Jump to content
Jambands.ca

Hux

Members
  • Posts

    4,739
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Hux

  1. Wow, could you dumb the issue down a little more? Me try: Good when bad people go place bad people go. Bad people - bad!
  2. I'd like to hear someone make the case that they haven't already lost it.
  3. On ebay at least, it appears only the ones in the original packaging fetch big bucks, like $200+ beat up ones are only worth a few bucks....my Mom got rid of all mine at a garage sale a few years back.
  4. I had the ring, the cage and at one point all those wrestling figures that were out.
  5. Good article today on the Conservative approach to "justice", namely an analysis by Correctional Services Canada that reveals much of the CPC justice legislation would lead to "dramatic increases in the prison population", no #'s given but it seems to bolster the case of the doubters over the supporters in this folder. Nice to see the more ridiculous bills were amended by the opposition, the Harper Conservatives are basically moving forward with draconian, and proven to be ineffective measures that many US States implemented in the 90's and are now reversing. There's a lot of politics going on here, the Cons basically have loaded the House agenda with these Bills and many won't be passed purely due to lack of time, then in the next election the CPC will campaign that their tough "law and order agenda, to keep Canadian streets safe" was blocked by the pinko opposition parties. You heard it here first. Jailers fear PM's justice overhaul The Toronto Star Thursday, January 11, 2007 Page: A01 Section: News Byline: Tonda MacCharles Source: Toronto Star Federal government proposals to get tougher on criminals would hit aboriginal people the hardest, violate Charter rights of inmates, and likely not make for safer streets, says the agency that oversees federal prisons. Underlying some of the agency's criticism is concern about dramatic increases in the prison population that would result from the Conservatives' approach. Among the targets in an analysis prepared by Correctional Services Canada's strategic policy division are proposals for mandatory minimum sentences and for the so-called three-strikes law, key elements of the Tories' law-and-order agenda. The analysis says minimum sentences don't have a deterrent effect and drain away funds available for social programs that prevent crime. The proposal for a three-strikes law - designating as a dangerous offender anyone convicted of a third violent or sexual offence - would have a "disproportionately higher impact" on native people, the analysis says. The analysis took aim at almost every law-and-order promise that would affect prisoners made by Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservatives during the election campaign a year ago. The final version of the document, obtained by the Star under Access to Information legislation, is dated Jan. 24, 2006 - the day after the Conservatives won the election. It outlined "considerations" for the new government on each of its proposed policies, as well as advice on the "direction/way forward." The final document and its early drafts contain several blacked-out sections. But the public servants' critique appears to offer more ammunition to the government's critics. Only two crime bills have passed - tougher penalties for street racing and a watered-down version of the promised restrictions on conditional sentencing or "house arrest." The rest of the Tories' promised measures are either stalled in the minority Parliament, or still to be introduced. But Harper appears undeterred by either opposition or concerns of the public service, naming law and order as still among the government's priorities. Here are some key excerpts from the bureaucrats' analysis: On mandatory minimum prison sentences, legislation which the Conservatives have introduced for gun- and gang-related crime, and promised for serious drug offences, and for crimes committed while on parole or for repeat offenders: "Research shows mandatory minimums do not have a deterrent or educative effect." It notes the United States is moving away from mandatory minimum sentences, and embarking on reforms to improve parole to ease crowding and reduce incarceration rates. It says "increased incarceration reduces funds available for social programs that prevent crime." On Harper's promise to repeal statutory release, the legal right to early release for prisoners who serve two-thirds of their sentences, upon good behaviour: Such a proposal would have a huge impact on prison populations. The document says two-thirds of all federal offenders released in 2004-05 were statutory releases, with generally few problems. In the last five years, it said, only 3 per cent of offenders out on statutory release saw their freedom revoked "for a violent offence." The biggest advantage, it suggests, is the ability of correctional authorities to supervise the inmate in the community for the last third of a sentence. Impact on aboriginal offenders is flagged. Without statutory release, it says, they would "be further delayed in their return to the community, preventing them from benefiting from more culturally appropriate interventions." On promised consecutive sentences for multiple violent or sexual offences: "Credible research shows that longer sentences do not contribute to public safety and may actually increase the risk of recidivism (repeat offences) for some offenders." On promises to kill the "faint hope" clause that allows inmates sentenced to life a possibility of bidding for parole after 15 years in jail: The analysis makes clear that most eligible offenders do not bother to apply. Of those who have ultimately won parole, only a handful have been returned to custody. (As of Dec. 2004, there were 712 eligible lifers, it said. Since 1991, when the "faint hope" clause became available - access to it was tightened in 1997 - 118 of 145 applicants were successful in winning parole, and of those, 17 were returned to custody for breaching the conditions of their release.) On Harper's suggestions that a Tory government would take away voting rights from federal prisoners: The Supreme Court of Canada has upheld prisoner-voting rights as "unfettered." On a proposal to automatically designate as a "dangerous offender" anyone convicted of a third violent or sexual offence (sometimes called the "three-strikes" bill): The bureaucrats' analysis says because aboriginal offenders have a higher rate of conviction for assault and related offences, the proposal could have a "disproportionately higher impact" on natives. A "dangerous offender" designation draws an indefinite sentence, and the offender can't apply for parole until after at least seven years in custody. On restricting access to conditional sentences (also known as "house arrest"): Conditional sentences are imposed in fewer than 5 per cent of all cases, have reduced admissions to provincial jails by 13 per cent with no negative impact on crime rates, and "generally worked well and garnered praise from sentencing experts around the world," said the bureaucrats. As it turned out, the combined Liberal, Bloc Quebecois and New Democratic opposition succeeded in substantially amending this bill, and a watered-down version passed the Commons and Senate. A source told the Star yesterday that without the amendments, the law would have had a huge impact on provincial jail populations. After last week's cabinet shuffle, Harper repeated his resolve to push ahead with the law-and-order agenda. But he is clearly frustrated with the kind of advice his government has received from the public service. On Sunday, asked what he'd learned as prime minister, Harper complained on CBC Radio's Cross-Country Check-up of the "practical" difficulties of working with bureaucrats. Harper said the most difficult thing he had to learn as prime minister "is dealing with the federal bureaucracy." It is a question of getting "the bureaucracy moving in the direction you want them to move while not becoming ... captive of them. ..." A call to Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day's office was not returned.
  6. or correspondingly, Charles Nelson Rielly.
  7. You should change your name to Rip Van Winkle....
  8. I was a big WWF fan as a kid, reading that Andre the drunk article brought back a few memories and the one that always stuck out for me was the Saturday Night's Main Event when Hogan lost the belt to Andre on that one-count by ref Dave Hebner and suddenly at the end of the match an identical twin ref appears!! - "the millions Dibiase must have spent on plastic surgery"!! haha... Found a video of the match on YouTube Here's the wiki entry for it, turns out it still holds the record for most watched TV wrestling broadcast... The Main Event I February 5, 1988 - Indianapolis André the Giant (w/Ted DiBiase & Virgil) defeated Hulk Hogan win the WWF Championship. André pinned Hogan with the butterfly suplex even though Hogan's shoulder came up before the three count. Hogan lost because an imposter referee (Earl Hebner, the identical twin brother of Dave Hebner, the assigned official) continued counting to three despite Hogan's shoulder being up. After the match, André attempted to surrender the title to DiBiase, but this was later disallowed. The title was declared vacant, establishing the championship tournament at WrestleMania IV. This broadcast remains, as of 2006, the highest rated TV show in pro wrestling history, with a 15.2 rating and 33 million viewers.
  9. "Get a hand-job from "Sam Roberts" and dart tournament Day" at Transport Canada - Ladies and Gentlemen your tax dollars at work!
  10. bouche wins this one easily.
  11. I think you have the makings of a good investigative news story there, I would bet all kinds of stores are still charging that extra percent but pocketing it.
  12. Whoa - they replaced Jones with the Hoff!?!
  13. I wouldn't bet on it, the GST cut and "daycare in an envelope" alone have vastly reduced gov't revenues (1% off the GST is $6 billion a year alone) these guys are getting to the point of not having alot of fiscal flexibility....I think they have said they will cut another billion or two from programs/dept's, so I think it will go that direction before any of these programs come back.
  14. Does this mean Uncle Seth is no more? :crazy:
  15. :::faxes above info to Weir's team of attorneys:::
  16. ...it's all in that link, just scroll down. *EDIT - I found another def of "Non-Core Programs": Programs or activities do not meet the priorities of the federal government or Canadians
  17. Baird got his start years ago as part of the Mike Harris Gov't in Ontario. Enough Said. The only rationale given for the cuts was this: The elimination of Youth International Internship Program, fell under #4) non-core programs. Doesn't that explanation up there make it crystal clear? Medical Marijuana wtf?? link
  18. Dumb move by him, he will lose his riding. Hope he enjoys his last few months as an MP.
  19. Hux

    Bob Weir

    Responding to the open bar and free drinks for all in attendance Weir, naturally, decided to sue.
  20. Biggest news in this for me is basically two women being shuffled from the spotlight to far far less visible roles.
  21. There's gotta be somebody in there Weir can sue...bring on Danny Fuckin' Kaye!
×
×
  • Create New...