Hi, my name is D and this is my writings on subjects. I'm no rapscallion or anything at all. If you want to you can read my writings on subjects if you have free time. If you want to argue with me or call me names then please comment. Negative feedback is very welcome...I love dat shit. Me? I'm not even a noun, I'm a fucking verb, dude.

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Jabroni Canadian Law Under The Microscope: "Not Criminally Responsible"

I'm gonna open a new section in my Index page called...CRIME AND PUNISHMENT. It's gonna be the section for hard-hittin' articles 'bout crimes and punishments.


Wow, there's some crazy cases in the news in my home area/region this month which are hot topics of debate and both cases are centered around one silly law in the rule books.

Firstly, a man who drank a bunch of anti-freeze and then proceeded to stab his two children 46 times until they died....is literally a free man as of now it looks like:

Story: http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/09/12/former-quebec-doctor-who-admitted-to-stabbing-his-children-will-be-released-on-bail-judge-rules/

That's beyond fucked up. That's actual lunacy. That is literal human lunacy that this person is back in the public after murdering his two children by stabbing them 46 times. Seems though that in Canada, if you just tell the judge and jury that you are a crazy dude...you just have to chill in jail for 2 years and then all is forgiven. What the fuck?

Also in the news is the trial of that fucking jerk who killed and ate a man and live-streamed it over the internet.

Story: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/luka-magnotta-case-the-challenges-of-a-not-criminally-responsible-defence-1.2779593

People are worried now that this ABSOLUTE FUCKING MANIAC is gonna get 2 years in jail for killing and eating a person live on the internet.

How in the world is this even a debate that is actually going on in society? It literally boils down to...

"Should a guy who stabbed his two beautiful defenseless children 46 times until they died and a guy who murdered and ate a man live on the internet be free men in society?"

No one has to think twice over this, this IS NOT a debate. No, these men do not belong in society...they belong either behind bars or executed.


"Not Criminally Responsible"

The reason a jury of "peers" found that guy who stabbed his kids barely even guilty of a crime was due to his lawyer employing what is referred to as the "Not Criminally Responsible" defense. It boils down in the law books as...
"Under Canadian law, individuals can be found Not Criminally Responsible on account of Mental Disorder (NCRMD) “for an act committed or an omission made while suffering from a mental disorder that rendered the person incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of the act or omission or of knowing that it was wrong.”
(-source)

So to translate that into a simple basic sentence it would read as so...
"If you did something bad but while you did it you were too crazy to know that what you were doing was bad...then you didn't do anything bad."
(-Canadian Justice System)

Okay, No. No, Canada, it doesn't fucking work like that. If you kill your kids or eat a guy on the internet...it DOES NOT make it okay if you were crazy. Obviously a guy who stabs his kids 46 times or a guy who eats his friends on the internet ARE CRAZY!

This law literally says, if a guy is crazy then he can do whatever he wants. This is so fucking stupid.

Laws are made to punish people who did crazy shit...so you can't have a law in your banana republic rule books that nullifies all crimes preformed by crazy people. Crazy people do crazy crimes! That's the key demographic that does crazy crimes!

Gimme a fucking break. This law makes the criminal justice system inherently pointless. The jails are filled in North America with people who have preformed small victimless crimes yet people who have committed huge victimfull crimes get to walk around free. It's crazy.

It's almost like the criminal justice system is so crazy that it believes its own silly laws now. The criminal justice system has deemed itself too crazy to have to be responsible for the crazy shit they do. The whole system is off its hinges, literally.

Can you imagine the jury that ruled on this? These little bleeding hearts who heard the guy who killed his kids literally say this in court...this is not made up, this is what the guy said in court...

"I think jail is a waste of time for me, I'm better off to be free so I can take care of my sick uncle" 
(-That piece of garbage who killed his kids)

The maniac really said that and I guess the jury believed him! They think a man who stabbed his kids 46 times until they died should still be allowed to take care of his sick uncle. No one needs to be told this but I guess it has to be said...HAVING TO TAKE CARE OF YOUR SICK UNCLE IS NOT A VALID EXCUSE FOR KILLING YOUR CHILDREN! YOU STILL HAVE TO GO TO JAIL FUCK FACE! DO YOU FUCKING GET IT!?


Mental Illness is Not a Get Outta Jail Free Card

This silly notion that if you're crazy you can do whatever you want is spreading to other parts of society too not just the justice system. In case you are not aware, being crazy doesn't mean you can do whatever you want.

It is not only a legal defense but it seems like bein' crazy has become a 100% acceptable excuse in any situation in society now.

I've read countless articles lately from news sites about a young person with some mental illness who was reprimanded in some way and we are all supposed to feel bad inside because of it...it's always the same story...
"A poor young boy with (autism/aspergers/etc.) was reprimanded by his (teacher/neighbor/etc.) for his crazy actions. How can someone do the horrible act of (removing from class/sending a letter to parents/etc.) to a child with (autism/aspergers/etc.)?"  
 (-summary of many news articles of late)

I don't understand this news story template that is going around these days. There's hundreds of them too...there's a new variation of this news trope every single week now. It's always the same paint-by-numbers article too...only the faces and names change.

I was reading this site called "Autism Discrimination" the other day and a lot of the entries are something along the lines of "my son is often violent and hits the other kids but they have to learn that he is autistic and learn to love him." Look, if your son is hitting and attacking other kids HE is the problem, it's that simple. No one has to "learn" to fucking love him. Good for him some doctor diagnosed him with some disease with a cute name...that does not give him the green light to attack other kids and expect their love in return. It doesn't work like that.

To remove a child from a classroom setting for extremely disruptive and/or violent behavior is not "discrimination" at all...it is the teacher's actual duty to remove a child like that from class. In the eighties or nineties these countless events would have not been news stories but now all of sudden a child being kicked out of class gets re-worked into some horrible human rights violation.

Being diagnosed with "autism" or "aspergers" does not mean your kid can do whatever they want.


Aspergers in Court?

"....Yeah judge I killed all those people....but......I got a touch of the Aspergers so it's all good!"

This next Crime and Punishment story is out of Philly, where a fucking disgusting piece of human garbage murdered a nine year old child and then his lawyers pleaded that he should not be found responsible due to him having "asperger" syndrome.

Article: http://www.phillyburbs.com/blogs/reality/asperger-s-not-an-excuse-in-killing/article_82f7669d-f3df-5438-80f1-fa36859012d9.html

Luckily in this case, fortunately, the jury did not fucking buy this load of baloney and sentenced this animal to life in prison.

At least jurors in Philadelphia have brains...maybe other parts of the world can learn from them.


Conclusion

This "Not Criminally Responsible" due to mental illness shit is getting really old really fast. I don't care how crazy you are...there is no excuse for killing children and there is no excuse for killing and eating a guy.

These acts were deliberate, thought out, murders. One guy filmed it for people online to watch! Obviously it was 1st degree murder.

Put these fucking animals in jail. Put these psychos to sleep, fuck.

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

Montreal Baseball Project Marches On: The Legend Continues....

Warren Cromartie's Montreal Baseball Project is going to host another baseball festival in the beautiful Ville de Montréal once again in 2015 to coincide with the two Major League Baseball exhibition games at Olympic Stadium between the Jays and Reds which are scheduled for the next baseball season. A lot of people are pretty stoked and/or pumped about this just as they were when it was announced last year.

Cro has stated that those coming to the 2015 Expos Fest and who'll be crashin' the Big O for these Reds/Jays games will be none other than Mr. Rusty "Le Grand Orange" Staub, Timmy "Rock" Raines, Andres "El Gato" Galarraga, broadcaster Jacques Doucet, and headlinin' will be Hall of Famer and Legend Andre "Hawk" Dawson. Yeah!


The 2014 Olympic Stadium Games

I'm sure it's a joke to a lot of people in the baseball world that someone would be super stoked and pumped about some pre-season exhibition games but you gotta understand that there's still a huge fan base of die-hard Expos fans in Montreal who haven't had MLB come to town in a full decade so it was a big deal for us.

The games against the Mets were done so well too. For game one, Raines was there, Steve Rogers was there, Gary Carter's wife and daughter were there to honor the late n' great Kid, and Cromartie was there to lead the fans in a chant of "WE WANT BASEBALL BACK!" It was nice, it really was. Look, for an Expos fan it was pretty freakin' cool.

Carter's family, Cy, Cro, n' Rock

For game two, almost the entire 1994 Expos were in the house from Grip, to Moises, to Walker, to Johnny Wetteland and everybody in the stands got hella pumped to see those dudes again. For shizzle. I remember watching all these guys live in the flesh the year they went 74-40 and seeing all of them back in the Big O was something I thought I would never see again.

Fletch, Walker, Felipe, n' lancer gaucher Denis Boucher

There were almost 100,000 people who came to the those two games...and I don't know but...something tells me these two pre-season games in 2015 are gonna crack the 100K mark. Something's in the air up in here and I know well enough (most of the time) to classify what is in the air when I feel that something is in the air. What is in the air in this case? BASEBALL FEVER.


Cincinnati Reds: The Best and My Favoritist of Those Guys

Props to the Cincinnati organization for agreeing for their club to venture north to the baseball-less and barren-of-baseball wasteland of Montréal to play a major league baseball game or two in the 2015 pre-season.

I have memories of the all the NL teams and most of these teams I have a favorable view of. Those Cincina-ta Reds are one of those teams I have a favorable opinion of, as such. In order to give props to the Reds organization I would like to write about them...specifically about the best Red and also about my favorite Red of all time.

Best: Barry Larkin

You're talking some heavy duty Reds over the years from Joe Morgan to Pete Rose to George Foster to Jose Rijo and the list goes on and on...but to me I'd have to classify Barry Larkin as the greatest by talent and by numbers Red of all time.

I should say that I may be biased because I personally have seen many many live games involving Barry Larkin. His rookie year was 1986 and he retired in 2004. For me, my first live baseball game was in 1986 and my team moved away in 2004...so my viewing of baseball and the career of Barry Larkin do overlap pretty much 100%. So I personally have never seen, say George Foster, play yet I assume someone who hit 92 homers in the span of two season was probably pretty fucking good. The fact that I've seen Barry play live on numerous occasions may be the reason I believe him to be the best Red ever.

People are spoiled in this era with shortstops who can play adequate defense and hit...but in my era of watching baseball it was still common to see a shortstop who hit .230 as the team's first string shorty. A guy like Barry who could win a gold glove at short, a position which sees well over 700 balls hit to in any given year, and hit well was very rare in previous eras.

He didn't just hit well though...he did it all. He hit for contact (.295 lifetime average), he hit down the line and into gaps (441 doubles, 76 triples), he hit longballs (198 homers), he drew walks (.371 OBP), and even stole some bases (379 out of 456 attempts). To have a gold glove shortstop who could do stuff like this was incredible.

The only real knock on Barry was that he rarely played 150+ game seasons due to injuries. He wasn't an Iron Man like Ripken but he was better than Ripken when he did play.

I know many would disagree with me asserting that Larkin was the best Red ever so I'll leave it as worded like this...

...Barry Larkin was the best Red I ever watched play.


Favorite: Chris Sabo

Sabo was a popular Red who played thirdbase for them in the late eighties and into the nineties. He is mostly remembered for his signature goggles he wore around his head moreso than his hitting or fielding prowess (which wasn't too shabby by the way).

As you can see from this beautiful artistic rendition of his facial features in this Donruss Diamond Kings baseball trading card to the left of the screen...Chris Sabo indeed had signature-ass goggles that made you stop and look at his card when you got it in a pack.

He was nicknamed "Spuds" Sabo by Pete Rose because apparently Sabo resembled Spuds McKenzie from the old Bud Light commercials. For those unfamiliar, Spuds McKenzie was a super cool dog who rocked hard, drank hard, and banged a hell-a-vu-lotta women back in the eighties (including even Debbie Gibson).




 Personally, I do not see any tangible resemblance between Sabo and McKenzie...


Okay, I admit, the reason Chris Sabo is my most best and favoritist Red evar is simply for the aesthetic and shallow reason that...Chris Sabo looked so fucking goofy in those goggles. He looked like a certified goof ball in those things. When players of the eighties were competing as to who wore the most stylish of fly sunglasses or "shades" if you will...it was visually striking to see Sabo with these literal grandma-glasses fastened to his head with an elastic band. He was the anti-fly...the actual anti-fly.

I understand that eye-glasses would surely fall off a man's skull whilst he had to manipulate his body to whip out baserunners at first or to bang out jack-a-roo hum-dingers...but still...you have to admit that Chris Sabo looked genuinely silly in those goggles.


If poppin' up with yer fly open is cool..then call me Miles Davis!!


I used to advertise my respect for Chris Sabo to the whole world through the use of the T-Shirt as well. The year the Reds were in the World Series in 1990 and Chris Sabo fucking tore up that World Series like it was nobody's fucking business...my parents purchased me a 1990 World Series T-Shirt which because of the play of Sabo in that series had a big huge Chris Sabo head on it (complete with over-exaggerated grandma-glasses). I was like 8 or something years old back in '90 and everyone at school would always be like...

Kid at School: Haha! Who's that big huge DORK on yer shirt?
Me: Oh, that's just Chris Sabo! Isn't he kewl?
Kid at School: NO!

Hands down, Christopher "Spuds McKenzie" Sabo is the kewlest Red in history...unlike the "best" argument where it is debate-able as to who was the best Red...when it comes to the who the kewlest Red is the debate is much simpler. It would be difficult for anyone to win an argument in which they tried to claim that Sabo was not the kewlest Red evar.


My Most Humblest of Apologies to Former Cincinnati Red Ken Griffey Junior

One memory I have of the Reds was something I remember good because it was a stupid thing I did. I was, I think 17, when this happened and to be fair I was not the most maturest of seventeen year old human youths back then.

Anyway, Ken Griffey Jr. was playing kind of crappy in his first year in the National League in 2000 with the Reds, he was hitting like .244 coming into the series on July 28th against the Expos at Olympic Stadium (average on that date courtesy of Baseball-Reference Dot Com). I was sitting on the first base side and witnessed Mr. Griffey pop out and I for some reason had the urge to yell...

..."looks like ya just popped up ya big faggot!"

...and Ken Griffey Junior literally turned and looked directly into my eyeballs...and I was like....

...."Oh shit! How did he hear me!?"

I really didn't think with the noise of the stadium and everything that players even heard when fans heckled but I am 100% sure he heard me and I always felt bad about saying that for two reasons: 

1) Ken Griffey Jr. is a super cool guy and is 100% a Hall of Famer and legend...and it was not polite to make fun of him while he popped up.

2) You shouldn't use "faggot" as a pejorative word because gay people are chill and cool. But yo, back in like 1999 when I was 17 that word was just part of a youth's vocabulary. I mean in my last year of high school if you totaled up all the times a youth said the word "faggot" in 1999.....you're talking about like at least a zillion instances. Still it's not an excuse and I'm sorry for using that word as an insult.

So, I apologize to the gay community for using the word "faggot" as a pejorative word quite often in my youthful days. I never use that word anymore...I have used the word "faggo" in this blog once or twice but that was under instructions from Scott Thompson (no not the Expo one but the Kids in the Hall one) that "faggo" is an a-ok term to say.

According to Kid in the Hall and comedy star Scotty Thompson..."faggo" is chill to say still.

So, 100% I don't ever use the "t" in that word anymore.

Most of all though, I apologize to Ken Griffey Junior because, well, the guy's a baseball icon and legend. He's a first ballot hall of famer for sure (he didn't look even a little bit roided up). KGJ....you are a capital "L" Legend, bro.


Conclusion

Montreal Baseball Project is still going strong. It should be noted that this is still operating in Phase II, many seem to think that MBP has initlized P3 but believe me when Cro initiates Phase III...you're gonna know that's for damn sure because it's gonna be huge.

Hey...you wanna a rumor that I heard about 2016's Expo fest? Yes, Vlad is apparently coming to town but don't quote me on that.

Tuesday, September 2, 2014

A Tuesday Comparison: Comparin' the Writings of Tommy Malthus to Child Psychology

Wanna do a comparison? Okay, I'm down. Let's compare the opinions of Tommy Malthus to child psychology for a change. It's not like I have anything better to do today.

The Writings of Tommy Malthus 

Tommy Malthus was a guy from the 1800s who wrote about population and resources. He firmly believed that the current resources of the earth could and would not satisfy the rate at which humans were re-producing. He wrote that the future will inevitably be a bleak one of famine and ultimately will lead to the death of humans.

People have taken his writings very seriously over the last 200 years or so and nations have been attempting to get their hands on the supposed dwindling global resources so that their nation will make it through the great famine which will apparently spell the end for them.

Basically he was saying that there's not enough food, water, energy on this earth for everyone and we must fight over who gets to have their hands on it and make it through the "great catastrophe" which awaits us in the future.


Child Psychology

Next off, let's rap loose about some child psychology...

I'm not huge on psychology, in many aspects I think it's a jabroni-laden field of silliness, yet I read a lot of child studies because they are interesting (Bobo clown study and others). One study that I found interesting was children were given toys to play with and then simply observed by the psychologists. What they noticed in many cases was the children would behave very differently when they entered the room full of toys. Some of the children would take a toy and go to a corner of their own and play with it (shy kids), other kids would take toys and play a game with other kids (outgoing kids), then the last type of kid would steal toys from the other kids.

At first they thought, "oh that child must have liked that toy and his/her reason for stealing it was to satisfy a want," and that may have been true in some cases yet the psychologists started to notice in many cases once the child successfully stole the other child's toy...he/she would get bored of it in a few seconds and then go steal some other kid's toy. He or she wasn't stealing for the want or need to have the toy they were observing another kid playing with...they simply wanted to steal because that other kid had it and it compelled them to take it from them. It was the act of taking something from someone else that interested the children who stole toys in most cases.

In the adult world, a good example of this phenomenon is the long-known fact that wearing a wedding ring into a singles bar will attract A LOT of attention. A lot of people wonder why that is but child psychology explains this rather easily...a lot of singles will hit on a "taken" member of the opposite sex for the sole reason of "taking" something away from someone. These lascivious howlers are the same as the kids who stole toys for no reason in the study...they don't even really want to bang the person who is married...what they want is the feeling of taking something from someone and that gives them a thrill or a warm feeling inside.

How Does this Nonsense Tie Together, You Ask?

According to the followers of Malthus, there are a limited amount of resources on this earth and they will only wind up in the hands of those who take them. They only wind up in the hands of the takers. The lonely kids who play with one toy? Fuck 'em they won't survive. The outgoing kids who work together and play with the toys together? No chance, they won't survive. Only the kids who take will survive. Take, take, take, take, take,take, TAKE.


Take, take, take...

Finder's keepers! Losers weepers! First come! First serve! Take! Take! Take!

There's only so much food, water, energy, and precious resources on this earth! TAKE THEM BEFORE SOMEONE ELSE DOES! TAKE IT ALL FOR YOURSELF! TOO MUCH IS NEVER ENOUGH! YOU CAN NEVER TAKE ENOUGH! TAKE IT ALL! TAKE EVERYTHING THAT ISN'T NAILED DOWN! IT'S DOG EAT DOG OUT HERE! KILL THEM ALL! TAKE ALL THEIR STUFF! THEY DON'T NEED IT...YOU NEED IT!

It's either you or me! No offense but if boils down to you or me...believe you me...I'm picking ME! Now gimme all your stuff! It's Mine! All Mine!

It's mass hysteria out here! Buy a gun! Get ready! It's Mass Hysteria Out HERE!

Does it Have to Be This Way?

Is the population really spiraling out of control? Doesn't seem so. Please let my homeboy, the master statistician, Hans Rosling rap a little loose on this subject...


It looks like we are gonna recover from the post-war baby booms which over-saturated the population and numbers will level out. Statiscally, if you are educated and live comfortably...you have about 1 or 2 babies per woman. If you are an uneducated and poor family you have 6 or 7 children. It seems people over-breed when people are dying too often. If a war breaks out and 2 million people die...families will in turn try to balance it out by breeding like crazy. If child mortality rates are high in a region then families will over compensate by trying to make babies like crazy to replace the ones that die.

Those are the facts. It seems the main problem in over-population is simply some regions are experiencing so much death that they are over compensating birth rates. All we have to do is get good hygiene, vaccines, food, clean water, and education to the poorest regions of earth to level out the breeding cycle and it's not as hard as you think. Science and technology is on the case and when they are on the case things tend to get done.

Conclusion

Yes there is 7+ billion people in the world, yet with our technology and science we can feed, clothe, house, and provide energy for all of these people. Once everyone on earth is living comfortably we can level off the breeding cycle and throw Malthus out the window for good.

Forget Amish/Organic farming and let science produce maximum yields. Forget resource based energy production and think about renewable energy production. Vaccinate your fucking kids. That's the type of things that will make a brighter future...not resource wars.

It's not a world for the takers. Not at all. This world is a world for thinkers. This is a world for problem solvers. This is a world for intelligent folks who get the job done. This is NOT a world for takers. In fact, the wars over resources is the real catastrophe and the irony is that they are fighting these wars apparently to avoid the catastrophe predicted by Malthus. It's kinda nuts if you think about it.

Statistician and prognosticator Tommy Malthus' writings have been the opinion of the majority of the world for about 200 years now. Is it time to listen to a new statistician and prognosticator for a change? I mean 200 years was a long time ago, maybe it's time to let guys like Hans Rosling take the helm of the stats/prog scene for a coupla hundred years or so? No?