Thread: dog the bounty hunter in jail

I was about to post a long rebutle that quiet honestly was not very nice... sheer frustration. I'm glad you figured it out.

And theoretically, rather then undermining the extradition treaties, extradition treaties exist for just this reason.


Out of curiosity have you ever lived in the US?

Originally Posted by Arrianna

I was about to post a long rebutle that quiet honestly was not very nice... sheer frustration. I'm glad you figured it out.

Out of curiosity have you ever lived in the US?

A long rebutle that wasn't very nice?!?! That's not very nice hehe

I was getting quite frustrated too...the capslock was looking mighty tempting hehe....so thank goodness I realized why we weren't meeting eye to eye....

As for living in the United States, no, never lived there, though I've had several friends who have either lived or moved to there. I'm not sure if that question is meant to open me up to "then what would you know of American laws," but incase that is, I've taken a couple of international political science courses, so I guess my posts were coming from my theoretically problem of the two country's treaties, and not the American law.

Originally Posted by Chubz

As for living in the United States, no, never lived there, though I've had several friends who have either lived or moved to there.

Actually I was wondering because I have lived in BC for nearly a year and a half. In fact 6 months of that was on Vancouver Island.

I ran into one thing alot while I was there. Namely alot of people who thought they knew what it is like in the US because of what they had been told by others or a single experience while on vacation but really had no clue. Ok, to be more accurate I ran into alot of people who would look at me and say "I don't mean to be rude" and then preceed to do just that by telling me what it was like in the US (and not the good things, nooo...). Now think about that for a minute. I am from the US and they are telling me what it is like. Not only that but 90% of it is wrong. I did alot of smilling and nodding while keeping my mouth shut.

The reason I asked was because you make a statement about the US news in your deleted post which I was wondering whether you said in anger or if you meant it. Because if you did you just added to my list of things I have been told which are fallous. Congratulations it's a long list.

I agree that there is a high amount of American bashing up here in BC, which generally I can't stand. I don't like bashing americans, and to be honest, at my last job, if I were to take an equal ratio of BC'ers to American's that I had come in contact with, the Americans are generally in a much better mood than the regular BC people that came through....one of the nicest people I talked to during my job was a lady from Texas.....Sadly, we had some American tourists come in one day, and they were actually making fun of themselves...they were like "oh, I bet you get a lot of us stupid Americans up here," and I really felt sorry because they shouldn't have to do that. When it comes to Americans, Canada can be VERY pretentious, and I dislike it when they go on about "oh americans are evil cuz of this, and that, and etc," because most of the time its a complete misconception, and generally not true. My University has at least five clubs in it that probably just sit around and bash America, and have little protests on campus, because they deem that as being 'politically conscious.'

However, my remark about the United States news is based on the actual reporting that goes on over there (mainly on news channels such as CNN and Fox) because there is a lack of good reporting there. There is always bias in news, no matter what they say, and there is always companies behind the news, but when I watch the BBC, or CBC, and switch it to an American news company, I notice an immediate difference.

I'm not saying this in a patronizing way, but watch the BBC and notice the types of questions that are asked by the British journalists to politicians. If it is an important subject, the journalists will pounce on the politician if he makes any error. It's a no holds-barred fight at that point. Turn it back to CNN, or FOX, and the type of questions asked by reporters are deplorable in comparison. I'm sorry, but FOX and CNN are fueled by opinion, not news. At least 1/4 of the airtime of CNN and FOX are given to people who are not journalists and simply have their own tv show, or radio show, and while they are only two newsstations out of many in the US, they are the most watched in terms of statistics and ratings, so the poor journalism that goes on does have an unfortunate effect.

This is a poor example, but an example nonetheless (don't think I get my opions from simply watching comedy shows)....The Daily Show last night talked about Newsweek, which printed an article about the war in Afghanistan and how it was fueling more terrorists, but in the US, they removed the cover story and instead talked about a lesbian photographer....er...censorship anyone? (Like I said, quoting from the Daily Show isn't a good example, but honestly turn on the television and try and see the difference between major channels in the US, and major channels in Britain).

Thanks. I will definatly agree that there is alot of bias in the news where politics is concered. The news in the US has been involved in "nation shaping" since day one and that is hardly likely to change anytime soon. Usually that is only where politics is concered though. News agencies with a bias toward a politition, policy, or party will give them a free ride while slandering the other side. Since Dog is not involved in politics the news is hardly going to give him a free ride however.

The article in newsweek? Yeah, that was pretty stupid. It wasn't censorship however. The US government hasn't had that kind of authority since WWII. That was called editing... and pretty foolish editing at that. I had a feeling you were thinking in those terms though which is why I wondered your POV. You see in the US when the news doesn't print something because of the government it's because they asked pretty please and the news agency decided to be nice. The "censorship" that occurs here is from the top down. The top being ownership who can both hire and fire you. That is not actually censorship but it is certainly bias.


...and yeah, when I want a full rounded veiw of international events I go read BBC news as well.

That's a good point about censorship vs bias....

Yeah, right now Canadian news groups are having their own problems when it comes to politics because the Conservative Government had told party members not to talk to certain people that had been blacklisted. The government had gone through records pertaining to the "freedom of information act," and took down the names of journalists who had requested government information through that act. It gave the government a heads up on who was most likely going to ask gritty questions, and rather than deal with it they just told members not to talk to them. Of course, this got out to the news as well, and the government quickly back tracked. News companies up here are slowly deteriorating (we had 3 major companies who between them owned the majority of all tv stations and radio stations in Canada, and now it's done to 2, as one of them was sold to a competing company). One of the companies is well known for firing employees who shed israel in a poor light in the news.

I guess I should probably mention something about Dog in here so this doesn't get dinged as fully off-topic hehe. Er....Yeah, the Mexican authorities are pretty slack (two Canadians were murdered in Mexico, and it took them a month or so before the Mexican authorities started workin on it, and they blamed two other Canadian women in the hotel at the time, despite contrary evidence). But I really don't think this will fully go through. I will lay money down that an agreement will be reached where Dog continues to be under house arrest or something.

though he did the US a favor in helping to capture a very serious criminal, he did it through illegal means, if it is illegal in mexico to bounty hunt, then he violated mexico's law, instead of doing what most do, which is seek out government help, though this sucks as it can take months, this is the way the law works, can you imagine if that were to happen to other countries or yours, would you allow no matter how good it may cause this guy to break your rules which are put in place.