liberals could have ensured we would never see an ahole conservative PM ever again ... but as usual - they punted it ...
How's that? What could Liberals have done about someone deciding to run for the Conservative leadership?
Proportional representation.
You think that would have guaranteed that no Conservative leader ever became PM again or kept O'Leary from the Conservative leadership?
thanks dignin for representing during my absence ...
I specifically put asshole conservative PM because I do think there can be a shift to a moderate Conservative party in the future which wouldn't preclude it from winning an election under any format ...
i do think if the liberals went ahead with some form of proportional representation, which the all party committee recommended, it would prevent a person like O'leary or even a Harper from ever becoming PM ... the only way Harper was PM for so long was due to vote splitting amongst the centre and left parties ... that would essentially be negated under a new voting system ...
liberals could have ensured we would never see an ahole conservative PM ever again ... but as usual - they punted it ...
How's that? What could Liberals have done about someone deciding to run for the Conservative leadership?
Proportional representation.
You think that would have guaranteed that no Conservative leader ever became PM again or kept O'Leary from the Conservative leadership?
thanks dignin for representing during my absence ...
I specifically put asshole conservative PM because I do think there can be a shift to a moderate Conservative party in the future which wouldn't preclude it from winning an election under any format ...
i do think if the liberals went ahead with some form of proportional representation, which the all party committee recommended, it would prevent a person like O'leary or even a Harper from ever becoming PM ... the only way Harper was PM for so long was due to vote splitting amongst the centre and left parties ... that would essentially be negated under a new voting system ...
I dunno, maybe. I would at least like to give Canadians that much credit. I do support electoral reform... It wasn't one of my huge issues during the election, but I do support it. BC actually had a referendum for provincial electoral reform at one point in the 2000s, but it failed - the BC citizens narrowly voted against it. Though, there were some valid concerns that it failed because they way the fucking Liberal government worded it and campaigned against it made it too complicated for a lot of people to even really understand. Meanwhile, the yes side did a poor job of simplifying and clarifying.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
liberals could have ensured we would never see an ahole conservative PM ever again ... but as usual - they punted it ...
How's that? What could Liberals have done about someone deciding to run for the Conservative leadership?
Proportional representation.
You think that would have guaranteed that no Conservative leader ever became PM again or kept O'Leary from the Conservative leadership?
thanks dignin for representing during my absence ...
I specifically put asshole conservative PM because I do think there can be a shift to a moderate Conservative party in the future which wouldn't preclude it from winning an election under any format ...
i do think if the liberals went ahead with some form of proportional representation, which the all party committee recommended, it would prevent a person like O'leary or even a Harper from ever becoming PM ... the only way Harper was PM for so long was due to vote splitting amongst the centre and left parties ... that would essentially be negated under a new voting system ...
I dunno, maybe. I would at least like to give Canadians that much credit. I do support electoral reform... It wasn't one of my huge issues during the election, but I do support it. BC actually had a referendum for provincial electoral reform at one point in the 2000s, but it failed - the BC citizens narrowly voted against it. Though, there were some valid concerns that it failed because they way the fucking Liberal government worded it and campaigned against it made it too complicated for a lot of people to even really understand. Meanwhile, the yes side did a poor job of simplifying and clarifying.
same thing happened in ontario re: electoral reform referendum
similar to the US - there is like 30% of the population who will always vote conservative regardless of who's name is on the ballot ... under our current voting system - it means someone like O'Leary will always have a chance ... especially if disenfranchisement with Liberals continues ...
Now now TB. His name is Will Baker. He is all cured up now and deserves a second chance at life. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state? I hope everyone asks themselves this question.
To this point in time, he hasn't been a model patient. Soon though, he'll do the right things and we can grant him a full release too. I realize he killed his three children and that's pretty awful, but I'm not so sure it's worse than beheading, mutilating, and cannibalizing some random guy you've know for 3 seconds on a bus.
And I have to say it: the voice was telling him to kill McLean. Was it telling him to cut him to pieces, eat him, place chunks of him in his pockets, and basically bask in the blood?
Now now TB. His name is Will Baker. He is all cured up now and deserves a second chance at life. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state? I hope everyone asks themselves this question.
Why are you being so snarky about it? Geez.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Now now TB. His name is Will Baker. He is all cured up now and deserves a second chance at life. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state? I hope everyone asks themselves this question.
To this point in time, he hasn't been a model patient. Soon though, he'll do the right things and we can grant him a full release too. I realize he killed his three children and that's pretty awful, but I'm not so sure it's worse than beheading, mutilating, and cannibalizing some random guy you've know for 3 seconds on a bus.
And I have to say it: the voice was telling him to kill McLean. Was it telling him to cut him to pieces, eat him, place chunks of him in his pockets, and basically bask in the blood?
This is dumb.
i feel for sensible Canadians like yourself 30. the apathy toward scum like this ridiculous.
Now now TB. His name is Will Baker. He is all cured up now and deserves a second chance at life. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state? I hope everyone asks themselves this question.
Why are you being so snarky about it? Geez.
I've asked myself this question. Have you?
edit - And to clarify I meant the original question. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state?
To this point in time, he hasn't been a model patient. Soon though, he'll do the right things and we can grant him a full release too. I realize he killed his three children and that's pretty awful, but I'm not so sure it's worse than beheading, mutilating, and cannibalizing some random guy you've know for 3 seconds on a bus.
And I have to say it: the voice was telling him to kill McLean. Was it telling him to cut him to pieces, eat him, place chunks of him in his pockets, and basically bask in the blood?
This is dumb.
i feel for sensible Canadians like yourself 30. the apathy toward scum like this ridiculous.
It's nonsense for sure.
I don't think I would describe the prevailing sentiment as apathetic as much as I would describe it as... I don't even know what term to use.
It's pure nonsense.
The second case I submitted was a case in my area. The f**king idiot father killed his kids in grotesque fashion because he was mad at his ex. He fled into the mountain and a trapper found him. I wished he'd have shot him.
If he had... he'd have saved us the very painful moments reading about him ruled not criminally responsible because he was mentally ill (yah... bullshit), day outings, the looming release date and various other things that have the majority of us saying, "What the f**k, man?"
Now now TB. His name is Will Baker. He is all cured up now and deserves a second chance at life. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state? I hope everyone asks themselves this question.
Why are you being so snarky about it? Geez.
I've asked myself this question. Have you?
edit - And to clarify I meant the original question. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state?
Yes, sure, at the moment. I know he's fine right now. I am not scared of schizophrenics who are being properly treated and aren't delusional. I would sit beside him and ask him about the whole thing - I'd be curious to know more about how he's feeling, how someone copes with such a situation (not that I would expect him to be happy to discuss it, lol). I already said, someone needs to closely monitor him to ensure that he is taking his meds as prescribed and that he's not having breaks from reality. Always. If that is being done, I don't have concerns. If it's not, I do.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Now now TB. His name is Will Baker. He is all cured up now and deserves a second chance at life. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state? I hope everyone asks themselves this question.
Why are you being so snarky about it? Geez.
I've asked myself this question. Have you?
edit - And to clarify I meant the original question. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state?
Yes, sure, at the moment. I know he's fine right now. I am not scared of schizophrenics who are being properly treated and aren't delusional. I would sit beside him and ask him about the whole thing - I'd be curious to know more about how he's feeling, how someone copes with such a situation (not that I would expect him to be happy to discuss it, lol). I already said, someone needs to closely monitor him to ensure that he is taking his meds as prescribed and that he's not having breaks from reality. Always. If that is being done, I don't have concerns. If it's not, I do.
the 2nd paragraph of the article says he will no longer be monitored.
with all due respect, how on earth do you KNOW he is fine right now? that seems absurd to say. because he changed his name and is on a pharmy cocktail?
who really gives a shit how he copes? you believe he should be treated like a victim?
Now now TB. His name is Will Baker. He is all cured up now and deserves a second chance at life. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state? I hope everyone asks themselves this question.
Why are you being so snarky about it? Geez.
I've asked myself this question. Have you?
edit - And to clarify I meant the original question. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state?
Yes, sure, at the moment. I know he's fine right now. I am not scared of schizophrenics who are being properly treated and aren't delusional. I would sit beside him and ask him about the whole thing - I'd be curious to know more about how he's feeling, how someone copes with such a situation (not that I would expect him to be happy to discuss it, lol). I already said, someone needs to closely monitor him to ensure that he is taking his meds as prescribed and that he's not having breaks from reality. Always. If that is being done, I don't have concerns. If it's not, I do.
the 2nd paragraph of the article says he will no longer be monitored.
with all due respect, how on earth do you KNOW he is fine right now? that seems absurd to say. because he changed his name and is on a pharmy cocktail?
who really gives a shit how he copes? you believe he should be treated like a victim?
He will no longer be monitored by the Review Board system. That's not the same thing as no longer being monitored at all, although I agree the article didn't explain that.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Now now TB. His name is Will Baker. He is all cured up now and deserves a second chance at life. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state? I hope everyone asks themselves this question.
Why are you being so snarky about it? Geez.
I've asked myself this question. Have you?
edit - And to clarify I meant the original question. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state?
Yes, sure, at the moment. I know he's fine right now. I am not scared of schizophrenics who are being properly treated and aren't delusional. I would sit beside him and ask him about the whole thing - I'd be curious to know more about how he's feeling, how someone copes with such a situation (not that I would expect him to be happy to discuss it, lol). I already said, someone needs to closely monitor him to ensure that he is taking his meds as prescribed and that he's not having breaks from reality. Always. If that is being done, I don't have concerns. If it's not, I do.
the 2nd paragraph of the article says he will no longer be monitored.
with all due respect, how on earth do you KNOW he is fine right now? that seems absurd to say. because he changed his name and is on a pharmy cocktail?
who really gives a shit how he copes? you believe he should be treated like a victim?
He will no longer be monitored by the Review Board system. That's not the same thing as no longer being monitored at all, although I agree the article didn't explain that.
thats good he will still be monitored then at least. who is responsible for that now? its amazing his past actions arent considered clear evidence of a significant risk. if the supreme court felt his first mutilation was clear evidence that he could again be a significant risk, he wouldnt have been granted his freedom. if i read that 1999 ruling right. how are they so sure this person is fixed?
Now now TB. His name is Will Baker. He is all cured up now and deserves a second chance at life. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state? I hope everyone asks themselves this question.
Why are you being so snarky about it? Geez.
I've asked myself this question. Have you?
edit - And to clarify I meant the original question. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state?
Yes, sure, at the moment. I know he's fine right now. I am not scared of schizophrenics who are being properly treated and aren't delusional. I would sit beside him and ask him about the whole thing - I'd be curious to know more about how he's feeling, how someone copes with such a situation (not that I would expect him to be happy to discuss it, lol). I already said, someone needs to closely monitor him to ensure that he is taking his meds as prescribed and that he's not having breaks from reality. Always. If that is being done, I don't have concerns. If it's not, I do.
the 2nd paragraph of the article says he will no longer be monitored.
with all due respect, how on earth do you KNOW he is fine right now? that seems absurd to say. because he changed his name and is on a pharmy cocktail?
who really gives a shit how he copes? you believe he should be treated like a victim?
He will no longer be monitored by the Review Board system. That's not the same thing as no longer being monitored at all, although I agree the article didn't explain that.
thats good he will still be monitored then at least. who is responsible for that now? its amazing his past actions arent considered clear evidence of a significant risk. if the supreme court felt his first mutilation was clear evidence that he could again be a significant risk, he wouldnt have been granted his freedom. if i read that 1999 ruling right. how are they so sure this person is fixed?
Idiots trip all over themselves to release people such as this so they can pat each other on the back and say, "What good people we are!"
There is obviously a risk. There's more of a risk associated with the prick I submitted earlier. The same do-gooders that eagerly worked to free Li are in Schoenborn's corner as well. Just as I easily predicted a release for Li... this scumbag will get one too. And the general public will have to sit there as advocates smugly smoke their pipes and tell themselves how everybody is so lucky to have them.
Now now TB. His name is Will Baker. He is all cured up now and deserves a second chance at life. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state? I hope everyone asks themselves this question.
Why are you being so snarky about it? Geez.
I've asked myself this question. Have you?
edit - And to clarify I meant the original question. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state?
Yes, sure, at the moment. I know he's fine right now. I am not scared of schizophrenics who are being properly treated and aren't delusional. I would sit beside him and ask him about the whole thing - I'd be curious to know more about how he's feeling, how someone copes with such a situation (not that I would expect him to be happy to discuss it, lol). I already said, someone needs to closely monitor him to ensure that he is taking his meds as prescribed and that he's not having breaks from reality. Always. If that is being done, I don't have concerns. If it's not, I do.
the 2nd paragraph of the article says he will no longer be monitored.
with all due respect, how on earth do you KNOW he is fine right now? that seems absurd to say. because he changed his name and is on a pharmy cocktail?
who really gives a shit how he copes? you believe he should be treated like a victim?
He will no longer be monitored by the Review Board system. That's not the same thing as no longer being monitored at all, although I agree the article didn't explain that.
thats good he will still be monitored then at least. who is responsible for that now? its amazing his past actions arent considered clear evidence of a significant risk. if the supreme court felt his first mutilation was clear evidence that he could again be a significant risk, he wouldnt have been granted his freedom. if i read that 1999 ruling right. how are they so sure this person is fixed?
He will be monitored by the civil mental health services, fairly strictly. The review board decisions are based assessing the many factors that go in to elevating or reducing potential risk to the public. Although of course I wasn't there at the hearing, I know that the RB would only have been able to come to the conclusion that he didn't post of significant risk if there was a very tight plan in place that handed over management to another service and that Li/Baker was already involved with.
"Fixed" - no one is ever fixed. It's a question of managing the illness. Many, many people successfully manage it.
And yes, the RB has to grant an absolute discharge if it isn't proven that the individual continues to pose a significant risk. The bare bones fact the the index offence occurred can't be used as proof of ongoing risk, and if you think of that, it's obvious, because if it did then no one would ever get an absolute discharge. The RB absolutely looks at the seriousness of the index offence; that can't be used as the only factor, but clearly they are particularly diligent when looking at a very serious offence. They also look at how engaged the person is in their treatment, how much insight they have into their illness, how much of a symptomatic response they have had, whether they engage in behaviours that put their recovery at risk (like drinking, using drugs, etc.), whether they have factors that contribute to stability (like housing, social supports, structure in their lives with work, school, etc.), whether there are other conditions that might affect their recovery like other medical issues or personality problems.
With Li/Baker, it's a crystal clear example of an instance when a medical condition caused someone to commit a heinous act. Now the medical condition has been successfully treated. If an individual had been driving and had a heart attack and plowed into a group of pedestrians, killing several, that person wouldn't have even had any charges. We tend to view people with mental illness incredibly harshly, and then act surprised when people don't want to seek treatment.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Now now TB. His name is Will Baker. He is all cured up now and deserves a second chance at life. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state? I hope everyone asks themselves this question.
Why are you being so snarky about it? Geez.
I've asked myself this question. Have you?
edit - And to clarify I meant the original question. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state?
Yes, sure, at the moment. I know he's fine right now. I am not scared of schizophrenics who are being properly treated and aren't delusional. I would sit beside him and ask him about the whole thing - I'd be curious to know more about how he's feeling, how someone copes with such a situation (not that I would expect him to be happy to discuss it, lol). I already said, someone needs to closely monitor him to ensure that he is taking his meds as prescribed and that he's not having breaks from reality. Always. If that is being done, I don't have concerns. If it's not, I do.
the 2nd paragraph of the article says he will no longer be monitored.
with all due respect, how on earth do you KNOW he is fine right now? that seems absurd to say. because he changed his name and is on a pharmy cocktail?
who really gives a shit how he copes? you believe he should be treated like a victim?
He will no longer be monitored by the Review Board system. That's not the same thing as no longer being monitored at all, although I agree the article didn't explain that.
thats good he will still be monitored then at least. who is responsible for that now? its amazing his past actions arent considered clear evidence of a significant risk. if the supreme court felt his first mutilation was clear evidence that he could again be a significant risk, he wouldnt have been granted his freedom. if i read that 1999 ruling right. how are they so sure this person is fixed?
Idiots trip all over themselves to release people such as this so they can pat each other on the back and say, "What good people we are!"
There is obviously a risk. There's more of a risk associated with the prick I submitted earlier. The same do-gooders that eagerly worked to free Li are in Schoenborn's corner as well. Just as I easily predicted a release for Li... this scumbag will get one too. And the general public will have to sit there as advocates smugly smoke their pipes and tell themselves how everybody is so lucky to have them.
I don't personally know anyone in the mental health system that smokes a pipe, but keep up with your own fantasies, Thirty. And you forgot to add in the lattes.
For the record, and as I've said before, I also have concern about the Schoenborn case.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Now now TB. His name is Will Baker. He is all cured up now and deserves a second chance at life. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state? I hope everyone asks themselves this question.
Why are you being so snarky about it? Geez.
I've asked myself this question. Have you?
edit - And to clarify I meant the original question. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state?
Yes, sure, at the moment. I know he's fine right now. I am not scared of schizophrenics who are being properly treated and aren't delusional. I would sit beside him and ask him about the whole thing - I'd be curious to know more about how he's feeling, how someone copes with such a situation (not that I would expect him to be happy to discuss it, lol). I already said, someone needs to closely monitor him to ensure that he is taking his meds as prescribed and that he's not having breaks from reality. Always. If that is being done, I don't have concerns. If it's not, I do.
the 2nd paragraph of the article says he will no longer be monitored.
with all due respect, how on earth do you KNOW he is fine right now? that seems absurd to say. because he changed his name and is on a pharmy cocktail?
who really gives a shit how he copes? you believe he should be treated like a victim?
He will no longer be monitored by the Review Board system. That's not the same thing as no longer being monitored at all, although I agree the article didn't explain that.
thats good he will still be monitored then at least. who is responsible for that now? its amazing his past actions arent considered clear evidence of a significant risk. if the supreme court felt his first mutilation was clear evidence that he could again be a significant risk, he wouldnt have been granted his freedom. if i read that 1999 ruling right. how are they so sure this person is fixed?
Idiots trip all over themselves to release people such as this so they can pat each other on the back and say, "What good people we are!"
There is obviously a risk. There's more of a risk associated with the prick I submitted earlier. The same do-gooders that eagerly worked to free Li are in Schoenborn's corner as well. Just as I easily predicted a release for Li... this scumbag will get one too. And the general public will have to sit there as advocates smugly smoke their pipes and tell themselves how everybody is so lucky to have them.
I don't personally know anyone in the mental health system that smokes a pipe, but keep up with your own fantasies, Thirty. And you forgot to add in the lattes.
For the record, and as I've said before, I also have concern about the Schoenborn case.
Now now TB. His name is Will Baker. He is all cured up now and deserves a second chance at life. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state? I hope everyone asks themselves this question.
Why are you being so snarky about it? Geez.
I've asked myself this question. Have you?
edit - And to clarify I meant the original question. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state?
Yes, sure, at the moment. I know he's fine right now. I am not scared of schizophrenics who are being properly treated and aren't delusional. I would sit beside him and ask him about the whole thing - I'd be curious to know more about how he's feeling, how someone copes with such a situation (not that I would expect him to be happy to discuss it, lol). I already said, someone needs to closely monitor him to ensure that he is taking his meds as prescribed and that he's not having breaks from reality. Always. If that is being done, I don't have concerns. If it's not, I do.
the 2nd paragraph of the article says he will no longer be monitored.
with all due respect, how on earth do you KNOW he is fine right now? that seems absurd to say. because he changed his name and is on a pharmy cocktail?
who really gives a shit how he copes? you believe he should be treated like a victim?
He will no longer be monitored by the Review Board system. That's not the same thing as no longer being monitored at all, although I agree the article didn't explain that.
thats good he will still be monitored then at least. who is responsible for that now? its amazing his past actions arent considered clear evidence of a significant risk. if the supreme court felt his first mutilation was clear evidence that he could again be a significant risk, he wouldnt have been granted his freedom. if i read that 1999 ruling right. how are they so sure this person is fixed?
Idiots trip all over themselves to release people such as this so they can pat each other on the back and say, "What good people we are!"
There is obviously a risk. There's more of a risk associated with the prick I submitted earlier. The same do-gooders that eagerly worked to free Li are in Schoenborn's corner as well. Just as I easily predicted a release for Li... this scumbag will get one too. And the general public will have to sit there as advocates smugly smoke their pipes and tell themselves how everybody is so lucky to have them.
I don't personally know anyone in the mental health system that smokes a pipe, but keep up with your own fantasies, Thirty. And you forgot to add in the lattes.
For the record, and as I've said before, I also have concern about the Schoenborn case.
Just keeping you on your toes!
My toes are just fine. They're about to help me hop on my bike for a Sunday ride. Maybe I'll stop for a latte.
Enjoy your Sunday, too.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Happy Family Day holiday for those of you in BC and whichever other provinces celebrate it today (I know many provinces celebrate next Monday). Long weekend in February - yeah!
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
I found this interesting about SK. I didn't know this. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/saskatchewan-rcmp-border-crossings-1.3980937 One reason why Saskatchewan is not experiencing a similar surge is because it does not offer legal aid to refugee claimants. "If someone is making a refugee claim in Saskatchewan they have to spend their own money from their own private funds to hire a lawyer and they simply do not have any money," Bashir Khan, an immigration and refugee lawyer in Winnipeg, told CBC News last week.
HFD what do you think of the latest unfolding in your province lately?
Comments
I specifically put asshole conservative PM because I do think there can be a shift to a moderate Conservative party in the future which wouldn't preclude it from winning an election under any format ...
i do think if the liberals went ahead with some form of proportional representation, which the all party committee recommended, it would prevent a person like O'leary or even a Harper from ever becoming PM ... the only way Harper was PM for so long was due to vote splitting amongst the centre and left parties ... that would essentially be negated under a new voting system ...
similar to the US - there is like 30% of the population who will always vote conservative regardless of who's name is on the ballot ... under our current voting system - it means someone like O'Leary will always have a chance ... especially if disenfranchisement with Liberals continues ...
http://www.thespec.com/news-story/7124489-freedom-granted-to-man-who-beheaded-passenger-on-greyhound-bus/
His name is Will Baker.
He is all cured up now and deserves a second chance at life.
Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state?
I hope everyone asks themselves this question.
Here's the next guy to get a full release:
http://www.thespec.com/news-story/7124489-freedom-granted-to-man-who-beheaded-passenger-on-greyhound-bus/
To this point in time, he hasn't been a model patient. Soon though, he'll do the right things and we can grant him a full release too. I realize he killed his three children and that's pretty awful, but I'm not so sure it's worse than beheading, mutilating, and cannibalizing some random guy you've know for 3 seconds on a bus.
And I have to say it: the voice was telling him to kill McLean. Was it telling him to cut him to pieces, eat him, place chunks of him in his pockets, and basically bask in the blood?
This is dumb.
Have you?
edit - And to clarify I meant the original question. Will you volunteer to sit beside him on a bus to test his mental state?
I don't think I would describe the prevailing sentiment as apathetic as much as I would describe it as... I don't even know what term to use.
It's pure nonsense.
The second case I submitted was a case in my area. The f**king idiot father killed his kids in grotesque fashion because he was mad at his ex. He fled into the mountain and a trapper found him. I wished he'd have shot him.
If he had... he'd have saved us the very painful moments reading about him ruled not criminally responsible because he was mentally ill (yah... bullshit), day outings, the looming release date and various other things that have the majority of us saying, "What the f**k, man?"
I already said, someone needs to closely monitor him to ensure that he is taking his meds as prescribed and that he's not having breaks from reality. Always. If that is being done, I don't have concerns. If it's not, I do.
with all due respect, how on earth do you KNOW he is fine right now? that seems absurd to say. because he changed his name and is on a pharmy cocktail?
who really gives a shit how he copes? you believe he should be treated like a victim?
There is obviously a risk. There's more of a risk associated with the prick I submitted earlier. The same do-gooders that eagerly worked to free Li are in Schoenborn's corner as well. Just as I easily predicted a release for Li... this scumbag will get one too. And the general public will have to sit there as advocates smugly smoke their pipes and tell themselves how everybody is so lucky to have them.
"Fixed" - no one is ever fixed. It's a question of managing the illness. Many, many people successfully manage it.
And yes, the RB has to grant an absolute discharge if it isn't proven that the individual continues to pose a significant risk. The bare bones fact the the index offence occurred can't be used as proof of ongoing risk, and if you think of that, it's obvious, because if it did then no one would ever get an absolute discharge. The RB absolutely looks at the seriousness of the index offence; that can't be used as the only factor, but clearly they are particularly diligent when looking at a very serious offence. They also look at how engaged the person is in their treatment, how much insight they have into their illness, how much of a symptomatic response they have had, whether they engage in behaviours that put their recovery at risk (like drinking, using drugs, etc.), whether they have factors that contribute to stability (like housing, social supports, structure in their lives with work, school, etc.), whether there are other conditions that might affect their recovery like other medical issues or personality problems.
With Li/Baker, it's a crystal clear example of an instance when a medical condition caused someone to commit a heinous act. Now the medical condition has been successfully treated. If an individual had been driving and had a heart attack and plowed into a group of pedestrians, killing several, that person wouldn't have even had any charges. We tend to view people with mental illness incredibly harshly, and then act surprised when people don't want to seek treatment.
For the record, and as I've said before, I also have concern about the Schoenborn case.
Enjoy your Sunday, too.
TB may even laugh a little.
http://www.torontosun.com/2017/02/12/justins-big-date
Just read another article in which Trump was referred to as "Dondemort".
http://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/live-blog/trump-trudeau#/
One reason why Saskatchewan is not experiencing a similar surge is because it does not offer legal aid to refugee claimants.
"If someone is making a refugee claim in Saskatchewan they have to spend their own money from their own private funds to hire a lawyer and they simply do not have any money," Bashir Khan, an immigration and refugee lawyer in Winnipeg, told CBC News last week.
HFD what do you think of the latest unfolding in your province lately?
edit - or anyone else.