Or organization that has a hidden agenda to destabilize society and replace it with one of their own making.

The sad thing is, I had high hopes for Lemmy.ca, but it seems these same 100 accounts are starting to clog up the Lemmy user space. I keep seeing the same-old-same-old from a cadre of accounts that seem to work in tandem.

Do you have any idea as to exactly how many police they would need to actively investigate every car break in? You sound exactly like the criminal element in America that is demanding they defund the police to make it easier for criminals to prosper. This is Canada, not America.

And yet the public gets in an outrage when known criminals get put back on the street and then re-offend, some in heinous crimes. Given his background and the number of convictions, I am sure he has his solicitor on speed dial. He was previously charged with attacking people with a baseball bat, and you want the police to believe him? Just ignore the blood, and let him go? Exactly how were the police to believe that the ‘victim’ was legitimately an intruder, and not someone the knife-wielder actually invited into his home, they got into an argument, and this guy took a knife to him? Police are not mind readers, and they are used to people lying to them. No way are they going to believe either side. Charge them, get them off the street, and let the system run its course.

Yet not a word so far in these comments that almost 10% of Meta’s income stream comes from scam posts. No wonder Meta really does not want to do much about these scams.

In 2025, Meta made approximately $196.2 billion from ads. This included $16 billion from ads for scams and banned goods. While these are against its policies, enforcement is often reactive rather than proactive.

But of Meta made $16 billion from these posts, imagine how much the scammers made?

They are doing what they are capable of within their budgets, that are constrained by the taxpayer.

This case makes it clear. Once the authorities determine through an investigation all of the facts, and what actually happened, and collect all the facts, they will determine if the level of self-defense was appropriate.

So a privatized police force, on contract to only the wealthy who can afford them, accountable only to their employers?

The amount of times myself or someone i know has called them, only for them to say “not much we can do, just file a report online”

Exactly how high do you want your taxes to go? Complete coverage for all o the calls would be prohibitively expensive, and I suspect you would be one of the first people to protest your high taxes.

"Open season’ has a tendency to develop into open warfare against anyone you do not like. Unrestricted ‘self defense’ is wide open to abuse, like it is in America.

The Mexican cartel that thought they had a right to defend themselves by using a rocket against a police helicopter.

There is a very big difference between ‘defending yourself’ and ‘deciding to take the law into your own hand and dishing out your own brand of justice and punishment’.

Doing the first is your right, doing the second is vigilante justice and almost always turns the country into ‘rule by organized crime’. Mexico is a good example of what happens when the ‘right to defend’ leads to ‘the right to impose your will regardless of the law’.

Why does this read so much like a conversation between two chatbots? Neither is listening to the other, just responding,

Considering that it has been less than 100 years that America has been considered our ally (the entire purpose of Confederation in 1867 was to form a strong Canada that could defend itself against the American foe), the needle has been pointing to ‘enemy’ longer than it has been pointing to ‘ally’. History will regard the ‘friend’ part as just a brief interlude.

I am afraid Americans in general do not look at Canadians as ‘friends’, they look at us as ‘customers’.

I really good suggestion that was made was that they have to serve their term out as an independent until the next election.

You have an interesting version and concept of history and current events. Even if the Dems win the house, and even if they win the next Presidential election, nothing will change about the US because there is nothing any President can do to save it. The problems America has are systemic and ingrained in the economy. Trump is just the poster boy, bringing them out to the attention of the world. America has gone from America 80% world GDP to less than 20% world GDP in two decades. That will never be undone by ANY future President.

South Korea is actually taking over the role of America as the world’s arms manufacturer, (heading for fourth place) and that will not change no matter what happens in the US politically. As the world shies away from American arms, South Korea is determined to pick up the slack. Once they get market share, they will not lose it. They have the industrial capacity to beat out anyone, even the US.

Law of Unintended Consequences - More federal PC members are going over to the Liberals because they can n ot tolerate what is happening in their own party. Soon Carney will have his majority.

PP has already split from him.

They do not intend to use it. Just the knowledge that they have it and CAN use it is causing the US to back off against warmongering rhetoric against China. However, it is China that is developing the stable allies because of their military might, and America that is losing stable allies because it is becoming militarily impotent. America did not have the resources to defend even the Ukraine, so no country is now relying on the US to even defend America against another major military.

When those ‘few’ bombing survivors blow up buildings, yeah they make a big impact. The genocide was on the part of the Americans who dropped the bomb, they intended to wipe out the Uighur.

https://www.aljazeera.com/video/newsfeed/2025/5/26/afghan-villagers-struggle-years-after-us-dropped-mother-of-all#flips-6373504880112:0