Saturday, February 21, 2009

Understatement of the Year

"The first jump was just phenomenal..."

So said a bungee jumper whose cord snapped on the second 400 foot jump. Evidently the snapping cord absorbed much of the energy, and thankfully he was jumping over a river, so after a visit to the ER he's out, talking to the press and saying he wants to jump again.

I on the other hand, am not interested in a first jump.

Wednesday, February 18, 2009


OK, I know the economy is shaky and lots of people are worrying about their jobs. But I just can't get over the ads I've been hearing on the radio for "recession buster pricing" on 50 inch plasma HD TV's.

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Socialists are Childish

My children have taught me many lessons, and the recent one is that socialists are childish. Let me relate some recent events:

My youngest wanted me to give her some money so that she could put it in the collection plate at church. Whether she wanted to do so out of a sense of obligation or for the good feelings that come with giving to others, I don’t know. But when I suggested she give some of her own money she said no, “because I don’t want to waste it”.

My youngest also saw a pile of coins on my desk. She asked if she could have some. I said no, because it was my money. Then she proceeded to complain that it wasn’t fair.

Children start out as pure emotion. They start with no logic circuits. They want and if they can’t have they complain and cry. Every problem in the world has a simple solution; get Daddy to fix it. Every need and desire will find a simple resolution; get Daddy to buy it.

As parents we understand all of this, and we work with our children to help them grow into useful and productive citizens. We have a responsibility to share our own wealth with others. We work hard for what we have, and if we have more than someone else because we have greater talents, or we worked harder, or we stayed in school longer, then it isn’t a matter of fairness. Some problems are of our own making, and we ourselves are responsible for fixing most of our own problems. Emotion is not to be abandoned, but it is to be balanced by logic. And no, big Daddy doesn’t buy you everything. As parents we understand this and we try to build this understanding in our children.

However these are lessons the Left has never learned. The Left feels good that they have accomplished something when they give away other people’s money. And no, statistically speaking the Left doesn’t waste their own money on giving to charity. If someone has more than someone else, there can only be one possible reason; unfairness. And the Left knows how to use populist politics, the media, emotional pleas, the judiciary and the political system to “address unfairness”. To the Left the world is simple; all problems can be solved by more government. The government has the moral responsibility to solve all problems, not individuals. All problems can be addressed by transferring more money from productive sectors of the economy to unproductive sectors. Anyone who disagrees with the Left’s ideology is clearly being ideologically driven! And anyone who disagrees with the Left is heartless.

Capitalism is such an efficient system that it pays for all sorts of socialist nonsense. But it is possible to kill the goose that laid the golden egg. And that is one reason why the Left is more than just a nuisance. The Left is dangerous. Their ideology (and it is an ideology) will tear down the economic foundations of our society, resulting in more suffering and more calls for government control and support. What you are left with is bread and circuses, which is OK with the Left provided they are the ones handing out the bread and determining the entertainers for the circuses.

Saturday, February 14, 2009

While I'm at it

I was listening to Lowell Green the other day. That will be a thought crime soon, but for now it's legal. Anyway, they were talking about free needles for prisoners to control the spread of HIV and HepC in prison populations.

A number of good points were made. One good point was that if there is any place we should be able to control the drug problem, it's in a prison. Another was that it sends the wrong message. Third, the money spent giving away needles could be spent enforcing the law. All good points.

However the best part of Lowell's show was the guy who phoned in to talk about intermittent sentencing. He knew what he was talking about, having served 60 days intermittent for assault. Intermittent sentences allow the prisoner who has a job to serve his time on weekends so that he doesn't lose him job. Sounds like a good idea to me. And it is a good idea. Except it loses something in practice.

You see, many of the guys who have intermittent sentences don't actually have jobs. They get a buddy to sign a piece of paper saying they have a job, but in reality they are on welfare. Then, these guys serve as mules bring drugs in and out of the prisons. And if a guy doesn't want to be a mule, he gets told to do it or else.

Don't the prison authorities know about this? One would think so. And they do have ways of detecting the drugs. But it's a lot of paper work. And it is easier to let the prisoner dope up. And if you are working the weekend you don't want a lot of hassles. So it's easier to turn a blind eye.

Who pays the price? You and me. Paying our taxes and thinking that justice is being done. You and me thinking that society is being protected when it fact it is going down hill. You and me, living in a society that has laws but no enforcement of the law; a system without deterrence and without punishment and all of this intentionally so.

I think I understand...

A man who has been found guilty of terrorism is about to be sentenced. The Crown is calling for 2 Life sentences with an extra 44 years tacked on... and no parole for 10 years. That's right folks, you can receive a double life sentence plus 44 years, and what it actually means is that you could walk out free in 10 years (minus your double or triple time for time already served).

This confused me. It obviously has nothing to do with justice. And it obviously has nothing to with logic. It is certainly a violation of English usage, for which the word "life sentence" has a different meaning.

However I think I now understand. This is meant to be a catharsis, so that those involved in the legal system can feel that they are doing something. It also gives them an excuse if challenged (we were tough on him, we gave him a double-life sentence). But again, it has nothing to do with justice.

Well, that's something that's got to change. Life ought to mean life. And don't give me any nonsense about needing to give prison populations hope so that they are easier to manage. There is nothing to manage if a guy is sitting in a cell 24 hours a day.

Thursday, February 12, 2009


Today I was listening to the news and was once again greeted by a pathetic attempt at justice. A man was sentenced for 1st degree murder. He knifed someone to death on one of our city buses, as part of a robbery.

As is usual for this kind of case, the judge made very strong statements about the guilty party. He said the crime was deliberate. He said that the victim was innocent. He said that he was concerned that the guilty man showed no remorse for his crime.

And then as usual, after the tough talk, he handed out a sentence that was pathetic. Yes, life in prison... with no parole for 10 years. And with time served, he'll be out in 7.5 years.


But what really surprises me is that he wasn't given double or triple time off for time already served. Our "justice" system has this neat trick whereby they give double or triple credit for time served before trial. Being criminal but not being stupid, some felons are seeking to delay their trials as much as possible, knowing that they are guilty and will serve the time anyway, but usually getting out earlier because of their 2x or 3x pre-trial incarceration.