Comments for Cobourg Blog http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog Always Fresh Fri, 29 Aug 2008 01:34:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 Comment on Speeding tickets are a poor use of Police time by Chris Worsnop http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/archives/81#comment-547 Chris Worsnop Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:15:26 +0000 http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/?p=81#comment-547 I have frequently read items in the Toronto Star's Wheels section on Saturdays written by Jim Kenzie. He is one who follows the same logic about speed limits as does the lead article in this thread. Basically he claims that the 400 series highways are engineered for a higher speed limit than 100kph, and therefore it is OK to drive at what he considers to be the safe speed: 120-130kph. He frequently uses the argument that it is not speed that kills, but bad drivers and bad driving. Since he considers himself to be a good driver, he claims the right to set his own speed limit. One answer that has been sugested to his argument is that it is not indeed speed that kills so much as the suddent stop. The problem though is not whether speed is a killer or not, it is whether the law is bendable or not. If it is "illegal" to drive in the left lane all the time, as the punch line of the penultimate paragraph claims, (I'm not sure the claim is accurate. It is certainly legal in Ontario to "undertake" by passing on the right.) and if this illegal practice is reprehensible on account of its illegality, then speeding should be treated the same way, until/unless the law is changed. Relativity should not be applied in one set of legal circumstances and not another. On the issue of the officer acting as arresting agent, judge, jury and sentencer, there is indeed a moral and ethical dilemma. However, all arguments aside, drivers have a margin of 50k above the posted limit to play with before they need to worry. Most of the argumentation one hears about this law is based on assumptions that the arrests are being made on highways rather than in urban areas. Is there a difference between 50k over the limit in a 50k zone and the same in a 100k zone? Also, is it worth considering that someone travelling at 50k in excess of the posted limit - on any road - is (recklessly) wasting non-renewable energy, most likely in the belief that if s/he can afford it, it is none of anyone else's business? In that case, perhaps fuel prices need to be increased to the level people pay in Europe so that we will think twice about putting our Canadian feet to the floor. I have frequently read items in the Toronto Star’s Wheels section on Saturdays written by Jim Kenzie. He is one who follows the same logic about speed limits as does the lead article in this thread. Basically he claims that the 400 series highways are engineered for a higher speed limit than 100kph, and therefore it is OK to drive at what he considers to be the safe speed: 120-130kph. He frequently uses the argument that it is not speed that kills, but bad drivers and bad driving. Since he considers himself to be a good driver, he claims the right to set his own speed limit. One answer that has been sugested to his argument is that it is not indeed speed that kills so much as the suddent stop.

The problem though is not whether speed is a killer or not, it is whether the law is bendable or not. If it is “illegal” to drive in the left lane all the time, as the punch line of the penultimate paragraph claims, (I’m not sure the claim is accurate. It is certainly legal in Ontario to “undertake” by passing on the right.) and if this illegal practice is reprehensible on account of its illegality, then speeding should be treated the same way, until/unless the law is changed. Relativity should not be applied in one set of legal circumstances and not another.

On the issue of the officer acting as arresting agent, judge, jury and sentencer, there is indeed a moral and ethical dilemma. However, all arguments aside, drivers have a margin of 50k above the posted limit to play with before they need to worry.

Most of the argumentation one hears about this law is based on assumptions that the arrests are being made on highways rather than in urban areas. Is there a difference between 50k over the limit in a 50k zone and the same in a 100k zone?

Also, is it worth considering that someone travelling at 50k in excess of the posted limit - on any road - is (recklessly) wasting non-renewable energy, most likely in the belief that if s/he can afford it, it is none of anyone else’s business? In that case, perhaps fuel prices need to be increased to the level people pay in Europe so that we will think twice about putting our Canadian feet to the floor.

]]> Comment on Speeding tickets are a poor use of Police time by John Draper http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/archives/81#comment-543 John Draper Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:01:01 +0000 http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/?p=81#comment-543 It seems you are comparing driving 50 over the limit to crimes like robbery or murder where Police arrest the suspect and march him to jail pending a bail hearing. Clearly, 20 over the limit is not seen that way so there has been a line drawn by the lawmakers at 50. The justification is that at 150, you are indulging in street racing. Clearly, most people charged at 150 have not been street racing so the justification does not apply in general. In the context of the whole post, on-the-spot punishment by confiscating the vehicle is another example of easy classification of the "crime" removing the need for a charge of dangerous driving and removing the need to have the charge proved in court. I have in the (distant) past, driven at 150km/h on a deserted 401 and neither had an accident nor caused one nor upset anyone. So the speed by itself is not a problem - and certainly should not be punished on the spot by a police officer. In effect, the law now erroneously says that enough speed is proof of a criminal act. Somewhat like enough alcohol on your breath is proof of a criminal act - but that to me is acceptable since ANY driving while intoxicated should be criminal. But excessive speed is a relative thing, not absolute. Oh, and by the way, the post was not prompted by any recent ticket. I was prompted by observing obvious bad driving that police do nothing about while chasing speeders who only sometimes are dangerous. It seems you are comparing driving 50 over the limit to crimes like robbery or murder where Police arrest the suspect and march him to jail pending a bail hearing. Clearly, 20 over the limit is not seen that way so there has been a line drawn by the lawmakers at 50. The justification is that at 150, you are indulging in street racing. Clearly, most people charged at 150 have not been street racing so the justification does not apply in general. In the context of the whole post, on-the-spot punishment by confiscating the vehicle is another example of easy classification of the “crime” removing the need for a charge of dangerous driving and removing the need to have the charge proved in court. I have in the (distant) past, driven at 150km/h on a deserted 401 and neither had an accident nor caused one nor upset anyone. So the speed by itself is not a problem - and certainly should not be punished on the spot by a police officer. In effect, the law now erroneously says that enough speed is proof of a criminal act. Somewhat like enough alcohol on your breath is proof of a criminal act - but that to me is acceptable since ANY driving while intoxicated should be criminal. But excessive speed is a relative thing, not absolute.

Oh, and by the way, the post was not prompted by any recent ticket. I was prompted by observing obvious bad driving that police do nothing about while chasing speeders who only sometimes are dangerous.

]]> Comment on Speeding tickets are a poor use of Police time by Manfred Schumann http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/archives/81#comment-541 Manfred Schumann Tue, 26 Aug 2008 00:45:42 +0000 http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/?p=81#comment-541 A few additional comments -- Perhaps it is more the question - Where should the balance point between pro-active and re-active response be set? One of the inherent difficulties is the subjective nature of situational assessment and the appropriate degree of response needed at the moment. Setting firm guidelines is desirable but risky, so is it preferable? I think the law attempts to do that, but the justice system is there to monitor and modify its application, after some more in-depth assessment is concluded. A few additional comments — Perhaps it is more the question - Where should the balance point between pro-active and re-active response be set? One of the inherent difficulties is the subjective nature of situational assessment and the appropriate degree of response needed at the moment. Setting firm guidelines is desirable but risky, so is it preferable? I think the law attempts to do that, but the justice system is there to monitor and modify its application, after some more in-depth assessment is concluded.

]]> Comment on Speeding tickets are a poor use of Police time by Manfred Schumann http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/archives/81#comment-540 Manfred Schumann Tue, 26 Aug 2008 00:33:49 +0000 http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/?p=81#comment-540 Your statement about justice, Zimbabwe style, made me cringe. Not because of your Zimbabwe reference, rather, your logic. If a police officer had first hand witness to another crime, say - something like a threat of physical harm by means of - lets say - a firearm, would you suggest that your logic should apply and that the officer should follow through using our "Canadian justice" model by not neutralizing the threat immediately through seizure of the firearm, until it can indeed be proven that a crime has been committed? The potential consequences strike me as rather chilling. I am of the opinion that leaving a vehicle in the hands and under control of a driver flying at 50 kmph over the specified limit is akin to letting the other guy with the firearm keep it until justice is served. I'm thinking that law enforcement and justice cannot always go hand in hand. From this perspective, perhaps you need to develop your rationale a bit - no - a lot further. Your statement about justice, Zimbabwe style, made me cringe. Not because of your Zimbabwe reference, rather, your logic. If a police officer had first hand witness to another crime, say - something like a threat of physical harm by means of - lets say - a firearm, would you suggest that your logic should apply and that the officer should follow through using our “Canadian justice” model by not neutralizing the threat immediately through seizure of the firearm, until it can indeed be proven that a crime has been committed? The potential consequences strike me as rather chilling. I am of the opinion that leaving a vehicle in the hands and under control of a driver flying at 50 kmph over the specified limit is akin to letting the other guy with the firearm keep it until justice is served. I’m thinking that law enforcement and justice cannot always go hand in hand. From this perspective, perhaps you need to develop your rationale a bit - no - a lot further.

]]> Comment on Not all Immigrants are good for Canada by Wally Keeler http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/archives/80#comment-517 Wally Keeler Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:30:50 +0000 http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/?p=80#comment-517 Elisabeth Arnold and Elsebeth Gerner Nielsen, two former members of the Danish parliament, politicians belonging to the "Socialist-Radical Liberals" wrote: "...only 5% of young Muslims in Denmark wish to marry a Dane. A sign of self-inflicted isolation, indeed. We welcome the brave 5% who accept intermarriage." I recall during the early 60's that white-skinned Americans had a similar small statistic regarding intermarriage to Negros (as they were called at that time). The left lib of the day, rightly pointed out that this was indicative of gross racism. The left-lib of today in Denmark, as exemplified by Elisabeth Arnold and Elsebeth Gerner Nielsen seem unable to accuse the Muslim community of Denmark, with it's incredible 95% rejection of intermarriage with Danes, as indicative of gross racism by the Muslim community. That's not just a majority -- it's a VAST majority. Statistics Denmark asserts that immigrants and their descendants from Third World countries make up 5% of the population and Muslims make up 80% of that demographic. Police figures show that 76.5% of CONVICTED rapists in Copenhagen belong to that 5% of the population. This indicates that 95% of the population consisting of born Danes and immigrants from non-Third World countries constitute only 23.5% of CONVICTED rapists. So 95% commit 23.5% of rapes. and 5% commit 76.5% of rapes. Hmmmm. How should one regard the culture of that 5% committing the vast majority of rapes? One would think Danish feminists, and their sisters in Western democracies would be all over this. Elisabeth Arnold and Elsebeth Gerner Nielsen, two former members of the Danish parliament, politicians belonging to the “Socialist-Radical Liberals” wrote: “…only 5% of young Muslims in Denmark wish to marry a Dane. A sign of self-inflicted isolation, indeed. We welcome the brave 5% who accept intermarriage.”

I recall during the early 60’s that white-skinned Americans had a similar small statistic regarding intermarriage to Negros (as they were called at that time). The left lib of the day, rightly pointed out that this was indicative of gross racism.

The left-lib of today in Denmark, as exemplified by Elisabeth Arnold and Elsebeth Gerner Nielsen seem unable to accuse the Muslim community of Denmark, with it’s incredible 95% rejection of intermarriage with Danes, as indicative of gross racism by the Muslim community. That’s not just a majority — it’s a VAST majority.

Statistics Denmark asserts that immigrants and their descendants from Third World countries make up 5% of the population and Muslims make up 80% of that demographic. Police figures show that 76.5% of CONVICTED rapists in Copenhagen belong to that 5% of the population.

This indicates that 95% of the population consisting of born Danes and immigrants from non-Third World countries constitute only 23.5% of CONVICTED rapists.

So 95% commit 23.5% of rapes.
and 5% commit 76.5% of rapes.

Hmmmm. How should one regard the culture of that 5% committing the vast majority of rapes? One would think Danish feminists, and their sisters in Western democracies would be all over this.

]]> Comment on Big companies are not inherently bad by Wally Keeler http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/archives/78#comment-516 Wally Keeler Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:56:01 +0000 http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/?p=78#comment-516 Hmmm. Interesting. I remember going to the Park Theatre in Cobourg in the 50's and seeing Jungle Jim movies. I don't recall that I learned anything from them. I also enjoyed Saturday afternoon matinee movies starring the Bowery Boys and learned nothing from them either. What I did learn from small town Canada was the class snobbery of many upper crustaceans and middle crass small L libs. They were 100% white skinned, or as North American aboriginals allegedly put it: palefaces. My pedigree is w.a.s.p. straight blue-eyed Canuck male. I take no pride in any of that. They are not accomplishments -- just happenstance. I regard the pedigree of others in the same manner. Gay pride, proud to be this, that or the other thing, but none of it was an individual accomplishment. Interestingly, the Canadian Human Rights Commission has a 100% conviction rate of all Section 13 cases they send to the CHRT. Also interestingly, 100% of the respondents are white-skinned. Hmmm. Interesting. I remember going to the Park Theatre in Cobourg in the 50’s and seeing Jungle Jim movies. I don’t recall that I learned anything from them. I also enjoyed Saturday afternoon matinee movies starring the Bowery Boys and learned nothing from them either.

What I did learn from small town Canada was the class snobbery of many upper crustaceans and middle crass small L libs. They were 100% white skinned, or as North American aboriginals allegedly put it: palefaces.

My pedigree is w.a.s.p. straight blue-eyed Canuck male. I take no pride in any of that. They are not accomplishments — just happenstance. I regard the pedigree of others in the same manner. Gay pride, proud to be this, that or the other thing, but none of it was an individual accomplishment.

Interestingly, the Canadian Human Rights Commission has a 100% conviction rate of all Section 13 cases they send to the CHRT. Also interestingly, 100% of the respondents are white-skinned.

]]> Comment on Big companies are not inherently bad by Chris Worsnop http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/archives/78#comment-513 Chris Worsnop Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:13:45 +0000 http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/?p=78#comment-513 I learnt it in my family, where, if one of the children asked where mom was, the standard answer was, "She's run away with a black man." It was a joke, or intended to be, but nevertheless an indication that "black" was not good; an indication that is easily internalized. I learnt it from my culture which made films about Africa and Arab countries and the American West in which aboriginals of all kinds were ridiculed or killed for the amusement of white people. I learnt it from my own experience seeing coloured people treated as less valuable than others in public places. I learnt it from colleagues at work who pointed out to me in the friendliest manner that some of the assumptions I was was using in my own behaviour were discriminatory. I learn it constantly from my own behaviour in places like airports, where I shame myself by looking at fellow passengers with suspicion, basing my suspicion entirely on their appearance and skin tone. I learnt it in my family, where, if one of the children asked where mom was, the standard answer was, “She’s run away with a black man.” It was a joke, or intended to be, but nevertheless an indication that “black” was not good; an indication that is easily internalized.
I learnt it from my culture which made films about Africa and Arab countries and the American West in which aboriginals of all kinds were ridiculed or killed for the amusement of white people.
I learnt it from my own experience seeing coloured people treated as less valuable than others in public places.
I learnt it from colleagues at work who pointed out to me in the friendliest manner that some of the assumptions I was was using in my own behaviour were discriminatory.
I learn it constantly from my own behaviour in places like airports, where I shame myself by looking at fellow passengers with suspicion, basing my suspicion entirely on their appearance and skin tone.

]]> Comment on Not all Immigrants are good for Canada by Wally Keeler http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/archives/80#comment-512 Wally Keeler Thu, 21 Aug 2008 12:32:42 +0000 http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/?p=80#comment-512 Thanks for illuminating your metaphor -- it is accurate. The depth of entrenchment by either side is up for debate. In any event, women are being assaulted in Denmark on a scale, likely not seen since the days of the nazi occupation. Thanks for illuminating your metaphor — it is accurate. The depth of entrenchment by either side is up for debate. In any event, women are being assaulted in Denmark on a scale, likely not seen since the days of the nazi occupation.

]]> Comment on Big companies are not inherently bad by Wally Keeler http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/archives/78#comment-507 Wally Keeler Wed, 20 Aug 2008 21:51:27 +0000 http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/?p=78#comment-507 I am still curious: You wrote: "The last times I admittedly changed my philosophies were to admit to having been inherently racist" I queried: "Where did you learn the philosophy that made you an inherent racist?" I am still curious:

You wrote: “The last times I admittedly changed my philosophies were to admit to having been inherently racist”

I queried: “Where did you learn the philosophy that made you an inherent racist?”

]]> Comment on Big companies are not inherently bad by Chris Worsnop http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/archives/78#comment-506 Chris Worsnop Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:35:44 +0000 http://www.cobourginternet.com/blog/?p=78#comment-506 Perhaps you are right about a "masculinist" not necessarily being a "chauvinist". Point taken. In that case, I, too, am a masculinist, as well as a feminist. Perhaps you are right about a “masculinist” not necessarily being a “chauvinist”. Point taken. In that case, I, too, am a masculinist, as well as a feminist.

]]>