Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

I'm satisfied with most of Trudeau's platform but the picture for the canadian economy is so loving depressing that it's hard to feel hopeful.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

I wonder if conservatives will make a big deal about 24 sussex being repaired, given that it's badly needed it for over a decade.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

PT6A posted:

No one except Saskatchewan gives the faintest gently caress about CFL, just so you know.

The calgary stampeders games seem pretty full.

I live in Saskatchewan and I hate the riders. I am loving the schadenfreude of seeing people's reaction to the Riders ridiculously lovely season.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Helsing pretty much hit the nail on the head. I find myself sympathetic to the NDP but I'm glad they lost. I didn't want them to be rewarded for the rightward shift they pulled and lo and behold they weren't. Still can't believe Mulclair didn't resign after the rear end kicking he received.

So far trudea's cabinet seems good, the new finance minister notwithstanding, so let's see what they outline in their throne speech in a month.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

brucio posted:

How are Brad Wall's prospects in next spring's provincial election? Any credible challenge?

As someone who lives in this province I can safely say he will re-elected with no problem.

Which sucks because gently caress him.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Cultural Imperial posted:

Did you guys see Albertans are calling for Notley to be murdered for passing some farm labor safety bill? loving lol. If Albertans aren't the worst loving scum on earth I don't know what is

I deal with farmers quite often given my work. They are easily some of the biggest pieces of poo poo I've seen when dealing with family law cases. 90% of the time they will not hesitate to completely gently caress over their former spouse. I'm not surprised at all they hate any bill that makes it so they can't treat workers/family members like crap.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Ikantski posted:

So far Trudeau was off by 60% on refugees they'd get in this year, 40% off on revenue from 1% tax hike, the mortgage changes today were a joke, he changed the $10b deficit promise to a goal and bizarrely asked a bunch of civil servants to voluntarily resign so he could appoint his own shills. The guy is good at symbolic gestures and photo ops. There's lots of money to spend now, give him a few years of Buttsing the debt and the austerity will come just like Ontario.

Edit: And he's going to cancel mincome for parents.

I don't see the big deal of extending the deadline for refugees by two months.

edit- I also don't see why farmers should get away with having their kids do dangerous work, all because people love to jack off to how great family farms supposedly are.

Monaghan fucked around with this message at 06:01 on Dec 12, 2015

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

ductonius posted:

I would like to say that I have no idea what the "alberta farm bill" entails but I do know that it has pissed off a bunch of farmers and having done work for farmers in the past I can say they are collectively the cruelest, meanest most swindling cunts on the planet and anything that might somehow attempt to force them to live in the modern world and join society as a whole in giving a single sloppy poo poo about their fellow human beings can only be a good thing.

this is the correct view.

almost all farmers are just nepotist fucks these days, who have way more political influence in the provinces then they should.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

that's a bit wrong headed. Civil court is loving expensive. If there behaviour meets the marked departure standard of the Reasonable Prudent Driver, then I think that it's proper that the driver gets criminal charges.


I think the issue with cars is that everyone uses them. familiarity breeds laziness and carelessness. However, a gun is something that isn't used on nearly as much occasions and I guess people should be much more concious of the harm that they may happen.

the hard truth is that finding a proper sentence for dangerous driving causing bodily harm/ death is loving hard . There's a ton of aggravating and mitigating factors in deciding what the proper sentence should be. All of this makes researching case law for the proper sentence a huge pain the rear end.

Somebody fucked around with this message at 16:44 on Sep 9, 2022

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Jordan7hm posted:

That's pretty much it yeah.

What really bugs me about that sentence is actually the short ban from driving.

Longer driving prohibitions can be given out under provincial traffic safety legislation. That's a separate manner from a criminal proceeding.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Professor Shark posted:

I hope everyone is enjoying a very green, Climate Change Christmas! :D

It's -28 in sask right now. We had an insanely warm November though.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Jordan7hm posted:

I don't think the people who go to the middle of nowhere with the goal of getting a job with a city police force are pin-dicked morons or even lovely officers, I just think they're doing what they need to do to get a better job.

RCMP officers don't get paid enough to make those jobs desirable.

RCMP officers make drat good money and get good pensions. The lovely thing about the job is moving all the time.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Albino Squirrel posted:

That's funny, the Globe thought we needed them in October.

That editorial in which they endorse the conservative party, but not harper will go down in history as one of the dumbest endorsements of all time.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Ikantski posted:

No goddamit I'm not a socialist. If he wants to spend 10% of his gross salary on a vacation, yes do it in fact let's all do it. He's setting the lead, being the Joneses and hopefully getting those Porsche SUV driving Torontonian #WelcomeRefugee tweeters to spend more. It motivates me to work harder, get more money and live the Canadian dream of escaping Canada for 10 days in the winter. It's great to know that $35,000 vacations are within grasp in Canada, I think that would be sweet. This is the best thing Trudeau's done for the economy since taking office.

Lol I know you hate the liberals and trudeau and there's a lot of good reasons for doing so, but come the gently caress on man. this just seems petty.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Didn't see this posted.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberal-criminal-justice-pardons-1.3412533

quote:


Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale tells CBC News that changes made by the previous government to the criminal pardons system were punitive and that his department could reverse them.

Under the Conservatives, pardons were replaced with "record suspensions." The application fee was quadrupled and the number of years needed to be eligible to request a record suspension was doubled for some people.

"The previous government had a certain ideology and a certain approach that needs to be re-examined as to whether it was then or continues now to be appropriate," Goodale said of the overhau

The changes came into effect almost four years ago. Immediately, the number of people who applied plummeted.

In 2011-12, the Parole Board of Canada received 29,829 pardon applications. Last year, it received 12,743 requests for a record suspension.

Offenders also have to wait much longer to be eligible to apply. For summary offences such as possession of marijuana, people must wait five years to prove they are now law-abiding citizens. For more severe offences such as robbery, the wait time is a decade.

The higher fees don't help either. In 2012 they jumped from $150 to $631.

"It looks to me that what was done was far beyond any measure of practical cost-recovery. It was in fact a punitive measure, and I think with the appropriate authorities within the government we need to re-examine that decision to see if it was appropriate," said Goodale.

Ottawa criminal defence lawyer Norm Boxall hopes Goodale will reverse all the changes made by the Conservatives.

"With the almost necessity of getting a criminal record check for every job, every employer, every volunteer group is sending people down to the police station to get criminal record checks forms completed, it means that people are essentially unemployable."

Boxall said many employers don't distinguish between offences, ruling out hiring anyone who's been convicted.

"It's a real tragedy, especially for young persons who could be charged at 18, 19 years old on an offence and not be eligible for a pardon until their mid-30s," he said.

Goodale said even the name change from pardon to "record suspension" will be under review.

That's welcome news to Kim Pate, executive director of the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies, which helps female offenders.

"Pardon indicates that someone has moved on from where they were, not just that we're hanging it over your head like a big dagger about to drop down on you if we perceive you've done something wrong," she told CBC News.

The Parole Board says pardons are designed to support rehabilitation and reintegration into the community. Goodale said the Conservative government had an ideology he isn't sure was aimed to achieve those objectives.

"Protecting the public is important, but we also need to look at the issue of balance and fairness and proportionality, and we will examine all of those things in reference to this issue."

I deal with this poo poo at my job sometimes and I really hope this is not the case of liberals only making like 2 changes, because getting a pardon is a huge pain in the loving rear end, and the fees and time associated with it are nuts.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

While driving in toronto was a pain in the rear end, I really did appreciate the grid system they used downtown. Seriously, everyone should use grids they rule.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

welp now that Brad Wall can't rely on coasting on oil prices, now he has to try and divert all the hate to quebec and the east coast. The tried and true western strategy

https://www.facebook.com/PremierBradWall/photos/a.293816384266.144639.43232479266/10153934074729267/?type=3&theater

Seriously he loving complains that "we only get 2% of the equalization payments though we make up 3% of the total population."

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Chicken posted:

Brad Wall used to be relatively left wing. He didn't get along with Harper, he didn't shut down any crown corporations, didn't lower taxes too much (if at all?) during the resource boom, wasn't overtly racist. Exactly what you'd expect from somebody on the center-right. Since Notley and Trudeau, he seems to have gone a little crazy.

I posted that chart earlier. Now that he can't coast on the oil boom, he's Brad's just trying to bring up " hey us westerners hate the loving east" poo poo that prairie politicians use all the time when things go south.

Ikantski posted:

Toronto gets more federal money than Regina, its bullshit, they're both cities!!

He elaborates on this in his facebook post his own loving info indicates that we maybe receive a percent less in equalization payments relative to our population size and people in my province are still pissed off about it. gently caress this place.

Monaghan fucked around with this message at 18:04 on Feb 11, 2016

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

jm20 posted:

Reva Seth, a lawyer and best-selling author, wrote about what she says was her own violent encounter with Ghomeshi on The Huffington Post. In her post, Seth anticipates the victim-blaming question of why she didn’t do anything about the assault in the immediate aftermath: “As a lawyer, I'm well aware that the scenario was just a ‘he said/she said’ situation. I was aware that I, as a woman who had had a drink or two, shared a joint, had gone to his house willingly and had a sexual past, would be eviscerated.”

Maybe they are trying to shake him down like those Cosby accusers, that guy is a quaalude saint.

So what exactly do you do in the criminal law context for sexual assault cases? A lawyer wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't try to question their credibility and asking for details in order to discredit their testimony. "what kind of car was he driving" is a legitimate question.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Eej posted:

Oh hey I didn't realize it's been a year since the ruling on Physician Assisted Death by the Supreme Court and even though there's a four month extension to develop legislation for it, individuals can apply to the courts directly for access in the meantime. Since legislature is dragging their feet on this, I just got an email from the College (I assume the same thing is happening across all health professions in every province) with some guidelines to follow in the meantime and they can basically be summarized as "if you have a conscientous objection, deal with it".

e: I'm really jealous how much better the CPSO's PDF designs are compared to the OCP, shows you where all the money really is :saddowns:

Sorry I may be misreading this, but are they saying that the individual doctor has to perform assisted suicide, even if they have a conscientious objection to it?

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

David Corbett posted:

In the latest news from Calgary, Uber has taken its ball and gone home after city council passed a new bylaw that would have legalized its services.

The requirements, apparently, were as follows:

1) Drivers would have to pay $220 a year for licensing,
2) Drivers would have to pay $30 for a police background check before they started, and
3) Vehicles would need to be inspected at least every year, with a repeat inspection after 50,000 annual km and every 50,000 annual km afterward.

All of this was apparently so onerous that it totally destroys the business model of Uber, which is ostensibly a $50 billion dollar company, so they've abandoned the Calgary market and will now be supplanted by someone who actually wants to do business here.

e: apparently the city also wanted drivers to prove they had adequate insurance, which was probably the real issue here

why did I read the comments. People are actually blaming those "job killing regulations" for uber leaving :psyduck:.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

smoke sumthin bitch posted:

anyone with a car should be able to provide transportation for money. taxi drivers already make less than the minimum wage I'm puzzled as to why they are taxed beyond reason. The obvious solution would be deregulation of the entire industry as it would profit both the workers and the consumers. Its a perfect example of how monopolies and cronyism is bad for the masses.

Okay and if a person who is using urber is hurt due to some random driver's reckless driving, whose responsible for compensating the victim?

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

PT6A posted:

Uber's $5 million liability policy. As far as I can tell, the insurance grey area that everyone's so worried about is liability in the case that an Uber driver hits something or someone while not carrying a passenger -- Uber's policy will not pay, since it only takes effect when a passenger is in the car, and the driver's own insurance may claim that they were driving for commercial purposes, which isn't covered under a standard policy.

Since the City of Calgary has been freaking out about insurance so much, I wonder if they will do an enforcement blitz to make sure that every pizza delivery driver or Just-Eat driver is also commercially insured? It would only be logical, since apparently the insurance issue is the Most Amazingly Important Thing Ever!

I was mostly responding to smoke's dumb idea of "let anyone drive someone for money"

Also, I don't get why your being so dismissive of insurance. The insurance issue is huge given how costly car accidents can be. Having clear rules about insurance seems like a good thing toe me. This is especially big in Calgary, which doesn't have have a provincial no-fault insurance in place.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

loving lol I can understand them not wanting to rush legalization legislation but not even committing to doing so before the next federal election, four years from now?

gently caress blair forever.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

smoke sumthin bitch posted:

no one should have their kids taken away from them for refusing vaccination you people cant be serious

I agree, but I don't think those kids should be allowed to attend public schools if they aren't vaccinated.

Dreylad posted:

University courses are where that actually starts happening. Although Some of the revised curriculum I've seen in high schools have kids reading and interpreting primary sources which is a good start to getting towards the "Why?"

I had a high school history teacher who ostensibly did an easy assignment to watch and report a ww2 movie made by hollywood. He wanted us to analyse how war was portrayed and why the movies always starred Americans.It was a good little study on propaganda and how history is portrayed.

He assigned the movies and as punishment to the kids who goofed around in class, he made them watch pearl harbor.

What I'm saying is that history teacher was the loving best.

Monaghan fucked around with this message at 22:37 on Mar 8, 2016

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

BattleMaster posted:

It astounds me that Albertans went from having high-earning tar sands jobs and laughing at everyone else to needing food banks and crying about having no future overnight. Like where did that money even go? Did no one think of saving money or investing it?

I read financial statements for these morons as part of my job so I can tell you EXACTLY where the money goes.

trucks
insanely expensive housing with ridiculous mortgages
ATV's
Boats
Booze
child support.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Given the evidence presented to the judge, it's a very reasonable verdict IMO.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Frosted Flake posted:

Too bad you can't be convicted of being a creep.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/01/jian-ghomeshi-i-dated-him?CMP=share_btn_link

Having said that - the twitter lynch mob calling for a separate justice system for sexual assault is disturbing .

I've seen people on twitter saying that he should have been compelled to testify :psyduck:.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

CountingCrows posted:

I'm always confused with cases like this because the judge literally said that he must acquit due to reasonable doubt. I don't disagree, but then it begs the question, in any case like this where it's primarily he said/she said, isn't it basically impossible to remove reasonable doubt? Does this judge ever convict in this case regardless of the witnesses perceived reliability?

The accusers lied under oath about very important things, like the frequency of talking with other victims, how closely they were following allegations, sending flirtatious emails and sexual meet ups months later, etc. The defence had evidence that they lied. Once you damage credibility to that degree, a witness is pretty much screwed.

Monaghan fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Mar 24, 2016

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

I'd be perfectly fine with judges who do rape cases having to take special training regarding sexual assault cases.

there have been times in which defence lawyers have tried to slip in evidence regarding the complainant's sexual history. There's also been issues regarding them discrediting people by going after every minute detail of the crime, which could re-traumatize. But really, I think it's incumbent on judges to learn about this stuff in order so they can tell defence lawyers to knock it off.

Somebody fucked around with this message at 17:11 on Sep 9, 2022

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

I know that runs afoul of the criminal code (I'm a lawyer here) but I believe that there's been cases where defence lawyers have put it in there, even though they know it's not allowed to sow doubt it the judge's mind. This is rare though, I admit. I think there's a video from 1999 from Ghomeshi's defence lawyer admitting to doing this.

As for the latter, I guess "knock it off" wouldn't be the best way to go about it, but I think that judges should get training regarding that a traumatic sexual assault case, that victims don't always remember every detail. If judges in their written decisions, maybe emphasized this fact, then defence lawyers would come to realize that that method of cross examination doesn't fly.

Cultural Imperial posted:

So can big ears teddy now get repeated sued in civil court?

no generally speaking an action in civil court has to happen within two years of the alleged incident.

Somebody fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Sep 9, 2022

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Kafka Esq. posted:

No, sir, you must be vigilant and show proper scorn for this man forever.

yeah "proper scorn" as in, don't meet him at his place to give him a handjob and then lie about it.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

RBC posted:

hmm yes because remembering a car and being sexually assaulted are very similar

When the person testified in great detail about the car and cited it as a major reason she thought the person was a safe date it's important.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006


I'm not exactly sure why Trudeau should comment on another country's election. Not to mention, given the liberal platform and his general statements, it's pretty obvious that he's not a trump supporter.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

Welp time to go vote for the NDP today, even though I don't like this branch of the NDP that much. Still it's baffling to me that wall has this much of a lead considering that the sask economy went down the tubes.

Odobenidae posted:

I've seen a lot of NDP lawn signs in the past few weeks if that means anything. I don't think their position can get much worse but I don't think they're going to win either.

ndp supporters seem more willing to display signs from my experience.

Monaghan fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Apr 4, 2016

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

EvilJoven posted:

Rectangle Province Party wins majority in Rectangle Province. Vows to continue doing all the things the way they've always been done. Rectangle Province suffers a bit because potash and oil aren't selling. Belts are tightened. Capital of Rectangle Province gets a Deadpool statue. It's super dumb.

This concludes the summary of what's going to happen in Saskatchewan over the next 4 years.

to be fair, I'd be all for the last thing happening, because why not.

Pinterest Mom posted:

Oh, I guess not all the union leaders are supporting Tom:


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canadian-labour-congress-head-says-ndp-needs-new-leader/article29522865/

(Hassan also sits on the party exec as VP (labour).)

well this guy pretty much nailed all the reasons why tom should leave.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

jm20 posted:

Oh health is back on the news radar, let's get some better statistics then.


Things are looking swell for our healthcare costs :downs:

from last page but I can't believe it's taken this long to force chain restaurants to post calories. I don't see the logic in not doing so.


usually the one's who are still doing hot dog lunches at age 48 are much more financially secure and have nice things.

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

God drat do I wish people would read the loving criminal code and read the purposes and principals in sentencing. It's actually pretty reasonable. There's more to a sentence that just "he committed a terrible act, therefore lock him up forever."

PT6A posted:

And, let's face it, raping a kid is still way much better than raping a kid and then beating that kid until they have brain damage, and then leaving them for dead.

When you consider the relative seriousness of the two, the fact that this guy only got 10 years means that a person who just raped a 7-year-old would only deserve like a 5 year sentence. In fact, you'll find he was sentenced to only 4 years for the sexual assault and 6 years for the aggravated assault. It's self-evidently ridiculous. The only justification can be what Brannock brought up: that we must allow for this, lest we allow a miscarriage of justice in the other direction.

Please enlighten me why it's ridiculous other then a simple need for revenge on your part.

Monaghan fucked around with this message at 01:23 on Apr 19, 2016

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006


I've seen this article linked on my facebook by someone thinking it was an anti-trudeau piece. Must have only read the headline.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Monaghan
Dec 29, 2006

THC posted:

Saskatchewan Government Dubs Climate Change ‘Misguided Dogma’ in Throne Speech

The throne speech, delivered by Lieutenant Governor Vaughn Solomon Schofield, pointed to “oil and gas, coal and uranium, livestock and grains” as allegedly victimized sectors.

“They look at those jobs like they are somehow harming the country and the world,” she read. “To those people, my government has a message. You are wrong. You could not be more wrong.”

I loving hate my province.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply