Scotty

This from the guy who thinks posting a quote that crime rates are stable means they must be dropping.

Would you like to explain to me how my saying that the survey does not show a drop in crime is somehow contradicted by your posting a quote which said that crime was stable? Are you under the misapprehension that "stable" means "dropping"?

I'm sorry. Was I using my brain? Is that not allowed? Apparently you find some web site somewhere which gives you a ludicrous figure, and for you, that's the end of the story. No thinking of any kind required. Case closed. End of story. So sure, Mexico, a crime free haven. Finland, a horrific den of violence and crime. Sure. I can believe that. I just need to turn off my brain. Like you do.

Don't pick nits. It still means that she gets all of her earnings, and a big chunk of his, and he is left with what's left while paying taxes on his entire earnings.

Clearly it's BS. Finland and New Zealand up on the top of the list as the most crime-ridden countries in the world? I don't think so! And so good to see that there's so little crime in Mexico! LOL

Police-reported crime is dropping. However, it is still FAR higher than it was in the fifties and sixties. And whether the statistical drop in police-reported crime is true reflection of crime is in dispute. Stats Canada's victimization surveys show no such drop in crime. What they do show is a drop in reporting rates. That alone could account for a substantial amount of the so-called "drop" in crime rates.

Maybe you could find where I talked about high levels of crime on this topic? Because it seems to me that what I've been talking about is the injustice of some sentencing. You're on the wrong topic. Maybe you should start another one.

What if Frank's slatternly wife leaves him, and then sues him for massive child support, and gets it, and the house. So she is living in his $300k house and he is living in a cheap rooming house and unable to see his kids because she keeps finding excuses to send them somewhere else on his days?

They went way over the top when they decided the man who has to pay that support can't write it off on his taxes, and instead let the woman who receives it have the tax break.

And did I not already say that whether crime is dropping or falling is immaterial to the justice of a sentence?

What links? Links to the Stratford Strawberry Festival? Be a little more specific, please.

Isn't capitalism about maximizing your returns? Doesn't every company charge the most it can get away with for its goods and services? Why should you expect workers to follow a different path?

And here I thought I was a conservative... yet that hardly describes me.

Yeah Lol! Imagine him thinking the management had something to do with whether a company suceeded or not! LOL. It's not like management gets to make any decisions or anything! Lol

Then they shouldn't have signed the contracts.

Yeah, all you dumb farmers. Move into the city!

I get cheques by mail, and no, the companies involved won't do direct deposit into a Canadian bank.

And it can't compete with Canada Post. I sometimes have stuff delivered by courier. It can be a pain in the ass. If I'm not home, they leave a card, and tell me I can reschedule, once, or go to their depot out in the middle of nowhere to pick it up. Canada Post will reschedule as many times as I want, and otherwise I can just go to one of their many local substations, in a card shop or wherever, to pick up my parcel. It's far more convenient. I also have a postal box for business mail, very nearby at a postal outlet. Oh sure, there are private outfits which rent such boxes - downtown. I much prefer Canada Post.

They were thinking that a bunch of legal adults ought to be able to get together to watch a civic event, in this case a hockey game, without there being a big problem. Personally, I see it as another indication of the spoiled nature of today's younger people. Vancouver and its neighboring communities are probably the epicenter of self-worship in Canada, governed by politicians desperate to tell people whatever they want to know, and to be inclusive, affirmative, and supportive to anyone and everyone. They're not into the 'personal responsibility' thing out there. Whatever is wrong in your life is someone elses fault, not yours. So you take a bunch of adult babies, otherwise known as twentysomethings, who have never been held to task for much of anything, who don't have or like responsibility, who have been coddled all their lives, liquor them up, and then set them loose in the downtown without any adult supervision. What do you THINK would happen? Personally, I don't think anyone under thirty should be allowed to drink... or vote. They're still ignorant, shiftless children.

And what would you guys like us to do about such people? Group hug, perhaps?

If the public had more faith and confidence in our judges such mandatory minimums wouldn't be so popular. That they are so popular is an indictment of how out of touch with society and with society's belief in justice judges are.

Congratulations, new member, for a demonstration as to how to make an absolute non-contribution to a topic.

So you'd prefer to have him living next door to you?

The facts seem self-evident. Without provocation, this repeat offender attacked a man and beat him nearly to death, resulting in brain damage and what will be a continuing cost to the country in keeping him in health care, if not institutionalized for the rest of his life. Three and a half years is what you should get for burglarizing a house, not for nearly killing someone.

I can when it's fairly representative. Hell, the reporter even called it "lengthy" as if he was impressed by the unusual severity. No. I don't need to do any such thing. If I shoot you in the face, and a judge gives me one day in jail, are the statistics about how often people get shot in the face really relevant? The act stands on its own and injustice is not related to statistics. That's because you're ignorant. You're paying money because of the high level of crime. Canada pays tens of billions of dollars every year because of the high rate of crime. And I'm not talking about the costs of cops and courts and prisons. I'm talking about the cost of insurance, of locks, and steel bars, and alarm systems, the cost added to your bill when you buy groceries because of shoplifters, the cost added to your car repairs by crooked garages, the cost to, if not you, then your neighbor, when his house is burglarized or his car is stolen. .That's because we're stupid. We've got thousands of people sitting in boxes when we should have them working on assembly lines. Prisons should be profitable, given they don't have to pay any wages, not money sinkholes.