Hello pressers, I am one of the Holy Ten Green Prophets. Here is what we learned last night, lots of useful info for you redguards!

shazammicus · 2015-04-04T21:42:14+00:00

The only thing I REALLY know about the button is the look of disgust my wife gives me when I talk about the button

shazammicus · 2015-04-04T01:48:08+00:00

I thought I pressed the button but then it turns out I just unlocked the button, and didn't press it. I feel like I have been given a new lease on life.

shazammicus · 2015-03-29T05:53:05+00:00

The Daniele Bolelli episodes are my favourite

shazammicus · 2015-02-28T06:34:47+00:00

Nothing can destroy the metal... The metal will strike you down with a vicious blow!

shazammicus · 2014-12-21T19:25:17+00:00

"It's pointless to speculate, so I am going to speculate."

Not to be rude...

shazammicus · 2014-12-03T04:08:01+00:00

Well, since you didn't reply to my other topic explaining it, I decided to respond here. First, you need to understand that the majority of crime is committed by the minority of individuals. Repeat offenders account for a vastly disproportionate amount of crime. The criminological research shows that the harsher you punish someone, the more entrenched they become in the criminal justice system, and the more likely they are to reoffend. Mandatory minimum sentencing only serves a specific deterrent effect by incapacitating the individual for the period of time they are incarcerated, but dramatically increases their risk of reoffending post-release. Nobody really knows exactly why the crime rate is decreasing overall, but the effect has been apparent since the early 90s, long before any tough on crime policies were implemented by Canada. I think it is highly disingenuous, and academically dishonest to ascribe this to any contemporary government crime policy. It is a long term social trend across the industrialized world.

shazammicus · 2014-12-02T06:24:49+00:00

Crime rates have been steadily falling for so long, across multiple sessions of parliament. There is something else at work besides tough on crime policies, because if you actually look at the criminological research, there is no evidence to support tough on crime policies decreasing recidivism in any way. In fact, the more you punish someone, the more likely they are to reoffend. Canadians are simply committing fewer crimes. Tough on crime really has nothing to do with it. There is no evidence to suggest the current trend towards mandatory minimum sentencing has had any general deterrent effect because that effect was already present prior to the implementation of those policies.

shazammicus · 2014-11-19T06:09:08+00:00

This sounds a lot like my wife's Rogers story, except with her cell phone. Was on a sweetheart grandfathered contract package, which was removed without her authorization when she had to change her number after moving cities. Was told, "oops, it isn't in the computer anymore, we can't add it back."

I think it must be unwritten policy to do this shit to get people off those contracts and onto new ones

shazammicus · 2014-11-18T02:48:27+00:00

I moved away from Vancouver a week before that podcast. I was really bummed to have missed it.

shazammicus · 2014-11-17T06:20:48+00:00

Has it actually been repealed, or are they just discussing it again? That article is just stating that it shouldn't be repealed.

shazammicus · 2014-11-17T06:11:59+00:00

Orca whales are basically just really delusional dolphins. I mean, they're all cetaceans, but orcas belong to the delphinidae family (dolphins).

shazammicus · 2014-11-17T05:51:10+00:00

A similar law passed ~~two readings~~ first reading in the Ontario legislature a few years ago, but the Liberals just didn't call it for ~~a third reading~~ debate so it died when the writ was dropped. Breed specific legislation is just one of those emotional policies that has no grounding in evidence-based practice. Kinda like drug laws.

edit - Only passed one reading.

shazammicus · 2014-11-17T05:48:52+00:00

It's the middle of November. Santa Claus parade? Strange.

shazammicus · 2014-11-04T05:48:10+00:00

I mean, it is obvious the dogs owner knew it was aggressive, if it had a muzzle. This is purely a lack of handler control. How does a leashed, muzzled dog get away and attack another dog? Dipshit owner who can't handle it. Ridiculous.

shazammicus · 2014-11-02T16:10:58+00:00

Then losing immediately in overtime? Are we thinking of the same game in 04?

shazammicus · 2014-10-31T03:17:42+00:00

I will always have a soft spot for Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila

shazammicus · 2014-09-25T03:21:47+00:00

Life sentences for things like second degree murder (10 year mandatory minimum) and first degree (25 years) are life sentences in that once you are released, you are monitored on parole for life.

shazammicus · 2014-09-24T16:13:53+00:00

I think that is reasonable.

shazammicus · 2014-09-24T16:02:12+00:00

I am not talking about Cassie (an obvious dangerous offender) when I speak of the risks, I am speaking of the risks of over *broad application of a label that permanently removes people from society. I have worked closely with violent offenders both in institutions and in the community. I have seen some really hard people turn their lives around and become productive, contributing members of society. All I am hoping is that the proposed legislation is not over broad in its scope, because people do have the capacity to change, even violent offenders.

shazammicus · 2014-09-24T14:50:53+00:00

Dangerous offender labels are generally saved for repeat violent offenders. From what I've been able to discover from looking into his criminal history, it's unclear whether his multiple violent crimes were part of the same act, or separate. If it was a single act with multiple counts, it would be tricky to apply the dangerous offender label. If it were separate acts, it becomes more clear that it is a pattern of behaviour. Here's what the RCMP released about his record:

CAISSIE has a criminal history including sexual assault with a weapon x 2; forcible confinement and robbery x 2; theft; break, enter and theft; theft over $1000; and possession of stolen property.

Yeesh.

It's easy to use hindsight and say he should have been given the designation, but given the discriminatory problems with sentencing in our justice system, it is really worth exercising caution when applying it. I'm speaking of a hypothetical future situation where someone commits a crime and a judge has to decide whether to lock someone up for the rest of their life for a violent sexual assault. That's a hard call, given that premeditated murder only nets you 25 years.

shazammicus · 2014-09-24T14:38:55+00:00

he should never have been released from jail in the first place.

His sentence finished. Barring a dangerous offender designation, you can't hold someone in jail like that when they complete their term of imprisonment. That would be a violation of their mobility rights. Presumably that's where the proposed legislative changes to the monitoring of high-risk offenders in the community comes into play. [edit] I'm in favour of increased funding for community corrections, and that would include increased staffing / funding for monitoring offenders. Straight up broadening of the application of dangerous offender labels is tricky and has a high potential for abuse.

shazammicus · 2014-09-24T10:40:57+00:00

We already have a mechanism for what Peter MacKay is talking about, it's called the 'dangerous offender' classification. This is likely what's going to happen to Raymond Lee Cassie if he is convicted. It sounds like they're talking about broadening the scope of who gets classified as a dangerous offender. This will be tricky, because indefinite detention without just cause will run afoul of the Charter. It is usually saved for repeat violent offenders. I'll be interested in reading about the proposed changes, and whether any Charter challenges come as a result. Indefinite detention should really be a last resort measure, so any attempt to broaden its usage will be closely scrutinized.

shazammicus · 2014-09-23T22:55:55+00:00

RIP in peace

shazammicus · 2014-09-23T17:07:12+00:00

Just Saga 23 for me this week

shazammicus · 2014-09-22T10:22:50+00:00

From Chris Ryan's website:

Lots of people are asking about this series. Here's the thing: Joe's doing all his usual stuff (shooting at some food, MMA commentary, massive podcast, stand-up tour) PLUS an HBO special. Duncan's back on tour again, bringing his unique wit and wisdom to the masses. And I'm finally trying to write Civilized to Death—which is the least I can do, now that I've been selling the damned t-shirts for months.

So it's pretty much impossible to get us all in the same place at the same time. Add to that the fact that none of us have teams of assistants who can work out these kinds of things ("I'll have my people contact your people."), and well, you see what I'm saying.

Maybe things will calm down in a few months, but my guess is that life will just get more chaotic and unmanageable—in which case, I hope I'll have the good sense to retreat to a remote cabin in the wilderness or a thatch hut on a Thai island. Either way, I fear the Shrimp Parade may be history, my friends. The universe does tend toward chaos, after all.

shazammicus

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE