ChuckerCanuck 2.0

And some people run screaming out of the dry...
 

Krazy stuff (Bushitler planned 9-11, someone's terrorist is someone else's freedom fighter) feeds Krazy people.
 

Charles, Any nice Irish aunts that used to give to the Irish Orphan Fund (making Irish Orphans)? Takes a lot of heroes to get to point where a community moves from fear to denial to completely rooting out those nice folks that encourage Krazies. Kudos to everyone that calls Krazy Krazy.
 

no nice Irish aunts engaged in funding terrorism. But that's a terrific point, anonymous.
 

Charles,

Wasn't that long ago that the last of those aunts finally got the message that those nice young men were making orphans not feeding them. Peddling Krazy ideas has consequences. It takes a long time to bury those who inhale too long.
 

So, are all Jihadists simply crazy? Where do we place the Toronto 18 on this scale? What about the homegrown doctors who blew up the subway in London?
More info to come from the investigation but I don't think we can totally discount the religious and ethnic connection.
 

sorry, not trying to discount it.


I am just thinking that it would be a mistake to go overboard and say, "oh its islamism" and then move on from there.

I think there are crazies in our society and I think we meet thm from time to time and I think we know they are crazies but can't do anything about it.

(Minority Report).
 

Charles,

Lots of fertilizer for impressionable minds, one truckload of fertilizer and you're in business.

Sure someone's DNA can blow up in your face, but a lot of this is about cleaning out the bullshit.
 

Not talking about wagging fingers, but about avoiding the Barney Song.
 

gently, gently.

I'm all for cleaning out the bullshit. But I don't want to clean out bullshit with more bullshit.

Lots of people have been very happy to ascribe terrible motives on W for invading Iraq. W is evil and they are the good guys, right?

Let's go to Cairo and say we're sorry. Sorry for what, exactly? Some things maybe. Iraq? Should we be sorry for W's sins in Iraq?

You might say, "yes we should."

And to me, that's more bullshit.
 

Davey.

Yeah. I think lots of them are crazy. I think jihadism legitimizes their craziness.

Like the way certain institutions in the Christian religious heritage give shelter to pedophiles.

Yeah, I think the Toronto 18 plotted to kill bunches of people and behead the best PM Canada has ever had not for some sane justification of righting a wrong but because they were crazy.

Not all 18, I admit. Probably just the flikkin' leadership.
 

It's one thing to believe and fight for a cause.
It's an entirely different thing to go and blow up fellow soldiers and innocent people, in the name of that cause.

Anyone, capable of that has turned the corner to 'Krazy'.
 

Why the Unabomber?

Did environmentalism make him do it?

Or does it offer him a narrative he latches onto that justifies his murderous instincts?
 

If it's about cleaning up the bullshit, it's not just about your random Krazy blowing up.

Gently. Firmly.
 

Charles, DNA + Culture. You can't change the DNA.
 

put another way then:

can you promise to clean up the bullshit perfectly forever? can we clean it up and never worry about krazies blowing up because we have taken away their motives?

or do the find another motive?

if they do, maybe there's a part of the story that needs talking about.
 

charles,

No precogs. No guarantees.

But when you clean out toxins you don't reason that the gene that is triggered by that toxin will just get triggered by some other toxin.

Gently, Firmly, Everyone's Krazy's need the light of day.

No rush to judgment. It's a long haul.
 

I hope this tragedy is not hijacked by the religion is the root of all evil bunch even if more and more these days that looks like it's the case (read pedophiles in church, jihadists, Krazy Zionists)
 

Right cause it aint religion unless you lump in everything as religion.

-cc on the road
 

Krazy, sure, but also crazy yelling "Allahu Akbar!"

About being an army psychiatrist -- he wasn't going to get sent overseas. And army bases are pretty nice places -- I've been to a few.

Nice bars and bowling alleys.

Soft billet, I say.

***

And even if he'd been sent overseas, he'd've spent all his time on base -- again, at a nice place with bowling alleys, bars, and nice people.

Still a soft billet.

***

But all that aside, there actually is a good way for our servicemen to protect themselves from crazies -- let them carry sidearms while in uniform.

That'd take care of a problem down here in DC -- sailors and airmen getting mugged on the way to the subway from their base.

The psych fellow would only have taken down one or two before being made into Swiss cheese, and one or two muggers in Anacostia wouldn't make it to sunset.

Win-win.
 

including stalin, hitler, mao and the bloodiest century.
 

Good online chat with an ex-JAG

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2009/11/06/DI2009110601285.html
 

"including stalin, hitler, mao and the bloodiest century."

and climate change and anti-technologism and even sex, drugs and rock and roll.
 

Looks like some folk were too _slow_ to draw conclusions about the ideology he was spouting:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6511591/Fort-Hood-shooting-Nidal-Malik-Hasan-said-Muslims-should-rise-up.html

If I'm in the Ft. St. John police cafeteria and someone says maybe those BC bombings are a good for the environment, does he keep his ability to enter the premises with a gun?
 

Chucker (with respect):

If only it would be that simple.
Yeah. Oswald was crazy.
 

He's just another guy who snapped. Since he's a muslim, he'll say muslim things when he snaps and goes postal. If he was part of some organized fifth column, I think he'd have found a way to do a lot more damage. A post with 30,000 people? He could have killed a lot more. There was a graduation with 600 people in one room nearby; someone blocked the doors after the rampage started. Had it been a planned event, he could have gone in there.

I think his being a shrink has more to do with it than anything else. Shrinks have the highest incidence of mental problems, don't they?
 

OT: I have a question that I've been asking in various places but not getting an answer. Perhaps another CPC "omerta" is in effect.

With regard to scrapping the long gun registry, the talking points are that it is too expensive, and it is ineffective. We're always given the hypothetical cop trusting that there are no guns in a house and being less cautious (I point out that "no guns in the house" means anyone there with a gun is not the homeowner and you don't need to hesitate that it might be legit). But let's set that aside for the moment.

It seems to me that all these arguments for scrapping the long gun registry should apply equally well to scrapping the hand gun registry. Yet when I ask this, I get no responses.

So a simple question: Do you or do you not, support scrapping the hand gun registry? If not, explain why the cost and effectiveness talking points somehow do not apply.
 

He's just another guy that snapped after telling his coworkers that he was "happy a US soldier was killed in an attack on a military recruitment centre in Arkansas in June" and that "maybe people should strap bombs on themselves and go to Time Square". (Telegraph link above)

Nothing there to see. Move right along.
 

Libby, are you a shrink?...
 

He's just another guy that snapped after telling his coworkers that he was "happy a US soldier was killed in an attack on a military recruitment centre in Arkansas in June" and that "maybe people should strap bombs on themselves and go to Time Square". (Telegraph link above)

Nothing there to see. Move right along.
Why didn't this "Col Lee", who was happy to talk to Fox News, tell someone in the Army about this?
 

Libby, are you a shrink?...
No, I am not. If I was, I would not refer to my profession with a slang name like "shrink". I read years ago that shrinks have a higher rate of mental problems than average.

mahmood, do you support repealing the hand gun registry? Yes or no?
 

it would be interesting to see the distribution of handguns across Canada vs. long guns.

and it would be neat to see of the total number of times a given class of firearms was used in Canada in a given year. By use.
 

" "maybe people should strap bombs on themselves and go to Time Square". (Telegraph link above)

Nothing there to see. Move right along."


Yeah, exactly. That's what his bosses said.
 

it would be interesting to see the distribution of handguns across Canada vs. long guns.
7 million long guns registered (out of 20 million estimated). About 1 or 2 million hand guns registered, if I recall correctly.

and it would be neat to see of the total number of times a given class of firearms was used in Canada in a given year. By use.
But would it have any effect on deciding whether to scrap the hand gun registry along with the long gun registry? If it is useless, it doesn't matter how many weapons are uselessly registered. The cost saving of scrapping the long gun portion of the firearms registry was estimated at $3 million. Probably less than is being given away by the fees amnesty.

Do you or do you not support scrapping the hand gun registry?
 

"Yeah, exactly. That's what his bosses said."

And that's exactly the problem. His bosses should have gone "overboard and said, 'oh its islamism' and then moved on from there.

[with all due respect]
 

Do you or do you not support scrapping the hand gun registry?

Are you or have you ever been a card carrying shrink.
 

me personally? I don't give a rat's ass either way. Currently, we have a hand gun registry. It doesn't appear to cost us oodles of cash to operate.

Hand guns, I would bet, are an urban phenomenon. Handguns as a % of gun crime is much bigger than long guns. And, crime as a % of total gun use is much higher for hand guns than long guns.

This would appear to me to be fundamental to the question of usefulness.

However, if you could prove that it was a useless expense, then I would be against it.
 

Yeah, exactly. That's what his bosses said.
If that turns out to be true, that his views were well known ahead of time, they have a major problem.

His bosses should have gone "overboard and said, 'oh its islamism' and then moved on from there.
That is way too simplistic. Someone says "I disagree with the government's policies" and only in Harper's Canada are you considered a traitor. Otherwise it is normal beefing. Cheering for your own soldiers being killed is something else, and requires investigation.

It all sounds very fishy.
 

"And that's exactly the problem. His bosses should have gone "overboard and said, 'oh its islamism' and then moved on from there."

it wouldn't bother me if they said "islamism" instead of "crazy". The islamism is the articulation of his craziness.
 

libby, Who told you opposing the war in Iraq or Afghanistan or Harper's gov't is Krazy. Get a grip.
 

it wouldn't bother me if they said "islamism" instead of "crazy". The islamism is the articulation of his craziness.

Good. Because some ideas trigger craziness that might otherwise be triggered in that way. Let's not be shy about identifying these instead of calling everything OH SNAP.
 

well, if W were president, they'd be blaming him for this. He'd be the root cause. no one would say the man was crazy. they would be tracing a line of action-reaction that made it seem like the killer had no reasonable choice but to go on a rampage because of Ws decisions.

there is some value in calling crazy crazy. However small.
 

me personally? I don't give a rat's ass either way. Currently, we have a hand gun registry. It doesn't appear to cost us oodles of cash to operate.
According to this the "old" registry cost $30M/year. The "new" registry we have now costs $83 million a year. We don't have two registries. The handgun registry was replaced with a firearms registry which includes handguns and long guns. I found someplace an RCMP estimate that removing the long gun part would save $3M/year leaving the $80M still being spent on the firearms registry.

Hand guns, I would bet, are an urban phenomenon. Handguns as a % of gun crime is much bigger than long guns. And, crime as a % of total gun use is much higher for hand guns than long guns.
Definitely when it comes to gangs. I suspect long guns are more prevalent for domestic violence and suicides simply because there are more of them.

This would appear to me to be fundamental to the question of usefulness.
The only usefulness arguments I have heard are a) all the police services and chiefs say the registry is very useful and b) no police officer would trust it that there are no guns and let their guard down so it has no effect.

However, if you could prove that it was a useless expense, then I would be against it.
Well that's the closest to a definitive answer I have seen on this. I personally think the full firearms registry is useful, but those who argue that it is not can't make the case that it is useless for long guns and useful for handguns.
 

well, if W were president, they'd be blaming him for this. He'd be the root cause. no one would say the man was crazy. they would be tracing a line of action-reaction that made it seem like the killer had no reasonable choice but to go on a rampage because of Ws decisions.
They're already trying out the "Obama's pet goat moment" because of some error in how he responded, I think it was talking to some people before expressing his condolences and concern. It'll be all his fault within a week in some quarters.
 

libby, Who told you opposing the war in Iraq or Afghanistan or Harper's gov't is Krazy. Get a grip.
Nobody said "Krazy", just treason. Ask "Taliban Jack".
 

"there is some value in calling crazy crazy. However small"

Kenniff: "I think anyone who kills innocent people is mentally ill. Its a question of did he have the capacity to understand what he was doing and was he motivated by an extremist ideology that perhaps contributed to his psychosis".

[wapost link above]

Until that ideology won't get donations from anyone's aunts let's confront it.
 

When Jack rambles on about strapping bombs on in Times Square, do give us a shout.
 

curious why it would save only 3 million dollars per year when, purportedly, it is 7 times the volume of hand gun registrations.

on servers alone, whether I am triple backing up data on 1-2 million handguns versus 8-10 total firearms (that's all registrations including long guns), it would make a difference.

I don't find the 3 million off an 83 million dollar budget believeable. Where's Kevin Page to look that whopper up!
 

I don't find the 3 million off an 83 million dollar budget believeable. Where's Kevin Page to look that whopper up!

From here:

"The auditor general found in 2006 that the registry had cost almost $1 billion in total through the end of fiscal 2005 but noted the program appeared to have come under better control. Since handguns and prohibited weapons must still be registered, eliminating the long-gun portion of the registry would only save taxpayers about $3 million annually."

So now do you support scrapping the hand gun and prohibited weapons registry?
 

you're just repeating what you said only through the auditor general's quote.

I don't find it a credible savings. I don't think the auditor general should just say something so perplexing without explaining.

It is like saying doing 2 million vaccinations costs the same as 10 million vaccinations.

Of course, the auditor general is a credible source. But I am sure she was asked at some point why she calculates it that way.

What you and she would be telling me is that the fixed costs of the system are so much of the operating expense, that the total cost of the system is inelastic when it comes to number of registrations.

Maybe its true. But it needs substantiating before the public should be asked to defy common sense and buy that story.

(ps, if you run your company that way, my first visit is free.)
 

It is like saying doing 2 million vaccinations costs the same as 10 million vaccinations.
No, it would be like saying maintaining the *records* of 2 million people who were vaccinated (after the records were entered) costs as much as 10 million.

The police would continue to access it 9000 times a day, since this is supposedly automatic when they run a name or address. So the bandwidth requirements would not drop. The CPU usage would drop, but you're not going to trade in a mainframe for something half as fast and save any money. Similarly, the disk space needed will drop, but you won't downsize. You'll continue to operate the server rooms, though you'll delay future capital costs for expansion.

What you and she would be telling me is that the fixed costs of the system are so much of the operating expense, that the total cost of the system is inelastic when it comes to number of registrations.
That's generally true in computerized systems. The costs do not rise linearly with number of records. Only when you break some large limit and need extra provisioning do you incur the expense of going to that level. Usually it takes an order of magnitude increase before you hit the wall, not a 4 to 1 ratio.

Maybe its true. But it needs substantiating before the public should be asked to defy common sense and buy that story.
Sorry I can't give you much more than arm waving. It seems to be difficult to find. Though I did find this where Stockwell Day estimates the savings at $10 million instead of 2 or 3, but he doesn't really know either.

I also found this which states that in the 2006 election the CPC proposed eliminating the entire firearms registry. So it is looking more like that is likely the plan and the long gun is just "incrementalism". Why not just be honest and try to scrap the whole thing if that is you view?
 

If we're going to have a serious conversation about anything, it isn't insanity's place in our society, it's Islam's.
 

Anonymous,

My, what a lovely neocon.
 

The cool Muslims, are just as freaked out about this crazy shit as the rest of us.

One God. One Soul. One Us.

We share the Spirit, with whom
we invite, into our world.


Another, Neo-Con.
 

And, if anyone is wondering why 'moderate Muslims' don't take a more active voice and speak out against the crazy terrorist shit, I will just say that as soon as they may choose to do so, they may face potential targeting of themselves (and/or their families), for reasons of revenge.

Put yourselves in their position. How much would you risk?

Even I, do not want to piss them off too much, nor use my name often.

Though I will this time.


Midnight

* *
 

Anyway, my coffee break is almost over; before I return to the loving rack, I will leave you with the following:


Midnight's Tips for scoring with Women (contn'd):


Give me a Bitch

that craves excitement ,


And I'll show you a Love

that lasts Forever .

* *


PS - You ain't got a chance.

Resistance is futile.

You realize that, right? :)
 

Fuck, Midnight, why to you have to make every thread about Sheena?
 

Well, She's just that kinda Girl.
 

Oh fuck. Not again. Welcome home.
And Congrats.

Tara's Home Day!

Tara's home. It's 8 AM and she wants to come in.

"Come on Jeff! Open the door!"

"Not again Tara! That was the last time!"

Every night your neighbor Tara leaves the house to go out and get her drink on and maybe a few dudes, and every morning she shows up home again demanding that her boyfriend buzz her in. She stopped carrying keys because she always loses them.

"Jeff! It's cold!"

"I can't Tara! I owe it to myself to not let you in!"

You threw away your alarm clock a long time ago. A few months after moving into your new place you learned you can always count on Tara's shrill, newly sober voice and Jeff's weak-kneed heartbreak would be there every morning at 8 AM to shake you awake and send you to the shower. Occasionally you push the snooze button and wait for Tara to walk down to the corner deli to buy a loose cigarette, then come back and put the icing on the cake.

"Jeff! I love you! Please don't do this!"

"I swear to God Tara, this is the last time."

Buzzzzzzz!

Good morning!

Happy Tara's Home Day!
 

Anonymous,

I didn't think you'd have a sense of humour, but that was funny as hell.
As for Midnight, I'd love to have gotten laid this weekend, but I'm chicken.
 

h/t : GIRLS ARE PRETTY. (And Fun. And Crazy.)
 

Ivan, it's not too late; grab your cock and poulet!
 

Ok. I really, really, hate to explain jokes, but since our audience is international, and the French language is diminishing faster than a beaver down the throat of a too-oft-married cougar, I will just espouse that a 'poulet' is a chicken. You will have to figure out the rest for yourselves (including your possibly un-educated mental stance, that you bring to this borderline excuse for a conversation).

Of course, you can always wing it.
 

When Tunas float into, or Kittens step onto, an explosive mine, they end up looking and tasting the same way.
 

Yabbut, which are more fun to fuck? :)
 

All right then you guys, stop it before Libby(The Shrink)Supporter shows-up and begins his analysis.
 

Tough call. Tuna are big and heavy, and you have fight off male Tuners just for the chance to snuggle beside them, and brush and snivel with them, just for the privilege of being one of a possible myriad of males that seek their attention, just to basically cream and blow your load in the general vicinity of their august presense. (Dammit, I said august - now everyone will know it is me.)

As for Kittens, you just have to eliminate the competion and proceed to fuck their brains out, while only getting partially wet.

Fucking people and decisions; sometimes I wonder what planet I am on. Meow.

Kittens are definitely within my purr-vue. I will kill for them. So like, anyone on the face of this planet who happens to be reading this, may consider this their first and final warning. I am claiming Alpha Status for Earth, until a younger and possibly more brazen Lion (assuming such a creature may eventually materialize) can knock me off my throne. You have been warned.
Midnight
 

Anyway, the temporary Bitch is stirring, and may soon be waking. After mutual enlightenlightenment, she may eventually be enboldened to the point of daring to ask me to take out the garbage.

I will tell her to fuck off (gingerly, of course), and remind her of my new status.
 

Ok. We're outta here. Catch ya Sunday.

Y'all be cool.
 

If this guy just suddenly went off the deep end he had a whole day or so to do it. He gave away his belongings (as suicide bombers do) he gave out korans, the only thing missing, so far, is a video of him telling the world why he is doing it.
The biggest problem is, when you suspect, think, have knowledge, etc that someone is going to do something bad, and you phone the police, you are told,
Has he hurt anyone yet, until he/she does we can't do anything.
Also, the fear of a lawsuit from some ambulance chasing lawyer keeps many people quiet.
Result, people get killed, and all the second guessing starts.
 

Ivan, I am not a neoconservative. I am a libertarian. I am a libertarian that is terrified of the threat posed by Islam: a totalitarian ideology masquerading as a "religion of peace". It scares me as much as fascism or communism. And a few token "moderate" Muslims in the suburbs of Toronto or Montreal aren't going to pacify my fears.

If they want to enslave peoples across North Africa and Asia, fine, but stay away from me. I am free.
 

Islam made him crazy ... and Allah made him do it ...!!!!

Based on this defence, our pc courts will exonerate him and send him to a psychiatric facility to help rehabilitate him and make him a useful member of our society.
 

Islam is just like communism, but with a deity added for more credibility.
 

Nah, this guy's getting a firing squad, or a lethal injection.

But back to the broader meaning question -- I'm with this guy.

It seems, though, that when an American military officer who is a practicing Muslim allegedly shoots forty of his fellow soldiers who are about to deploy to the two wars the United States is currently fighting in Muslim countries, some broader meaning might, over time, be discerned, especially if the officer did, in fact, yell "Allahu Akbar" while murdering his fellow soldiers, as some soldiers say he did. ...

I am not arguing, of course, that American Muslims, as a whole, are violently unhappy with America (I've argued the opposite, in fact). But I do think that elite makers of opinion in this country try very hard to ignore the larger meaning of violent acts when they happen to be perpetrated by Muslims. Here's a simple test: If Nidal Malik Hasan had been a devout Christian with pronounced anti-abortion views, and had he attacked, say, a Planned Parenthood office, would his religion have been considered relevant as we tried to understand the motivation and meaning of the attack? Of course. Elite opinion makers do not, as a rule, try to protect Christians and Christian belief from investigation and criticism. Quite the opposite. It would be useful to apply the same standards of inquiry and criticism to all religions.
 

I'm amazed this got 74 comments and the bestiality thread got 18... do ppl really find this more controversial than animal boffing?

Anyway, good post. What's the JB line, "give you my prejudice"? That is a good one.