular to the parents I know. They might want to consider some more family friendly policies that are consistent with conservative values like income splitting. It would not only allow for families to reduce taxes but also give stay at home moms the ability to contribute to things like CPP.

Another area ripe for improvement is a better way to deduct daycare cost. A huge chunk of your paycheck goes towards childcare. In my case, the babysitter got more than half of my after tax income. It is one of the main reasons why women drop out of the workforce. The costs of employment (daycare, increased stress levels, decrease of quality family time) outweigh the financial benefits. There must be some creative solutions to help both single mothers and two income households keep more of their earnings. Maybe allow a gross up of childcare expenses to reduce taxable income (similar to gross ups to reduce investments taxes). How about having daycare costs calculated on the final page of the tax form (refund or balance owing) to significantly reduce the amount owing or increase the refund received. I think any help with daycare costs would be another well received family friendly policy. Particularity young families, who are struggling the most given housing and gasoline cost. These young families should continue to be target area for the CPC as they probably are not yet rigidly supporting any party.
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, I am just going to go ahead and be mean and say it straight.

I moved into a 50 year old less than 900 square foot space, in a less desirable area, with my new wife. This is called, or at least used to be called, a starter home. This is the kind of home a single income family can easily afford. Most of the other people I know, their first house was 1200 square feet or more, in some cases brand new, and all in the most desirable areas. My first home cost $85,000, other people were paying in excess of $200,000 for their first home. I actually considered trailers in outlying towns that were considerably cheaper. I had the 25% down, some had only 10% or even 5%. I hear they will give you a zero down mortgage these days. I question whether all these people, who are struggling with childcare costs, and gas costs, are doing anything to live within their means, or even figure out what their means actually are. Do they even know that they have means? I think people should be looking to help themselves before they look for the government to step in.
crazymamma





Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 1011
Reputation: 71.8
votes: 14
Location: The kitchen

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

All right I'm really P.O.'d this morning. As a woman in Ottawa I can't believe the sentences that were handed down, on two infamous cases, Freaking back door plea bargains in which the victim has ZERO say.

One case the perpetrator gets ten years for the rape & killing cyclist Ardeth Wood. Well not quite ten years because they will deduct time served waiting for trial. Make it 7 years and 3 moths shall we? Oops not 7 years 3 months because he will be eligible for day parole in approx. 4 years and a bit. Oh and those 5 other rapes? Forget they ever happened, victims you never existed because this sick puppy is not a dangerous offender,r he was abused as a child and he will serve his time concurrently.

Case number two: Jennifer is snatched off path on her way home from work, killed and dumped in a natural trail walk in Ottawa. No dangerous offender status, just a quiet send off for Twenty some years.

I don't understand how it has happened that the victim or family has no input to these plea bargains. I would love to see a situation where we get representation somewhere in the process.

I would also like there to be a day when the names of judges and lawyers were publicized when they arbitrarily make these decisions on behalf of the people. I bet you they would think twice if folks knew who they were and were able to voice their disgust.

If you want more women to vote, you need to really speak to this.


Sorry if I sound as angry as I am.
casper35





Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 99
Reputation: 25.7Reputation: 25.7Reputation: 25.7

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 12:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I understand what you are saying. Our single income family of six live in a 900 square foot house that cost us less that 70G. But we live in a very small town with an average income. I also worked for many years before we could afford to have our first child when just shy of 30yrs old. We still do not have much money left over for extras after paying the mortgage, utilities, property taxes, gasoline, food, income tax.

My friends in Estevan can not find a similar sized 3 bedroom house for under 175,000. Same for Saskatoon and Regina. So unless you want to raise your family in Riversdale Saskatoon or Northcentral Regina, it really is a struggle to find affordable housing. The other choice is to live farther from the city but then there is increased transportation costs.

Remember too that I am not suggesting income redistribution but instead to allow families to keep more of their own earnings. A tax reduction is not a new social program or government handout. A new social program would be universal daycare, which I don't support. A handout is the childcare allowance or the child tax benefit. Daycare benefits the government since it employs babysitters and they pay income tax. In a sense it would be returning some of that income tax money to daycare users - parents. Any tax reduction is a good one. One that might attract young mothers and fathers to the CPC is even better.

One more consideration is aging demographics and future labour shortages. Both might be helped by allowing (working, taxpaying) families to afford to have more children at a younger age while still being able to have both parents work (if they choose). Raising kids is expensive regardless if you both work or not.

Anyway, just my contribution on how the CPC might be able to attract more women, help families and reduce taxes.
mltoryblue





Joined: 29 Oct 2007
Posts: 109
Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 12:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The CPC needs to start playing the middle class card a whole lot more. I really believe this is where the next majority lays.

For years the Liberals have told us that anyone making over 35k a year is fine and only people making less money than that are having a tough time. GST benefit, Child tax credit are examples of this. What they don't realize is that they have squeezed the middle class to support these programs.

The middle class is where the masses are in this country, poverty has been on the decline for a decade now no matter what the special interest groups will have you believe. Its time for across the board tax cuts that help out all Canadians, not stealing from Peter to pay Paul.
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 3:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, there is a squeeze on, even for people like you Casper, and me, who didn't buy all the house they could possibly afford. On a middle of the road income, 50 or 60 thousand a year (before tax), it is just a fact of life that sacrifices will have to be made. You can either have a new car and take a winter vacation, or have children, that kind of thing. It would definitely secure my vote if there were anyone who cared, or was willing to make sure the middle class was secure and growing. The problem is, I don't actually see too many people willing to change their vote at this point in time. The Liberals I know take the child cash, take the tax cuts, and just keep voting Liberal.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 2

Goto page Previous  1, 2  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


CanWest says Conservatives need women's vote for majority

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB