The time has come for the Democracies of the World to truly Unite and become a force to be reckoned with.
Why, you ask?
For several reasons, including the fact that the United Nations - like the League of Nations before it - has failed. It has been taken over by a bunch of petty little dictatorships that have as their prime objective the belittling of Western nations and while so doing, to extract as much money from their victims as possible.
The absolute veto given to the five major powers is another major problem. It has resulted in paralysis - especially since two of their number include Russia and China with both out to protect their ruthless proxies from meaningful UN action.
And speaking of China, in a relatively few years hence, it will have the largest economy of any nation: while the United States' importance will continue to decline.
And last, but by no means least, is the growing Islamist threat toward our democratic way of life.
For all of these important reasons, we need an close association of democratic nations to help offset these serious deficiencies and growing threats.
And in fact, there is such an Organization - it is called the 'Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development' or OECD for short.
Its main function is have its member nations cooperate economically amongst themselves to enhance their democratic institutions.
Given the above problems though it needs to do more.
Specifically, the OECD should include mutual defence to its Mission (i.e. an attack against one, is an attack against all).
Moreover, it should admit to its membership any nation that supports Free Elections and the Rule of Law. It should also work closely with those nations interested in becoming democracies.
But it will quickly have to grow and assume greater importance. Currently only 30 countries make up the membership of the OECD which started life back in 1961.
It will also reqire a name change - how about: The Alliance For Democratic Nations or The AllIANCE for short?
For the past several hundred years the world has had the luxury of relying upon one of its numbers - first Great Britain and more lately, the United States - to ensure a semblance of stability in world affairs - i.e. a world cop.
This era is coming to a close and no other democratic nation stands ready to assume the mantel. From here on in, strength will have to come from numbers and the protection of our way of life will be a collective responsibility - as it should be.
I can see a day, even in my lifetime, when non-democratic countries will be knocking at the door of THE ALLIANCE begging to be taken into a life of freedom and prosperity.
As I see it..
"Galagher"
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Friday, October 30, 2009
Canada's Incarceration Rate is Too High
But not nearly as bad as that of the United States.
We here in Canada have an incarceration rate of approximately 110 inmates per 100,000 population which pales in comparison with that of the United States which tops 1000 per 100,000. In fact, America's rate is the highest in the world - even higher than Red China.
But Canada's is too high as well.
That brings me to our Tory Government.
It wants to be tough on crime - which I am all for - as long as our incarceration rate declines.
An Oxymoron? No.
We need to find ways of punishment that do not entail imprisonment. And of course, this applies to the United States tenfold.
I speak with some authority as I have spent time in jail myself. Permit me to explain.
As a law student, our Criminology Class toured many of the penitentiaries in southern Ontario and as a Queen's student, many of those prisons were located right there in our home town.
But, I digress.
From my perspective, the only persons who should be incarcerated are those who are guilty of committing or planning violent crimes - including those who possess guns during the commission of a crime.
Let me try to be more specific. In my estimation the types of crime that warrant imprisonment are: murder; rape; kidnapping; terriorism; robbery; assault; traffickers; and serious damage to property (e.g. arson).
Pedophiles are sick people and should be confined to mental asylums for life or until they are so old or infirm that they cease to be a threat to our kids.
But for the rest, the druggies (users), thieves, embezzlers, fraudsters etc etc - alternative punishments need to be employed.
Punishments such as fines, house arrest, confiscation of property, black listing (e.g. no longer hold public or private office), and community service should be imposed. And, jail - only as a last resort.
In a nut shell, prisons should be used to protect the public from physical violence or serious damage to their property. Prisons are too costly, and really function as crime schools. The fewer housed in these facilities - the better for the public.
Now back to the Tories.
They have passed and are in the process of passing additional legislation that toughens the criminal code: lengthier terms; more minimum sentences; less generous parole provisions.
And that's okay for the violent offender.
But it is not okay for the non-violent offender. Find another way to punish him or her. Place a permanent tattoo on their foreheads if you want - but don't put them in jail.
I will end with a true case example - Conrad Black.
You will know that I am opposed to the punishment handed out to Black.
Here is a more appropriate penalty: surrender of his Title; confiscation of his many properties and wealth; and a life long ban on owning or holding office in any company - either public and private.
As I see it..
"Galagher"
We here in Canada have an incarceration rate of approximately 110 inmates per 100,000 population which pales in comparison with that of the United States which tops 1000 per 100,000. In fact, America's rate is the highest in the world - even higher than Red China.
But Canada's is too high as well.
That brings me to our Tory Government.
It wants to be tough on crime - which I am all for - as long as our incarceration rate declines.
An Oxymoron? No.
We need to find ways of punishment that do not entail imprisonment. And of course, this applies to the United States tenfold.
I speak with some authority as I have spent time in jail myself. Permit me to explain.
As a law student, our Criminology Class toured many of the penitentiaries in southern Ontario and as a Queen's student, many of those prisons were located right there in our home town.
But, I digress.
From my perspective, the only persons who should be incarcerated are those who are guilty of committing or planning violent crimes - including those who possess guns during the commission of a crime.
Let me try to be more specific. In my estimation the types of crime that warrant imprisonment are: murder; rape; kidnapping; terriorism; robbery; assault; traffickers; and serious damage to property (e.g. arson).
Pedophiles are sick people and should be confined to mental asylums for life or until they are so old or infirm that they cease to be a threat to our kids.
But for the rest, the druggies (users), thieves, embezzlers, fraudsters etc etc - alternative punishments need to be employed.
Punishments such as fines, house arrest, confiscation of property, black listing (e.g. no longer hold public or private office), and community service should be imposed. And, jail - only as a last resort.
In a nut shell, prisons should be used to protect the public from physical violence or serious damage to their property. Prisons are too costly, and really function as crime schools. The fewer housed in these facilities - the better for the public.
Now back to the Tories.
They have passed and are in the process of passing additional legislation that toughens the criminal code: lengthier terms; more minimum sentences; less generous parole provisions.
And that's okay for the violent offender.
But it is not okay for the non-violent offender. Find another way to punish him or her. Place a permanent tattoo on their foreheads if you want - but don't put them in jail.
I will end with a true case example - Conrad Black.
You will know that I am opposed to the punishment handed out to Black.
Here is a more appropriate penalty: surrender of his Title; confiscation of his many properties and wealth; and a life long ban on owning or holding office in any company - either public and private.
As I see it..
"Galagher"
Sunday, October 25, 2009
It Never Fails ...at the Big Z
Time for something lighter ...
I avoid Zellers like the plague, but inevitably I get drawn back there for something of great importance...like yesterday, - to buy Anne some much needed wool. (Anne with the broken foot - a story for another time)
I know going in, that whatever check-out line I pick will end up being the wrong one and I was not to be disappointed.
Finding the product of my search is not a problem for me. Hasn't been for years, since the first thing I do upon entering a department store - or similar type 'box' store, is seek out a sales clerk - sorry, an Associate, to act as my proxy in finding the object of my adventure out. Anne would spend a lifetime looking herself but again, that is another story...
Anyway, the real problem for me - and always has been - is finding a way to quickly pay for the items of my quest and speedily be on my way.
As per usual, I carefully surveyed the half dozen lines with 'open' lights on and decided that my best bet was the one most closest to me, as it contained the least number of shoppers. In reality, I knew that I was only kidding myself because I have tried this approach on countless other occasions to no avail.
I was fourth in line, feeling a bit silly with my one ball of wool. In actual fact, it was not a ball but a small oblong shaped pink bundle of yarn. Anyway, back to the line - the first two patrons sailed through without issue- they always do. Then the clerk served the 3rd customer, you know the one directly ahead of me.
The woman had but 4 items - all Halloween in nature. Three packages consisting of false eye lashes, false finger nails, and some wicked type of makeup. The fourth and final item was the traditional, conical, witch's black hat.
Now I am thinking to myself maybe I have been worrying for nought. How long can it take to ring through 4 rather small items albeit unusual ones. In fact, the transaction went without incident. The clerk quickly scanned the 4 horror items through and presented the lady with her very modest bill. The women reached into her purse and started to pull out a twenty dollar bill in payment and then .....she stopped.
She looked at her bill and queried the price. Hadn't she seen signs indicating 40% off rather than the lousy 25% she'd been given?
The clerk went to the handy sales bill on top of her counter and flipped quickly to the Halloween items and showed the lady that 25% was precisely what she was entitled to.
"But the signs said 40%", the woman wailed.
The clerk, to her credit, kept her calm - they always do and I have to think that that is half the problem. Maybe if they'd give these customers the gears from time to time it would help put this petty-type nonsense to rest. I digress.
The clerk then picked up her phone and called the suspect department blasting out for all and sundry to hear that a price check was needed.
We all waited. By this time my line had grown by an additional 4 or 5 others.
Five minutes lapsed and nothing. We all stood there looking at the phone.
Another call went out and another non-reply. More time having elapsed.
And me with my ball - or oblong of pink wool.
I was beginning to think 'horror' thoughts of my own.
Anyway - back to the line, which now was shrinking as those behind me skirted off to other lines. I laughed to myself thinking it served them right for lining up behind me in the first place. They should have known better.
Finally, a manager approached to hear the woman's sad tale of 25% rather than 40% reduction for these modestly priced novelties and the clerk explained the trouble she was having in getting through to the delinquent department.
The manager made a decision, as managers are apt to do. Not the one I was hoping for mind you - that being to give the lady the lousy 40%. No could do, since it would probably amount to the princely sum of a couple of dollars. Heck all they had to do was ask me and I'd have gladly paid it over for her.
No the manager decided that she personally would go and do the price check herself. How noble of her.
In the stores of my upbringing this would be no big deal but in these modern box stores it can amount to a great deal of lost time and energy.
Off she cheerfully went into the bowels of the building.
We all stood transfixed on the phone. And waited.
Finally a ring - and an answer and a response.
The signs advertising 40% related to products other than Halloween items. Case Closed.
The customer was so apologetic, I even began to feel sorry for her.
I even asked her if the costume was for her or a child.
She sheepishly admitted it was for her.
She'll make a great witch.
As I see it..
p.s. From a book by Walter Mosley: "A life worth remembering is hell to live".
I avoid Zellers like the plague, but inevitably I get drawn back there for something of great importance...like yesterday, - to buy Anne some much needed wool. (Anne with the broken foot - a story for another time)
I know going in, that whatever check-out line I pick will end up being the wrong one and I was not to be disappointed.
Finding the product of my search is not a problem for me. Hasn't been for years, since the first thing I do upon entering a department store - or similar type 'box' store, is seek out a sales clerk - sorry, an Associate, to act as my proxy in finding the object of my adventure out. Anne would spend a lifetime looking herself but again, that is another story...
Anyway, the real problem for me - and always has been - is finding a way to quickly pay for the items of my quest and speedily be on my way.
As per usual, I carefully surveyed the half dozen lines with 'open' lights on and decided that my best bet was the one most closest to me, as it contained the least number of shoppers. In reality, I knew that I was only kidding myself because I have tried this approach on countless other occasions to no avail.
I was fourth in line, feeling a bit silly with my one ball of wool. In actual fact, it was not a ball but a small oblong shaped pink bundle of yarn. Anyway, back to the line - the first two patrons sailed through without issue- they always do. Then the clerk served the 3rd customer, you know the one directly ahead of me.
The woman had but 4 items - all Halloween in nature. Three packages consisting of false eye lashes, false finger nails, and some wicked type of makeup. The fourth and final item was the traditional, conical, witch's black hat.
Now I am thinking to myself maybe I have been worrying for nought. How long can it take to ring through 4 rather small items albeit unusual ones. In fact, the transaction went without incident. The clerk quickly scanned the 4 horror items through and presented the lady with her very modest bill. The women reached into her purse and started to pull out a twenty dollar bill in payment and then .....she stopped.
She looked at her bill and queried the price. Hadn't she seen signs indicating 40% off rather than the lousy 25% she'd been given?
The clerk went to the handy sales bill on top of her counter and flipped quickly to the Halloween items and showed the lady that 25% was precisely what she was entitled to.
"But the signs said 40%", the woman wailed.
The clerk, to her credit, kept her calm - they always do and I have to think that that is half the problem. Maybe if they'd give these customers the gears from time to time it would help put this petty-type nonsense to rest. I digress.
The clerk then picked up her phone and called the suspect department blasting out for all and sundry to hear that a price check was needed.
We all waited. By this time my line had grown by an additional 4 or 5 others.
Five minutes lapsed and nothing. We all stood there looking at the phone.
Another call went out and another non-reply. More time having elapsed.
And me with my ball - or oblong of pink wool.
I was beginning to think 'horror' thoughts of my own.
Anyway - back to the line, which now was shrinking as those behind me skirted off to other lines. I laughed to myself thinking it served them right for lining up behind me in the first place. They should have known better.
Finally, a manager approached to hear the woman's sad tale of 25% rather than 40% reduction for these modestly priced novelties and the clerk explained the trouble she was having in getting through to the delinquent department.
The manager made a decision, as managers are apt to do. Not the one I was hoping for mind you - that being to give the lady the lousy 40%. No could do, since it would probably amount to the princely sum of a couple of dollars. Heck all they had to do was ask me and I'd have gladly paid it over for her.
No the manager decided that she personally would go and do the price check herself. How noble of her.
In the stores of my upbringing this would be no big deal but in these modern box stores it can amount to a great deal of lost time and energy.
Off she cheerfully went into the bowels of the building.
We all stood transfixed on the phone. And waited.
Finally a ring - and an answer and a response.
The signs advertising 40% related to products other than Halloween items. Case Closed.
The customer was so apologetic, I even began to feel sorry for her.
I even asked her if the costume was for her or a child.
She sheepishly admitted it was for her.
She'll make a great witch.
As I see it..
"Galagher"
p.s. From a book by Walter Mosley: "A life worth remembering is hell to live".
It Makes Eminent Sense
Keep in mind as a Libertarian, the smaller the government, the better.
The Province of Ontario recently announced that it is considering giving its Police the power to arbitrarily stop motorists in their never ending search for drunk drivers.
It makes eminent sense, given the carnage that drunk drivers have caused to themselves and more importantly, to their innocent pax and to other vehicle occupants.
It is hard to imagine but there was a time, in the not too distant past, when drunk driving was "cool". Police turned a blind eye or if the driver was especially blitzed, they would chauffeur him home.
Then they started to stop drivers who evidenced erractic driving and put them through a series of physical tests to help determine the issue of sobriety.
Then came .08 testing and the road blocks (the ride program). So for the first time - everyone was inconvenienced and could be pulled over for no apparent reason other than they might have been drinking to excess. Even though a relatively small per centage of drivers would fall into that category.
Then came .05 and the 24 hour suspensions. Now even those who enjoyed a glass of wine at dinner could lose their driving privelges and presumably their triple A insurance rating irrespective of the fact that they did not pose a danger on the road.
So back to my premise as a Libertarian - big governments get Bigger and BIGGER - if left unchecked.
So now we are to give the Police the power to stop on the highways anyone they wish, for no visible reason whatsoever. Again, despite the fact that the vast majority of drivers are responsible and do not drive while under the influence.
In a Free and Democratic State - which Canada in theory more and more only professes to be - one of the fundamental freedoms of its citizens is to be free from arbitrary search and seizure. With this new proposal, what comes to mind are the old pictures on television of Nazis police stopping innocent citizens on the street and demanding to see their identity papers.
The difference between our current situation and the Nazis approach is one of degree only. And, as time passes, that difference is getting more difficult to discern.
What is becoming ever more apparent is that the basic freedoms of the Majority are being sacrificed in governments' attempt to control the actions of a few.
Yes it is an excellent idea that police be given the power to stop whomever they wish, wherever they like in their ongoing efforts to reduce the deaths and injuries caused by drunk driving.
These ideas are always excellent - they make good sense and each one leads to an even better idea but down a very slippery slope.
For the sake of Democracy and its core freedoms, these ideas too often strike at the very heart of what we are all about.
As I see it..
"Galagher"
The Province of Ontario recently announced that it is considering giving its Police the power to arbitrarily stop motorists in their never ending search for drunk drivers.
It makes eminent sense, given the carnage that drunk drivers have caused to themselves and more importantly, to their innocent pax and to other vehicle occupants.
It is hard to imagine but there was a time, in the not too distant past, when drunk driving was "cool". Police turned a blind eye or if the driver was especially blitzed, they would chauffeur him home.
Then they started to stop drivers who evidenced erractic driving and put them through a series of physical tests to help determine the issue of sobriety.
Then came .08 testing and the road blocks (the ride program). So for the first time - everyone was inconvenienced and could be pulled over for no apparent reason other than they might have been drinking to excess. Even though a relatively small per centage of drivers would fall into that category.
Then came .05 and the 24 hour suspensions. Now even those who enjoyed a glass of wine at dinner could lose their driving privelges and presumably their triple A insurance rating irrespective of the fact that they did not pose a danger on the road.
So back to my premise as a Libertarian - big governments get Bigger and BIGGER - if left unchecked.
So now we are to give the Police the power to stop on the highways anyone they wish, for no visible reason whatsoever. Again, despite the fact that the vast majority of drivers are responsible and do not drive while under the influence.
In a Free and Democratic State - which Canada in theory more and more only professes to be - one of the fundamental freedoms of its citizens is to be free from arbitrary search and seizure. With this new proposal, what comes to mind are the old pictures on television of Nazis police stopping innocent citizens on the street and demanding to see their identity papers.
The difference between our current situation and the Nazis approach is one of degree only. And, as time passes, that difference is getting more difficult to discern.
What is becoming ever more apparent is that the basic freedoms of the Majority are being sacrificed in governments' attempt to control the actions of a few.
Yes it is an excellent idea that police be given the power to stop whomever they wish, wherever they like in their ongoing efforts to reduce the deaths and injuries caused by drunk driving.
These ideas are always excellent - they make good sense and each one leads to an even better idea but down a very slippery slope.
For the sake of Democracy and its core freedoms, these ideas too often strike at the very heart of what we are all about.
As I see it..
"Galagher"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)