aGENT Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 9 hours ago, Bob Long said: CBC is too biased, so heres PPs YouTube channel And here's some tweets from Russian/Chinese bots to back up what PP's video is saying! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 53 minutes ago, Warhippy said: Oh I'm sorry. Please, show me how the electorate isn't currently hyper partisan or the quality of elected official they vote in that indicates they are not idiots. Opinions are all well and good, but when you have people (insert name here) posting them as some sort of metric of success or failure for [insert politicians name/party here] for the greater population it's a serious problem and only highlights that hyper partisanship or idiocy I speak of Whatever the case, that headline is ABSOLUTELY loaded and I'm still waiting for someone to provide a similar article of such a loaded nature from the "left wing" media Me too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 3 hours ago, Sapper said: First .... The majority of addicts come with complex mental health issues that go beyond what we have ever had to deal with. Back in the 70's many would have been in Riverview or other such facilities. Not suggesting that would fix it .. just that we have never had to deal with this many addictive killer drugs and mental health issues combining .. ever I worked mental health and remember a psychiatrist challenging the staff at a education session with 2 scenarios - A ) little sweet old lady who's kidneys are shot in emergency for help. She had been taking 10x rate of Tylenol for years to numb joint pain B) a meth addict covered in sores and strung out. Q - what's the similarities and what's the differences? Answer - they are both the same. They both self medicated to lessen the symptoms. Meth and other hard drugs help lessen the voices tormenting that person and are cheap and work fast .... Same for the sweet old lady Differences - one is seen as a sweet old lady and the other s Meth head Conclusion - both are the same and If we can treat the underlying issue both aren't really addicts and would have a good chance of not continuing that addiction Once we look at all addicts as criminals rather than health issues we will never fix the problem. We have outlawed murder so when should have none then right ? All the rehab beds in the world are useless If they day they are recovered and released they return to the tent in the park or sent to a dump to live in a slave wage minimum pay job that will keep them in that dispair. The solution needs to end the stigma ... End the criminalization . Provide treatment and a few years of a living basic income with housing as we work with them to get them a job skill then match them to a good job For those who's mental health won't facilitate working then build decent clean housing for them and provide a living wage benefit and activities ( daily volunteer work or ongoing socialization ) to prevent them falling back to the old life The ability to say "clean up and pull up your boot straps" is no longer possible in Canada. The planning has to put the past,today and tommorows plans as one over all plan to succeed As for the drug dealers and makers feel free to jail them for life ..... I agree with all of this more or less, well said. The thing is for me, I think that the criminalization part is a requirement in that it acts as a detterent. Imagine if the free range hobo's shooting up all over our towns and cities had been allowed to do so with the current decriminalized experiment going on for, as an example, my entire life. I am middle aged. Studied Criminology in Post Secondary before joining the army and ultimately the feds vis a vis the CSE. If this decriminalization of hard drugs at the personal use level was in effect since 1973 we would now be losing 100 people a day in BC to overdoses and the hobo population would be in the hundreds of thousands. You have to keep the hard drugs illegal, with search and seizure where the cops have probable cause, and when someone is experiencing the effects of those drugs in public, they need to be removed from (in my home town) the street where they are laying around destroying businesses and shooting up a block away from three different schools, with hundreds of little kids walking through the bullshit twice a day to get to and from their educations. I am sympathetic but it stops at allowing this meth/crack/heroine community from creating a black hole in every town in the province/country/continent. In fact I am against allowing there to BE a meth/crack/heroine 'community' at all. Part of the 'released on your own recog" portion of the revolving door is you have to promise not to hang around criminals. These folks break that simple oath the moment they are released. I am thinking incarceration with treatment is a better option. I would love to be able to find or get the statistics on how many people tried the 'hard drugs' for the first time during this failed experiment, vs 'in the wild' for the same time period immediately before the experiment. We will never know, but I am leaning towards more trying it for the first time once the disincentive to try it was removed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
112 Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 1 hour ago, Optimist Prime said: I agree with all of this more or less, well said. The thing is for me, I think that the criminalization part is a requirement in that it acts as a detterent. Imagine if the free range hobo's shooting up all over our towns and cities had been allowed to do so with the current decriminalized experiment going on for, as an example, my entire life. I am middle aged. Studied Criminology in Post Secondary before joining the army and ultimately the feds vis a vis the CSE. If this decriminalization of hard drugs at the personal use level was in effect since 1973 we would now be losing 100 people a day in BC to overdoses and the hobo population would be in the hundreds of thousands. You have to keep the hard drugs illegal, with search and seizure where the cops have probable cause, and when someone is experiencing the effects of those drugs in public, they need to be removed from (in my home town) the street where they are laying around destroying businesses and shooting up a block away from three different schools, with hundreds of little kids walking through the bullshit twice a day to get to and from their educations. I am sympathetic but it stops at allowing this meth/crack/heroine community from creating a black hole in every town in the province/country/continent. In fact I am against allowing there to BE a meth/crack/heroine 'community' at all. Part of the 'released on your own recog" portion of the revolving door is you have to promise not to hang around criminals. These folks break that simple oath the moment they are released. I am thinking incarceration with treatment is a better option. I would love to be able to find or get the statistics on how many people tried the 'hard drugs' for the first time during this failed experiment, vs 'in the wild' for the same time period immediately before the experiment. We will never know, but I am leaning towards more trying it for the first time once the disincentive to try it was removed. "incarceration with treatment" does nothing but let people with impaired empathy enjoy a bit of schadenfreude. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapper Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 1 hour ago, Optimist Prime said: I agree with all of this more or less, well said. The thing is for me, I think that the criminalization part is a requirement in that it acts as a detterent. Imagine if the free range hobo's shooting up all over our towns and cities had been allowed to do so with the current decriminalized experiment going on for, as an example, my entire life. I am middle aged. Studied Criminology in Post Secondary before joining the army and ultimately the feds vis a vis the CSE. If this decriminalization of hard drugs at the personal use level was in effect since 1973 we would now be losing 100 people a day in BC to overdoses and the hobo population would be in the hundreds of thousands. You have to keep the hard drugs illegal, with search and seizure where the cops have probable cause, and when someone is experiencing the effects of those drugs in public, they need to be removed from (in my home town) the street where they are laying around destroying businesses and shooting up a block away from three different schools, with hundreds of little kids walking through the bullshit twice a day to get to and from their educations. I am sympathetic but it stops at allowing this meth/crack/heroine community from creating a black hole in every town in the province/country/continent. In fact I am against allowing there to BE a meth/crack/heroine 'community' at all. Part of the 'released on your own recog" portion of the revolving door is you have to promise not to hang around criminals. These folks break that simple oath the moment they are released. I am thinking incarceration with treatment is a better option. I would love to be able to find or get the statistics on how many people tried the 'hard drugs' for the first time during this failed experiment, vs 'in the wild' for the same time period immediately before the experiment. We will never know, but I am leaning towards more trying it for the first time once the disincentive to try it was removed. Here's the issue The overwhelming number if these addicts have no capacity to understand a law let alone obey it. Some call it the revolving door but judges can't simply jail someone who legitimately isn't sane enough to understand. We don't have enough hospital beds to pink them all ..... The ones with some grasp on reality may substitute one drug for another to get around it but that won't reduce anything. I doubt few If any started hard drugs because of the trial .... More like they did it more so out in the open. I don't disagree though that public spaces are not ok .... We don't permit even tobbaco use in those spots. If anything they should have provided use sites and by extension only decrimilized.the use at those locations to maybe incentive them to stay away from other spots. Our courts and police costs would need to double if we actually want the laws enforced and add jail costs on top of that ..... Like I said we have never before had so many people with mental.health issues on the streets and these easy to access , cheap and highly addictive drugs. 40 years ago it was pot and coke mostly. Street hobos couldn't afford coke so turned to booze. I wonder how many of them are now second generation street addicts ? Children of the first group that hit the streets when places like Riverview closed If anything I'd want the policing to go all in on cutting of the supply and getting it off the streets ... Can't use what ya can't get. Yes they would just switch item of addiction but it's the fentenayl that's driving alot of deaths. Eliminating it would be a big first step Don't charge the user ..... Hammer.the sellers and makers. Make use locations in a safe place away from the public and enforce the law that location is the only place beyond a private residence where you won't face charges ..... The old way of laying theaw down worked when the street hobo didn't have mental.health issues and understood consequences. This version has.neither so the same approach keeps failing everywhere. I don't know the answer of what for sure will work ..... But laying the law down failed horribly , decriminalization led to horrible consequences in public spaces. The answer may rest in the middle but unless regular Canadians are ok with a large tax amount going in to an all out country wide effort to treat the symptoms we are just going to keep failing Politicians of all parties make that solution near impossible as opposition parties weaponized and use it for politics and in power governments are fearful of spending too much money on it or about voters turning on them if they did actually do something that costs money..... A no win situation that keeps growing and is in BC just as it's in Ontario , Saskatchewan, Alberta etc etc .... It's not a right wing or left wing party problem ... It doesn't discriminate and no province has made much of a dent in it Just my 2 c 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnkNuk Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 On 5/1/2024 at 6:24 PM, Psycho_Path said: Are you happy with the Carbon Tax, and if so, why? You do realize it has nothing to do with benefiting the environment, right? You do realize it's driving up food costs, right? Serious question. Suppose I go to the grocery store tomorrow and spend $100 on food. How much would I have saved had there been no carbon tax? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 (edited) Spineless . That's an pretty accurate dig Edited May 3 by bishopshodan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolt Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 https://globalnews.ca/video/10463482/ndp-mp-calls-on-federal-ethics-commissioner-to-investigate-minister-boissonnault/ Another Liberal involved in corruption Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 8 minutes ago, bolt said: https://globalnews.ca/video/10463482/ndp-mp-calls-on-federal-ethics-commissioner-to-investigate-minister-boissonnault/ Another Liberal involved in corruption Poo Poo to that “Liberal involved in corruption” claim. The NDP Minister suggested there was a “perception” of conflict of interests. And what is a stinky Coiler fan doing in the background? Clearly this is just more Baby Whining from the Soilers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 13 minutes ago, bolt said: https://globalnews.ca/video/10463482/ndp-mp-calls-on-federal-ethics-commissioner-to-investigate-minister-boissonnault/ Another Liberal involved in corruption No another "perception" claim. That last sentence of yours is slander. There's only on mp that's gone to jail for corruption charges, and that's Harper's boy Del Mastro. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 21 minutes ago, bolt said: https://globalnews.ca/video/10463482/ndp-mp-calls-on-federal-ethics-commissioner-to-investigate-minister-boissonnault/ Another Liberal involved in corruption Oh? Corruption? Tell me. Which current party leader has been at odds with electoral fraud issues. No no, this should be good 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Look I can do it too, CPC involved in ethics corruption https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/scheer-video-green-ethics-1.7059926 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Just now, Warhippy said: Oh? Corruption? Tell me. Which current party leader has been at odds with electoral fraud issues. No no, this should be good It's so tired. These old tropes keep us locked in stupid arguments. But if we're going to do this again, the robocalls scandal, Duffy and Del Mastro would be where I'd be looking for connections to PP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 5 minutes ago, Bob Long said: It's so tired. These old tropes keep us locked in stupid arguments. But if we're going to do this again, the robocalls scandal, Duffy and Del Mastro would be where I'd be looking for connections to PP. Pierre Poutine while Micheal Sona ended up taking the fall. You're not wrong. These old stupid arguments are not getting us anywhere. But people seem to forget that Pierre has a 20+ year history in office and he's been at the centre of some egregious scandals of his own 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Just now, Warhippy said: Pierre Poutine while Micheal Sona ended up taking the fall. You're not wrong. These old stupid arguments are not getting us anywhere. But people seem to forget that Pierre has a 20+ year history in office and he's been at the centre of some egregious scandals of his own He does and I'm sure we'll all get reminded for 6 weeks next year, but is that enough? I know it's faint hope, but in order to really change the channel and focus on important issues I really think Trudeau needs to step down, otherwise it's just going to be more of the same stupid shit like we've just spent the last 10 minutes on. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicken. Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 30 minutes ago, Bob Long said: He does and I'm sure we'll all get reminded for 6 weeks next year, but is that enough? I know it's faint hope, but in order to really change the channel and focus on important issues I really think Trudeau needs to step down, otherwise it's just going to be more of the same stupid shit like we've just spent the last 10 minutes on. Hopefully for the good of the country he does.. but will his ego let him… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 9 minutes ago, Chicken. said: Hopefully for the good of the country he does.. but will his ego let him… all the leaders have inflated ego's. Skippy has a massive one for a guy who really hasn't been responsible for much, or really has any notable accomplishment other than being the last Harper cabinet minister still standing after 3 failed attempts to beat Trudeau. Trudeau has become 'the story'. I think every leader has a shelf life and ultimately becomes a distraction. When that happens, its time to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolt Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 1 hour ago, Warhippy said: Oh? Corruption? Tell me. Which current party leader has been at odds with electoral fraud issues. No no, this should be good Tens of millions of dollars of corruption scandals involving Liberal enriching themselves. Do you also equate an elephant to a mouse? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 1 minute ago, bolt said: Tens of millions of dollars of corruption scandals involving Liberal enriching themselves. Do you also equate an elephant to a mouse? Name a federal government in Canada that didn't have those issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolt Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 1 hour ago, Bob Long said: Look I can do it too, CPC involved in ethics corruption https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/scheer-video-green-ethics-1.7059926 Yes because that is comparable to Liberals stealing millions of taxpayer money. How corrupt do the Liberals have to be for you to drop your loyalty? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 1 minute ago, bolt said: Tens of millions of dollars of corruption scandals involving Liberal enriching themselves. Do you also equate an elephant to a mouse? how far back are you going? hey is Dean out of jail yet, btw? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Just now, bolt said: Yes because that is comparable to Liberals stealing millions of taxpayer money. How corrupt do the Liberals have to be for you to drop your loyalty? what are you actually talking about? dates would be helpful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolt Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Just now, Bob Long said: how far back are you going? hey is Dean out of jail yet, btw? Let me guess all the problems canada is facing is harpers fault Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Just now, bolt said: Let me guess all the problems canada is facing is harpers fault some of them are. Can you have a rational discussion on this, or is this just another "all liberals are corrupt" horse shit exercise? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolt Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 Just now, Bob Long said: some of them are. Can you have a rational discussion on this, or is this just another "all liberals are corrupt" horse shit exercise? The news of this new corruption scandal is a day old. Why do you get so offended every time I bring up current news? Are you on Liberal payroll or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.