Highly recommend the read. You seriously cannot reason with a percentage of people .
I'm sure you could find a left version of that cruise that would be nearly just as nuts but probably much less hate filled.
I couldn't read through this without my blood boiling in anger. These people are human garbage. A Platonic form of ignorance mixed with every manner of hatred encased in a shell of self-righteous condescension wrapped in aggressive offensiveness. They are everything that's wrong with the human race made into flesh.
You do realize this post exhibits the same traits, right?
What would you have me do? Respect their loathsome opinions and tolerate their hateful intolerance?
Maybe stop dehumanizing every single group you take issue with. Jesus Christ, Richy, you hate just as powerfully as these people do. Why is your hatred and prejudice okay, while theirs is not? It is possible to disagree with someone, even vehemently, without calling people human garbage.
Because I hate them for what they do and say. They hate people for what they are.
Trying to draw an equivalence being being a homophobe and hating homophobes, as an example, is a giant load of fucking bullshit.
"Being intolerant of my intolerance is just as wrong!" has long been the rallying cry of the bigot.
+12
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
edited March 2017
You can be intolerant of someone's views without declaring them human garbage!
Jesus Christ you SUPER want to strawman my arguments.
Nova_C on
+2
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
edited March 2017
This was dropped on Friday, but has been gaining attention likely because it's going to still be talked about by Opposition MPs this coming week considering none of them like it, but a discussion paper on Parliamentary Reform was put forward by the government to spur discussion on changes to the way Parliament conducts business. The main thrusts of the paper aimed primarily at: sitting days (ie- getting rid of Friday sittings), electronic voting access for MPs, Question Period (instituting a Prime Minister's Question Day was floated), & Committee functioning. This last bit is what the primary opposition seems to be about, as the example cited of a change was:
Committees can, at times, become dysfunctional. Members are able to sow dysfunction in committees by filibustering proceedings either by refusing to yield the floor or by moving dilatory motions. There is an obvious solution to remedy this tactic: imposing a maximum time for an intervention at committee. For example, speech lengths at report stage are 10 minutes. This could be a model for committees. And unlike report stage, Members on committees would not be restricted to one 10-minute intervention. Members could have as many 10-minute interventions as they desire, but the fact that the Member would have to yield the floor at the expiry of 10 minutes would properly address filibustering in committees. The principle of deliberations in the House and in committees should be to engage in substantive debate on the merit of an issue, not to engage in tactics which seek only to undermine and devalue the important work of Parliament.
Some other complaints are against removing the Friday sitting (or expanding it, which seems to be getting missed in the complaints), which are much less persuasive personally (the complaints are of the "Canadians work 5-7 days a week, Parliament should too!" which immediately turn me off), particularly since the rationale given in the paper was:
While the House does sit five days a week, certain procedural and time limitations on Fridays make these sittings less effective than other days. All recorded divisions on bills are automatically deferred on Fridays, which means in some cases, the business that is taken up on Fridays cannot resume on Mondays. Additionally, Friday sittings provide for no more than 2.5 hours for Government Orders and committees do not meet. One option would be to reapportion the time on Friday sittings to other days, and another option would be to make them more like other sitting days.
Key note is the discussion paper nature of this, rather than a committed upcoming change (this is, as the Globe's article notes, the 3rd time the Liberals are trying to change Parliament functioning since the election, with the last two going over just as swimmingly).
I didn't even know we had the "filibuster" in our govt.
Even if it can be abused I think it's a bad idea to limit discussion.
Re: the other discussion.
Calling someone human garbage based on an article is probably overstepping & no small amount of hyperbole.
However, it is absolutely appropriate to judge someone because of the things they say, do and support.
From the information provided in the direct quotes these people are selfish, callous and more than a little racist.
Also, having some redeeming qualities like taking care of their family, running a soup kitchen (whites only!), or petting kittens doesn't matter. These things don't cancel each other out like an equation. If you use terms like "muslim incursion" or "old stock Canadian" it really really doesn't matter if you also run an orphanage, you're still an asshole.
+6
Options
MeeqeLord of the pants most fancySomeplace amazingRegistered Userregular
Why is your hatred and prejudice okay, while theirs is not?
Because I'm not prejudging anything or anyone. I'm judging based on actions, and spending a giant pile of money to hear a hate monger talk seems like an easy place to go "Whelp, fuck those guys in particular". Because they gave money to support people advocating for bad things.
I didn't even know we had the "filibuster" in our govt.
Even if it can be abused I think it's a bad idea to limit discussion.
Re: the other discussion.
Calling someone human garbage based on an article is probably overstepping & no small amount of hyperbole.
However, it is absolutely appropriate to judge someone because of the things they say, do and support.
From the information provided in the direct quotes these people are selfish, callous and more than a little racist.
Also, having some redeeming qualities like taking care of their family, running a soup kitchen (whites only!), or petting kittens doesn't matter. These things don't cancel each other out like an equation. If you use terms like "muslim incursion" or "old stock Canadian" it really really doesn't matter if you also run an orphanage, you're still an asshole.
It's also a little ridiculous to base an assumption that these people are "human garbage" off an article that directly admits it is biased and that he is paraphrasing in many instances.
I'm sure these people aren't the best, but it's pretty absurd to take a biased article written by the other side as 100% fact. They did pay to see someone speak who is questionable at best, so their motives are definitely suspect, but get enough people in the same area and create a positive feedback loop to rile them up, you will pull the worst out of them.
WWhat other group am I taking issue with and this upset about?
People from Alberta.
I don't hate people from Alberta. I get upset at the fact they always vote Conservative, even as the CPC screws them over (as they have often complained about under Harper) and even as the Liberals help them (hello new pipelines), but my problem is with that behaviour, not with them as individuals or as a people.
+2
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
I didn't even know we had the "filibuster" in our govt.
Even if it can be abused I think it's a bad idea to limit discussion.
The specifics of the idea floated in the discussion paper aren't, on paper, a terrible suggestion. As it notes, it would allow members to have as many 10-minute interventions as they'd want, but the difference is that at the end of each 10-minute segment they'd have to yield the floor, preventing one member from monopolizing time (ie- filibuster). It's also modeled after rules already existing at the report stage, so it's not an arbitrary limit they just picked out of thin air.
But it does seem like unnecessary micromanaging. And it would also solidify opposition to every other suggestion as part of the discussion paper, which isn't terribly helpful.
More confusing is that the suggestions on electronic voting by MPs and changing Friday sittings (getting rid of or expanding them) have been brought up in previous proposals and have had no recommendations or consensus built on them by the Parties each time. Seems like every time they're brought up, they get punted on.
WWhat other group am I taking issue with and this upset about?
People from Alberta.
I don't hate people from Alberta. I get upset at the fact they always vote Conservative, even as the CPC screws them over (as they have often complained about under Harper) and even as the Liberals help them (hello new pipelines), but my problem is with that behaviour, not with them as individuals or as a people.
This.
I mean, at the end of the day I love Alberta. They're my fellow Canadians, and we're in this together. There are a lot of absolutely wonderful folks there.
But when it comes to politics, a lot of Albertans seem to have an absolutely absurd persecution complex. It can get a bit frustrating.
WWhat other group am I taking issue with and this upset about?
People from Alberta.
I don't hate people from Alberta. I get upset at the fact they always vote Conservative, even as the CPC screws them over (as they have often complained about under Harper) and even as the Liberals help them (hello new pipelines), but my problem is with that behaviour, not with them as individuals or as a people.
This.
I mean, at the end of the day I love Alberta. They're my fellow Canadians, and we're in this together. There are a lot of absolutely wonderful folks there.
But when it comes to politics, a lot of Albertans seem to have an absolutely absurd persecution complex. It can get a bit frustrating.
As an Albertan who did a fair bit of work in the oil and gas industry that is a trait you see a bunch with people in that field. I tend not to talk politics with a good portion of folks that I may work with. Had one person who I adore, complain that the contracting company that was going to do there home renovations was going to increase the cost by 15 or 25% (I forget which) because of the Carbon Tax.
I told them that it sounded like they were just gouging you and blaming it on the Carbon Tax and that maybe they should look into a different contracting company. But that sort of statement is common, heck within minutes of the NDP being elected people were screaming bloody murder. They weren't even in power yet and people were laying blame on them for whatever.
(Not that the NDP aren't beyond criticism but shit... it was insane. )
Switch SW-6182-1526-0041
+8
Options
Caulk Bite 6One of the multitude of Dans infesting this placeRegistered Userregular
Do I take that to mean, then, that you have no objection to one group of people declaring another group of people as human garbage?
What's the context? Which group is hating for the things people say/do and which one is hating because of how people were born?
Depends where you are, I suppose. Only one place in Canada fines you for speaking or writing the wrong language. Only one province has blatantly xenophobic policies. Human garbage, you say?
0
Options
Caulk Bite 6One of the multitude of Dans infesting this placeRegistered Userregular
Do I take that to mean, then, that you have no objection to one group of people declaring another group of people as human garbage?
What's the context? Which group is hating for the things people say/do and which one is hating because of how people were born?
Depends where you are, I suppose. Only one place in Canada fines you for speaking or writing the wrong language. Only one province has blatantly xenophobic policies. Human garbage, you say?
Let's narrow this scope back down. You are going to bat for the Canadian Alt-Right, a group that is gleefull in its espousing of hateful messaging. A group whose name is a thinly veiled code for white nationalists (who, as far as I'm aware, are bad people).
So yes, I think these people in particular are human garbage. Are you really trying to die on the hill of "white nationalists don't deserve to get called mean names"?
Caulk Bite 6 on
+1
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
Do I take that to mean, then, that you have no objection to one group of people declaring another group of people as human garbage?
What's the context? Which group is hating for the things people say/do and which one is hating because of how people were born?
Depends where you are, I suppose. Only one place in Canada fines you for speaking or writing the wrong language. Only one province has blatantly xenophobic policies. Human garbage, you say?
Let's narrow this scope back down. You are going to bat for the Canadian Alt-Right, a group that is gleefull in its espousing of hateful messaging. A group whose name is a thinly veiled code for white nationalists (who, as far as I'm aware, are bad people).
So yes, I think these people in particular are human garbage. Are you really trying to die on the hill of "white nationalists don't deserve to get called mean names"?
I see. It's only that one particular group of racists that's bad.
0
Options
Caulk Bite 6One of the multitude of Dans infesting this placeRegistered Userregular
Do I take that to mean, then, that you have no objection to one group of people declaring another group of people as human garbage?
What's the context? Which group is hating for the things people say/do and which one is hating because of how people were born?
Depends where you are, I suppose. Only one place in Canada fines you for speaking or writing the wrong language. Only one province has blatantly xenophobic policies. Human garbage, you say?
Let's narrow this scope back down. You are going to bat for the Canadian Alt-Right, a group that is gleefull in its espousing of hateful messaging. A group whose name is a thinly veiled code for white nationalists (who, as far as I'm aware, are bad people).
So yes, I think these people in particular are human garbage. Are you really trying to die on the hill of "white nationalists don't deserve to get called mean names"?
I see. It's only that one particular group of racists that's bad.
Now, is that what I said?
It is not. I'm attempting to stay on the topic that you brought up. That you are desperately trying to dance away from.
Do I take that to mean, then, that you have no objection to one group of people declaring another group of people as human garbage?
What's the context? Which group is hating for the things people say/do and which one is hating because of how people were born?
Depends where you are, I suppose. Only one place in Canada fines you for speaking or writing the wrong language. Only one province has blatantly xenophobic policies. Human garbage, you say?
Let's narrow this scope back down. You are going to bat for the Canadian Alt-Right, a group that is gleefull in its espousing of hateful messaging. A group whose name is a thinly veiled code for white nationalists (who, as far as I'm aware, are bad people).
So yes, I think these people in particular are human garbage. Are you really trying to die on the hill of "white nationalists don't deserve to get called mean names"?
I see. It's only that one particular group of racists that's bad.
This is meaningless.
Look, you jumped into this on your high horse so just tell us why we should not find the Canadian alt-right to be scum. What's wrong with that again? I don't think there's anything wrong being intolerant of their views.
Do I take that to mean, then, that you have no objection to one group of people declaring another group of people as human garbage?
What's the context? Which group is hating for the things people say/do and which one is hating because of how people were born?
Depends where you are, I suppose. Only one place in Canada fines you for speaking or writing the wrong language. Only one province has blatantly xenophobic policies. Human garbage, you say?
Let's narrow this scope back down. You are going to bat for the Canadian Alt-Right, a group that is gleefull in its espousing of hateful messaging. A group whose name is a thinly veiled code for white nationalists (who, as far as I'm aware, are bad people).
So yes, I think these people in particular are human garbage. Are you really trying to die on the hill of "white nationalists don't deserve to get called mean names"?
I see. It's only that one particular group of racists that's bad.
Calling alt-right folks names, even "human garbage", isn't racist.
It's hyperbolic and not helpful I'll grant you but there sure as shit isn't any equivalence between the views and statements observed on "that side" and what is happening in this thread.
As has been done to death in every election thread and beyond "both sides are the same" is 100% fucking bullshit. One side espouses hate for what you are and one side is using hateful terms for what people are doing.
I would suggest you know that full well and this whole tangent should quietly die.
In other Canadian news, BC NDP seems to have landed squarely in the "no Uber" camp. So, like the niqab and "balanced budgets" debacle that torpedoed the national NDP, they've fucked themselves.
4 more years of the wicked witch of the west because of NDP ineptitude & lefty vote splitting, wheee!
Do I take that to mean, then, that you have no objection to one group of people declaring another group of people as human garbage?
What's the context? Which group is hating for the things people say/do and which one is hating because of how people were born?
Depends where you are, I suppose. Only one place in Canada fines you for speaking or writing the wrong language. Only one province has blatantly xenophobic policies. Human garbage, you say?
Let's narrow this scope back down. You are going to bat for the Canadian Alt-Right, a group that is gleefull in its espousing of hateful messaging. A group whose name is a thinly veiled code for white nationalists (who, as far as I'm aware, are bad people).
So yes, I think these people in particular are human garbage. Are you really trying to die on the hill of "white nationalists don't deserve to get called mean names"?
I see. It's only that one particular group of racists that's bad.
Calling alt-right folks names, even "human garbage", isn't racist.
It's hyperbolic and not helpful I'll grant you but there sure as shit isn't any equivalence between the views and statements observed on "that side" and what is happening in this thread.
As has been done to death in every election thread and beyond "both sides are the same" is 100% fucking bullshit. One side espouses hate for what you are and one side is using hateful terms for what people are doing.
I would suggest you know that full well and this whole tangent should quietly die.
In other Canadian news, BC NDP seems to have landed squarely in the "no Uber" camp. So, like the niqab and "balanced budgets" debacle that torpedoed the national NDP, they've fucked themselves.
4 more years of the wicked witch of the west because of NDP ineptitude & lefty vote splitting, wheee!
Well, no Uber is a pretty good stance to take. Their business model is somehow both horribly exploitative and unsustainable. It's not the kind of behavior we should be encouraging.
Do I take that to mean, then, that you have no objection to one group of people declaring another group of people as human garbage?
What's the context? Which group is hating for the things people say/do and which one is hating because of how people were born?
Depends where you are, I suppose. Only one place in Canada fines you for speaking or writing the wrong language. Only one province has blatantly xenophobic policies. Human garbage, you say?
Actually, that one province had a few individuals in government try to pass blatantly xenophobic policies, and the people stood up against them and voted them the fuck out of power right away. Nice try though.
Do I take that to mean, then, that you have no objection to one group of people declaring another group of people as human garbage?
What's the context? Which group is hating for the things people say/do and which one is hating because of how people were born?
Depends where you are, I suppose. Only one place in Canada fines you for speaking or writing the wrong language. Only one province has blatantly xenophobic policies. Human garbage, you say?
Please, complete your thought. How, exactly, am I garbage, as someone, like the majority of my province, who voted against xenophobia. Also, how much is the fine going to be for writing this post ?
I hate what they've done to politics in our country, frankly.
I hate that they've poisoned the political well so badly in my province that the social conservatives are seeing a massive resurgence, after guys like Ed Stelmach started quietly moving those goalposts to the left.
I hate that they spread their dishonest, far right poison online to the degree that there are literally people who think that Rachel Notley had something to do with the Fort McMurray fires.
I hate that they embolden people like Kellie Leitch and her ilk in their xenophobic nonsense.
I hate that they take things like the Quebec mosque shooting and spin conspiracy theories that allow for the dismissal of concerns about the very real social problems created by their rhetoric and the rhetoric of their alt-right allies.
At this point, if you count yourself among Levant's followers, you're saying you stand against everything I stand for. If you attend their 'freedom rallies', you're enabling his vile rhetoric. Because he is diametrically opposed to social progress, to a better society for everyone, and I'm not going to stand here and pretend I'm worried about hurting the feelings of people who genuinely believe that Islam is a poison and anathema to the West.
They made their choices. They can live with the consequences. And yes, I'm Albertan. Born and raised, and I love my province, but I don't love our political discourse. It's toxic, it's reactionary, and it constantly tilts against the windmills of equality and inclusivity. And we own that. That's not on anyone else. It's on Albertans.
In other Canadian news, BC NDP seems to have landed squarely in the "no Uber" camp. So, like the niqab and "balanced budgets" debacle that torpedoed the national NDP, they've fucked themselves.
4 more years of the wicked witch of the west because of NDP ineptitude & lefty vote splitting, wheee!
Wait, why are you so convinced Uber has any love for it here in BC? I can only speak personally, I don't want Uber in BC either, but until you brought it up, I didn't even realize NDP and I share that opinion. But I see the reason behind why Uber would suck in BC is not necissarily because Uber is bad (which I think it would be for drivers which would impact their passengers) but BC in general is not a great place for transportation: public city buses, between town bus routes, and infrastructure woes in general due to a combination of distance, eroding weather, and inhospitable terrain that makes infrastructure really expensive and harder to drive. Unregulated transportation already happens in BC out of necessity, its called hitch hiking and pitching in for gas money.
How does Uber decide the election? I'm confused.
CanadianWolverine on
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
It's funny. I've spent the majority of the last 20 years trying to combat the alt-right escalation going on in my extended family. Lots of southern Alberta farmers among my aunts and uncles. Lots of avowed Christians who forget the inconvenient parts of the bible. Lots of hypocrisy and fear mongering. Some I've had to just give up on. Some are pretty reasonable, but pay far too much attention to people like Levant. I try to get them to justify to me when they get started on whatever latest thing they heard, which works sometimes because most of the time far right views do not hold up under scrutiny.
One of the things I've had a lot of trouble with are when they point to how much they are hated by 'the left'. And this thread shows just how I can't do anything about that. They're not hateful people. But slowly and surely they've been pushed further and further right by feeling politically marginalized, and by the only people saying that Albertans are good people are the ones saying everyone else isn't.
You can say that's not true, but it doesn't matter. So long as they identify with the people you call human garbage, they will get further and further immersed into right wing rhetoric and just ignore more and more what I say to try to keep them grounded in reality.
Do I take that to mean, then, that you have no objection to one group of people declaring another group of people as human garbage?
What's the context? Which group is hating for the things people say/do and which one is hating because of how people were born?
Depends where you are, I suppose. Only one place in Canada fines you for speaking or writing the wrong language. Only one province has blatantly xenophobic policies. Human garbage, you say?
Please, complete your thought. How, exactly, am I garbage, as someone, like the majority of my province, who voted against xenophobia. Also, how much is the fine going to be for writing this post ?
This is my point. I don't want to call anyone human garbage, but I've long been ashamed that in Canada, there is a government that punishes people for speaking the wrong language. I've never understood why that's not a bigger deal. It should be a bigger deal. But people are insisting that it's right and it's proper to call those that support such policies human garbage. I don't think that's going to help.
I take cabs pretty regularly, it's a shitty customer experience that hasn't materially improved in the 15 or so years I've been using it (multiple providers).
It can take hours sometimes to get a cab during busy event periods which ends up in people driving drunk.
Also uber was an example and the first name that came up. The actual proposal is to allow ride sharing services before end of 2017.
I support ride sharing being introduced and getting rid of the taxi industry monopoly.
Taxis should also not have all the extra regulation though, should be a level playing field.
Why it's tied to the election is that people DO support ride sharing.
For those interested, got a Maxime Bernier email soliciting donations today. So here's what's on Maxime's radar:
"<EBD's name>, the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights has graded the gun policies of all the candidates.
I’m the only one who got an A+.
It’s because my policy is the biggest change in favour of gun owners.
And it’s something we can win on.
Double firearms license length from 5 to 10 years;
Repeal all magazine capacity restrictions;
Classify firearms on function, not appearance;
Make any classification changes go through Parliament, not the RCMP and cabinet;
Reimburse gun owners for loss of property from previous government gun grabs, and protect firearms owners in the future;
Make safety courses more available across the country, especially rural Canada.
With my firearms legislation, many popular guns like the AR-15 would become non-restricted, because gun legislation wouldn’t be based on fear anymore.
The Ruger 10/22 magazine issue would be gone.
A trip to the range will mean you get to practice shooting, not reloading."
Cropped out the link to donate.
Also on Steam and PSN: twobadcats
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
What Ruger 10/22 magazine issue? Rimfire rifles aren't subject to magazine size restrictions.
Some of that sounds good to me, though. Double license length I like. Classify on function I like. I don't like repealing mag restrictions. I think the RCMP should be able to classify new weapons without Parliament. I think government should be reimbursing owners for confiscation due to changes in laws, not sure if that's already happening or no. Safety courses should be easily available.
I'm not sure I would consider the upsides of that greater than the downsides, though.
One of the things I've had a lot of trouble with are when they point to how much they are hated by 'the left'. And this thread shows just how I can't do anything about that. They're not hateful people. But slowly and surely they've been pushed further and further right by feeling politically marginalized, and by the only people saying that Albertans are good people are the ones saying everyone else isn't.
No. There are plenty of people who aren't conservative or aren't Albertans who say nice things about Alberta or propose ideas that would benefit Alberta. But those get ignored, because they don't fit into the persecution complex. The rest of the country could be frequently sending Albetra hugs and love letters, and these folks would still complain about the rest of the country hating them.
Also, the Albertans who complain the most about the rest of the country being mean to them are often also some of the most vocal about saying incredibly hateful things about other parts of Canada (Quebec, Atlantic Canada, etc). They are massive hypocrites and have zero high ground in this.
Declaring groups of people "human garbage" is certainly too far, but there's absolutely a reason other parts of the country get super frustrated with Alberta.
... but I've long been ashamed that in Canada, there is a government that punishes people for speaking the wrong language. I've never understood why that's not a bigger deal. It should be a bigger deal.
While I don't agree with Quebec's Bill 101, it's not really difficult to understand why it's a thing. I absolutely think it goes too far, but Canadian history is full of very real discrimination and marginalization against French Canadians. There was a lot of effort put into trying to anglicize French communities. Heck, in New Brunswick there's still occasionally complaints about the French population "getting too much" and the government being unfair to the English population because of things like ... allowing Francophones to get government services in French, and the the French areas not being treated like second class citizens anymore.
TubularLuggage on
+3
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
One of the things I've had a lot of trouble with are when they point to how much they are hated by 'the left'. And this thread shows just how I can't do anything about that. They're not hateful people. But slowly and surely they've been pushed further and further right by feeling politically marginalized, and by the only people saying that Albertans are good people are the ones saying everyone else isn't.
No. There are plenty of people who aren't conservative or aren't Albertans who say nice things about Alberta or propose ideas that would benefit Alberta. But those get ignored, because they don't fit into the persecution complex. The rest of the country could be frequently sending Albetra hugs and love letters, and these folks would still complain about the rest of the country hating them.
Also, the Albertans who complain the most about the rest of the country being mean to them are often also some of the most vocal about saying incredibly hateful things about other parts of Canada (Quebec, Atlantic Canada, etc). They are massive hypocrites and have zero high ground in this.
Declaring groups of people "human garbage" is certainly too far, but there's absolutely a reason other parts of the country get super frustrated with Alberta.
So, lost cause, then.
... but I've long been ashamed that in Canada, there is a government that punishes people for speaking the wrong language. I've never understood why that's not a bigger deal. It should be a bigger deal.
While I don't agree with Quebec's Bill 101, it's not really difficult to understand why it's a thing. I absolutely think it goes too far, but Canadian history is full of very real discrimination and marginalization against French Canadians. There was a lot of effort put into trying to anglicize French communities. Heck, in New Brunswick there's still occasionally complaints about the French population "getting too much" and the government being unfair to the English population because of things like ... allowing Francophones to get government services in French, and the the French areas not being treated like second class citizens anymore.
I get that. It doesn't change the fact that it's a racist policy actively enacted by government and needs to go, and we shouldn't be okay with the government punishing people for speaking their native language.
What Ruger 10/22 magazine issue? Rimfire rifles aren't subject to magazine size restrictions.
Some of that sounds good to me, though. Double license length I like. Classify on function I like. I don't like repealing mag restrictions. I think the RCMP should be able to classify new weapons without Parliament. I think government should be reimbursing owners for confiscation due to changes in laws, not sure if that's already happening or no. Safety courses should be easily available.
I'm not sure I would consider the upsides of that greater than the downsides, though.
High-capacity magazines designed for the 10/22 also fit a Ruger pistol. The RCMP recently decided those magazines are to be considered restricted.
I'm mixed on those proposals as well.
Double firearms license length from 5 to 10 years; Why? What's the reasoning/logic here?
Repeal all magazine capacity restrictions; Uh, no thanks.
Classify firearms on function, not appearance; Like this. These things should be based on objective facts, not emotional responses.
Make any classification changes go through Parliament, not the RCMP and cabinet; Hate this. I know the gun community hates the RCMPs power here but it makes 0 sense to have the politicians decide these things. Maybe a technical group needs to be set up? Something like the CSA electrical standards.
Reimburse gun owners for loss of property from previous government gun grabs, and protect firearms owners in the future; This is sufficiently vague I don't know how to feel about it.
Make safety courses more available across the country, especially rural Canada. Education is key. I'm all for this.
+3
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
edited March 2017
Oh. I have a few 25 round mags for my 10/22. They would look hilarious in a pistol.
The smallest mag I have for my 10/22 is the 10 round it came with. Is that also considered restricted now? Are there even smaller magazines available?
I like the double firearms license length to 10 years just because if we're okay with passports being 10 years, then PALs should be 10 years as well.
Well, unless you're francophone, Native American, Arab, a refugee, an immigrant, the child of a refugee or an immigrant, a Muslim, an Atheist, the wrong kind of Christian, LGBT, brown, black, a woman who doesn't know her place, a feminist, educated, dressed the wrong way, socialist-leaning, liberal-leaning, centrist, right-leaning but not right-leaning enough, trying to fight climate change, trying to expand the social net, or poor, in which case they hate your guts, blame you for all the wrongs in the world, spend their entertainment dollars encouraging an industry demonizing you, and dedicate their political power to eradicating your rights. But aside from that, they're really not hateful people.
One of the things I've had a lot of trouble with are when they point to how much they are hated by 'the left'. And this thread shows just how I can't do anything about that. They're not hateful people. But slowly and surely they've been pushed further and further right by feeling politically marginalized, and by the only people saying that Albertans are good people are the ones saying everyone else isn't.
You can say that's not true, but it doesn't matter. So long as they identify with the people you call human garbage, they will get further and further immersed into right wing rhetoric and just ignore more and more what I say to try to keep them grounded in reality.
Multiple people in this thread, on this very page, have said Albertans are good people. But still you blame us for... what exactly? Not being tolerant and welcoming of people whose explicitly-stated ideology is the very antithesis of a decent, tolerant, fair and safe society? Marginalizing and rejecting extremist hate groups like Levant and his Rebels, Trump and his hijacked Tea Party crowds, the KKK, MRA, and Neo-Nazi? Disrespecting people that are actively and gleefully engaged in persecuting and hurting others?
This is my point. I don't want to call anyone human garbage, but I've long been ashamed that in Canada, there is a government that punishes people for speaking the wrong language. I've never understood why that's not a bigger deal. It should be a bigger deal.
There is no such government in Canada. This scenario has never happened. It's not a big deal because it's a right-wing strawman of Québec's language laws.
Oh. I have a few 25 round mags for my 10/22. They would look hilarious in a pistol.
The smallest mag I have for my 10/22 is the 10 round it came with. Is that also considered restricted now? Are there even smaller magazines available?
I like the double firearms license length to 10 years just because if we're okay with passports being 10 years, then PALs should be 10 years as well.
I'm sure you can find better information from a quick google search but it has to do with there being limits on pistol magazine sizes. The 10 round rotary magazine that the 10/22 comes with is fine.
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
Well, unless you're francophone, Native American, Arab, a refugee, an immigrant, the child of a refugee or an immigrant, a Muslim, an Atheist, the wrong kind of Christian, LGBT, brown, black, a woman who doesn't know her place, a feminist, educated, dressed the wrong way, socialist-leaning, liberal-leaning, centrist, right-leaning but not right-leaning enough, trying to fight climate change, trying to expand the social net, or poor, in which case they hate your guts, blame you for all the wrongs in the world, spend their entertainment dollars encouraging an industry demonizing you, and dedicate their political power to eradicating your rights. But aside from that, they're really not hateful people.
Like, I don't get this. You don't know anyone in my family, but you're comfortable with calling them hateful because they identify as conservative.
Also, anyone who summarize Loi 101 as "punishing people for speaking the wrong language" either does not know what it does (possibly due to the anti-francophone bigotry common to English Canada), or is trying to misrepresent it.
Hint: I hate translations and usually watch movies in a theatre that does not show movies in French, buy books in a bookstore with a very small French language section.
Most signs and such are written in French and English. The main purpose of Loi 101 is to ensure the French is there. Because before it, it often was not.
My work is, in practice, done in English since I have to read and write stuff coming and going to all kind of place, and I don't speak German and Chinese.
We do insist that immigrants go to school in French. Kinda like the rest of Canada expect them to go to school in English (or French, some places), unless you guys added a few dozens school systems since the last time I checked.
I don't consider that to be punishing someone, unless you consider learning French to be punishment.
PS,
My English is a product of the French language school system.
Yeah, a lot of the things that the Gun Lobby try to call "cosmetic" are actually developments made to guns to turn them into more efficient human v human weapons.
In regards to people becoming entrenched in their beliefs out of a sense of liberal hate, that sense of persecution has more to do with their social circle and media consumption habits than any sense of actual persecution. A lot of right wing facebook / media (technically, not just right wing) loves to hype up any nonsense they can find.
Unless they can point to laws / statutes that liberals are both proposing and agitating for that are set out to curtail their freedoms?
Posts
Because I hate them for what they do and say. They hate people for what they are.
Trying to draw an equivalence being being a homophobe and hating homophobes, as an example, is a giant load of fucking bullshit.
"Being intolerant of my intolerance is just as wrong!" has long been the rallying cry of the bigot.
Jesus Christ you SUPER want to strawman my arguments.
Some other complaints are against removing the Friday sitting (or expanding it, which seems to be getting missed in the complaints), which are much less persuasive personally (the complaints are of the "Canadians work 5-7 days a week, Parliament should too!" which immediately turn me off), particularly since the rationale given in the paper was:
Key note is the discussion paper nature of this, rather than a committed upcoming change (this is, as the Globe's article notes, the 3rd time the Liberals are trying to change Parliament functioning since the election, with the last two going over just as swimmingly).
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
Even if it can be abused I think it's a bad idea to limit discussion.
Re: the other discussion.
Calling someone human garbage based on an article is probably overstepping & no small amount of hyperbole.
However, it is absolutely appropriate to judge someone because of the things they say, do and support.
From the information provided in the direct quotes these people are selfish, callous and more than a little racist.
Also, having some redeeming qualities like taking care of their family, running a soup kitchen (whites only!), or petting kittens doesn't matter. These things don't cancel each other out like an equation. If you use terms like "muslim incursion" or "old stock Canadian" it really really doesn't matter if you also run an orphanage, you're still an asshole.
Because I'm not prejudging anything or anyone. I'm judging based on actions, and spending a giant pile of money to hear a hate monger talk seems like an easy place to go "Whelp, fuck those guys in particular". Because they gave money to support people advocating for bad things.
It's also a little ridiculous to base an assumption that these people are "human garbage" off an article that directly admits it is biased and that he is paraphrasing in many instances.
I'm sure these people aren't the best, but it's pretty absurd to take a biased article written by the other side as 100% fact. They did pay to see someone speak who is questionable at best, so their motives are definitely suspect, but get enough people in the same area and create a positive feedback loop to rile them up, you will pull the worst out of them.
I don't hate people from Alberta. I get upset at the fact they always vote Conservative, even as the CPC screws them over (as they have often complained about under Harper) and even as the Liberals help them (hello new pipelines), but my problem is with that behaviour, not with them as individuals or as a people.
The specifics of the idea floated in the discussion paper aren't, on paper, a terrible suggestion. As it notes, it would allow members to have as many 10-minute interventions as they'd want, but the difference is that at the end of each 10-minute segment they'd have to yield the floor, preventing one member from monopolizing time (ie- filibuster). It's also modeled after rules already existing at the report stage, so it's not an arbitrary limit they just picked out of thin air.
But it does seem like unnecessary micromanaging. And it would also solidify opposition to every other suggestion as part of the discussion paper, which isn't terribly helpful.
More confusing is that the suggestions on electronic voting by MPs and changing Friday sittings (getting rid of or expanding them) have been brought up in previous proposals and have had no recommendations or consensus built on them by the Parties each time. Seems like every time they're brought up, they get punted on.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
Now, someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think a direct answer to your own quoted question counts as a strawman.
I'm not seeing it. I mean, you did draw an equivalence between the two viewpoints of "hate what they say/do" vs "hate what they are".
This.
I mean, at the end of the day I love Alberta. They're my fellow Canadians, and we're in this together. There are a lot of absolutely wonderful folks there.
But when it comes to politics, a lot of Albertans seem to have an absolutely absurd persecution complex. It can get a bit frustrating.
As an Albertan who did a fair bit of work in the oil and gas industry that is a trait you see a bunch with people in that field. I tend not to talk politics with a good portion of folks that I may work with. Had one person who I adore, complain that the contracting company that was going to do there home renovations was going to increase the cost by 15 or 25% (I forget which) because of the Carbon Tax.
I told them that it sounded like they were just gouging you and blaming it on the Carbon Tax and that maybe they should look into a different contracting company. But that sort of statement is common, heck within minutes of the NDP being elected people were screaming bloody murder. They weren't even in power yet and people were laying blame on them for whatever.
(Not that the NDP aren't beyond criticism but shit... it was insane. )
What's the context? Which group is hating for the things people say/do and which one is hating because of how people were born?
Depends where you are, I suppose. Only one place in Canada fines you for speaking or writing the wrong language. Only one province has blatantly xenophobic policies. Human garbage, you say?
Let's narrow this scope back down. You are going to bat for the Canadian Alt-Right, a group that is gleefull in its espousing of hateful messaging. A group whose name is a thinly veiled code for white nationalists (who, as far as I'm aware, are bad people).
So yes, I think these people in particular are human garbage. Are you really trying to die on the hill of "white nationalists don't deserve to get called mean names"?
I see. It's only that one particular group of racists that's bad.
Now, is that what I said?
It is not. I'm attempting to stay on the topic that you brought up. That you are desperately trying to dance away from.
This is meaningless.
Look, you jumped into this on your high horse so just tell us why we should not find the Canadian alt-right to be scum. What's wrong with that again? I don't think there's anything wrong being intolerant of their views.
Calling alt-right folks names, even "human garbage", isn't racist.
It's hyperbolic and not helpful I'll grant you but there sure as shit isn't any equivalence between the views and statements observed on "that side" and what is happening in this thread.
As has been done to death in every election thread and beyond "both sides are the same" is 100% fucking bullshit. One side espouses hate for what you are and one side is using hateful terms for what people are doing.
I would suggest you know that full well and this whole tangent should quietly die.
In other Canadian news, BC NDP seems to have landed squarely in the "no Uber" camp. So, like the niqab and "balanced budgets" debacle that torpedoed the national NDP, they've fucked themselves.
4 more years of the wicked witch of the west because of NDP ineptitude & lefty vote splitting, wheee!
Well, no Uber is a pretty good stance to take. Their business model is somehow both horribly exploitative and unsustainable. It's not the kind of behavior we should be encouraging.
Actually, that one province had a few individuals in government try to pass blatantly xenophobic policies, and the people stood up against them and voted them the fuck out of power right away. Nice try though.
Please, complete your thought. How, exactly, am I garbage, as someone, like the majority of my province, who voted against xenophobia. Also, how much is the fine going to be for writing this post ?
MWO: Adamski
I hate that they've poisoned the political well so badly in my province that the social conservatives are seeing a massive resurgence, after guys like Ed Stelmach started quietly moving those goalposts to the left.
I hate that they spread their dishonest, far right poison online to the degree that there are literally people who think that Rachel Notley had something to do with the Fort McMurray fires.
I hate that they embolden people like Kellie Leitch and her ilk in their xenophobic nonsense.
I hate that they take things like the Quebec mosque shooting and spin conspiracy theories that allow for the dismissal of concerns about the very real social problems created by their rhetoric and the rhetoric of their alt-right allies.
At this point, if you count yourself among Levant's followers, you're saying you stand against everything I stand for. If you attend their 'freedom rallies', you're enabling his vile rhetoric. Because he is diametrically opposed to social progress, to a better society for everyone, and I'm not going to stand here and pretend I'm worried about hurting the feelings of people who genuinely believe that Islam is a poison and anathema to the West.
They made their choices. They can live with the consequences. And yes, I'm Albertan. Born and raised, and I love my province, but I don't love our political discourse. It's toxic, it's reactionary, and it constantly tilts against the windmills of equality and inclusivity. And we own that. That's not on anyone else. It's on Albertans.
Wait, why are you so convinced Uber has any love for it here in BC? I can only speak personally, I don't want Uber in BC either, but until you brought it up, I didn't even realize NDP and I share that opinion. But I see the reason behind why Uber would suck in BC is not necissarily because Uber is bad (which I think it would be for drivers which would impact their passengers) but BC in general is not a great place for transportation: public city buses, between town bus routes, and infrastructure woes in general due to a combination of distance, eroding weather, and inhospitable terrain that makes infrastructure really expensive and harder to drive. Unregulated transportation already happens in BC out of necessity, its called hitch hiking and pitching in for gas money.
How does Uber decide the election? I'm confused.
One of the things I've had a lot of trouble with are when they point to how much they are hated by 'the left'. And this thread shows just how I can't do anything about that. They're not hateful people. But slowly and surely they've been pushed further and further right by feeling politically marginalized, and by the only people saying that Albertans are good people are the ones saying everyone else isn't.
You can say that's not true, but it doesn't matter. So long as they identify with the people you call human garbage, they will get further and further immersed into right wing rhetoric and just ignore more and more what I say to try to keep them grounded in reality.
Lost cause, I suppose.
This is my point. I don't want to call anyone human garbage, but I've long been ashamed that in Canada, there is a government that punishes people for speaking the wrong language. I've never understood why that's not a bigger deal. It should be a bigger deal. But people are insisting that it's right and it's proper to call those that support such policies human garbage. I don't think that's going to help.
It can take hours sometimes to get a cab during busy event periods which ends up in people driving drunk.
Also uber was an example and the first name that came up. The actual proposal is to allow ride sharing services before end of 2017.
I support ride sharing being introduced and getting rid of the taxi industry monopoly.
Taxis should also not have all the extra regulation though, should be a level playing field.
Why it's tied to the election is that people DO support ride sharing.
"<EBD's name>, the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights has graded the gun policies of all the candidates.
I’m the only one who got an A+.
It’s because my policy is the biggest change in favour of gun owners.
And it’s something we can win on.
Double firearms license length from 5 to 10 years;
Repeal all magazine capacity restrictions;
Classify firearms on function, not appearance;
Make any classification changes go through Parliament, not the RCMP and cabinet;
Reimburse gun owners for loss of property from previous government gun grabs, and protect firearms owners in the future;
Make safety courses more available across the country, especially rural Canada.
With my firearms legislation, many popular guns like the AR-15 would become non-restricted, because gun legislation wouldn’t be based on fear anymore.
The Ruger 10/22 magazine issue would be gone.
A trip to the range will mean you get to practice shooting, not reloading."
Cropped out the link to donate.
Also on Steam and PSN: twobadcats
Some of that sounds good to me, though. Double license length I like. Classify on function I like. I don't like repealing mag restrictions. I think the RCMP should be able to classify new weapons without Parliament. I think government should be reimbursing owners for confiscation due to changes in laws, not sure if that's already happening or no. Safety courses should be easily available.
I'm not sure I would consider the upsides of that greater than the downsides, though.
Also, the Albertans who complain the most about the rest of the country being mean to them are often also some of the most vocal about saying incredibly hateful things about other parts of Canada (Quebec, Atlantic Canada, etc). They are massive hypocrites and have zero high ground in this.
Declaring groups of people "human garbage" is certainly too far, but there's absolutely a reason other parts of the country get super frustrated with Alberta.
While I don't agree with Quebec's Bill 101, it's not really difficult to understand why it's a thing. I absolutely think it goes too far, but Canadian history is full of very real discrimination and marginalization against French Canadians. There was a lot of effort put into trying to anglicize French communities. Heck, in New Brunswick there's still occasionally complaints about the French population "getting too much" and the government being unfair to the English population because of things like ... allowing Francophones to get government services in French, and the the French areas not being treated like second class citizens anymore.
So, lost cause, then.
I get that. It doesn't change the fact that it's a racist policy actively enacted by government and needs to go, and we shouldn't be okay with the government punishing people for speaking their native language.
High-capacity magazines designed for the 10/22 also fit a Ruger pistol. The RCMP recently decided those magazines are to be considered restricted.
I'm mixed on those proposals as well.
Double firearms license length from 5 to 10 years; Why? What's the reasoning/logic here?
Repeal all magazine capacity restrictions; Uh, no thanks.
Classify firearms on function, not appearance; Like this. These things should be based on objective facts, not emotional responses.
Make any classification changes go through Parliament, not the RCMP and cabinet; Hate this. I know the gun community hates the RCMPs power here but it makes 0 sense to have the politicians decide these things. Maybe a technical group needs to be set up? Something like the CSA electrical standards.
Reimburse gun owners for loss of property from previous government gun grabs, and protect firearms owners in the future; This is sufficiently vague I don't know how to feel about it.
Make safety courses more available across the country, especially rural Canada. Education is key. I'm all for this.
The smallest mag I have for my 10/22 is the 10 round it came with. Is that also considered restricted now? Are there even smaller magazines available?
I like the double firearms license length to 10 years just because if we're okay with passports being 10 years, then PALs should be 10 years as well.
Well, unless you're francophone, Native American, Arab, a refugee, an immigrant, the child of a refugee or an immigrant, a Muslim, an Atheist, the wrong kind of Christian, LGBT, brown, black, a woman who doesn't know her place, a feminist, educated, dressed the wrong way, socialist-leaning, liberal-leaning, centrist, right-leaning but not right-leaning enough, trying to fight climate change, trying to expand the social net, or poor, in which case they hate your guts, blame you for all the wrongs in the world, spend their entertainment dollars encouraging an industry demonizing you, and dedicate their political power to eradicating your rights. But aside from that, they're really not hateful people.
Multiple people in this thread, on this very page, have said Albertans are good people. But still you blame us for... what exactly? Not being tolerant and welcoming of people whose explicitly-stated ideology is the very antithesis of a decent, tolerant, fair and safe society? Marginalizing and rejecting extremist hate groups like Levant and his Rebels, Trump and his hijacked Tea Party crowds, the KKK, MRA, and Neo-Nazi? Disrespecting people that are actively and gleefully engaged in persecuting and hurting others?
There is no such government in Canada. This scenario has never happened. It's not a big deal because it's a right-wing strawman of Québec's language laws.
I'm sure you can find better information from a quick google search but it has to do with there being limits on pistol magazine sizes. The 10 round rotary magazine that the 10/22 comes with is fine.
Like, I don't get this. You don't know anyone in my family, but you're comfortable with calling them hateful because they identify as conservative.
Why is that suddenly okay?
Hint: I hate translations and usually watch movies in a theatre that does not show movies in French, buy books in a bookstore with a very small French language section.
Most signs and such are written in French and English. The main purpose of Loi 101 is to ensure the French is there. Because before it, it often was not.
My work is, in practice, done in English since I have to read and write stuff coming and going to all kind of place, and I don't speak German and Chinese.
We do insist that immigrants go to school in French. Kinda like the rest of Canada expect them to go to school in English (or French, some places), unless you guys added a few dozens school systems since the last time I checked.
I don't consider that to be punishing someone, unless you consider learning French to be punishment.
PS,
My English is a product of the French language school system.
In regards to people becoming entrenched in their beliefs out of a sense of liberal hate, that sense of persecution has more to do with their social circle and media consumption habits than any sense of actual persecution. A lot of right wing facebook / media (technically, not just right wing) loves to hype up any nonsense they can find.
Unless they can point to laws / statutes that liberals are both proposing and agitating for that are set out to curtail their freedoms?
MWO: Adamski