Computer Science Canada

Ontario Election
Author:  Dan [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:09 am ]
Post subject:  Ontario Election
The ontario election is today! If you are elibale to vote make shure to get to the polls today and cast a vote on both the election and refurened!

Polls open at 9am and close at 9pm, you need to bring your id. If you do not know where to vote go to http://elections.on.ca and use the "Where Do I Vote" featuer.

If you have not hured about the refurenedum question or do not understand it check out this site for more info: http://www.yourbigdecision.ca/en_ca/default.aspx



Don't throw away your power, VOTE!
Author:  md [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 11:30 am ]
Post subject:  RE:Ontario Election
For reference ID is a voter card, pasport, or other form of provincial or federal issue photo ID. A health card doesn't count.

Also, please vote for anyone who says they'll revoke the law that just came into effect on the 30th. It would really make my life oh so much better.
Author:  Zampano [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ontario Election
What was that law?
Author:  Ultrahex [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ontario Election
md can i guess speeding ticket for over 50km/hr and the following:

Quote:
The new initiatives, to begin September 30th, 2007 means police can charge drivers who are speeding more than 50 km/h over the posted limit with significantly stiffer penalties than they face now. These new penalties could include:



? An immediate, seven-day licence suspension and seven-day vehicle impoundment
? If convicted, a possible maximum fine of $10,000
? For a second conviction, within 10 years of the first, a possible court-ordered licence suspension of up to 10 years



So how many people could these new initiatives affect? According to the provincial government, on average, there are 2500 convictions for this extreme speeding ticket every year.
Author:  Zampano [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ontario Election
md, if you were going that fast, your position looks very nearly indefensible.
Author:  octopi [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ontario Election
I'm kind of mad about the changes to the blood alcohol limit.

If your pulled over and have a limit of 0.05-0.08 its a 3 day suspension of your license for the first offense, 7day + have to attend course for second offense, and for the third its a 30day, attend course again, and have to have a breathalizer installed in your car.
Author:  Mazer [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ontario Election
For those of us who don't have experience with drinking [even a little] and driving, just how much would one need to drink in order to have a BAC of 0.05+? It doesn't seem crazy to me, but that's just because I don't drink if I'll be driving anyways so my point of view may well be skewed.
Author:  octopi [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 6:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ontario Election
It depends on the person, but anywhere from 1-2 drinks can put you at 0.05, 2-3 is 0.08

BAC drops 0.01 for every 40minutes since the drink was drunken.




Also on a side note, I'm mildly retarded, Although I've voted before, I was a complete idiot when I was doing it today, and had no clue what I was doing, it made for quiet the laugh (in my head) the workers probably thought I was retarded.
Author:  Tony [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 6:42 pm ]
Post subject:  RE:Ontario Election
I think I was trying to figure this out before - two coolers (8%) spaced over a period of 1 hour should place me at 0.08 BAC.

Although it's more than BAC alone - the absorption rate plays a lot as well. Depending on what you ate, sometimes I feel like I should not be driving even when I know I'm under the legal limit. Othertimes I feel fine even when I know I'm just over. Personally I play it safe and don't drink at all if I'm driving. Even though, having a breathalizer installed in your car for 0.05 seems kind of excessive.
Author:  Naveg [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:15 pm ]
Post subject:  RE:Ontario Election
Well lets not exaggerate here. You get a breathalizer installed on the third offense. That means you got caught doing something like speeding three times with a near-illegal BAC. I think the idea is that if you're getting caught that often when you're under the limit, best make sure you aren't driving at all when you're over.
Author:  md [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ontario Election
Zampano @ 2007-10-10, 2:46 pm wrote:
md, if you were going that fast, your position looks very nearly indefensible.


I don't think that means what you think it means. Unless you are saying that I can easily beat the charge. And no I wasn't going *that* fast, fast perhaps... but not enough that I should have been charged under the new law. The cop is simply an ass.
Author:  octopi [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 8:05 pm ]
Post subject:  RE:Ontario Election
Naveg, you don't have to be speeding to be pulled over. I've been pulled over 4 times in my life so far, only one was for speeding. The other 3 times were for no apparent reason, they just asked me what I was doing etc.....

A cop actually asked me if I had the keys to the vehicle the one time, for some reason he thought I stole it...retarded cops...

Also its very easy to hit 150 while driving.....I've governed my blazer (about 162ish) without even realizing it on the way to school a few times. Although not recently (after my speeding ticket a year or so ago)
Author:  Clayton [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 9:01 pm ]
Post subject:  RE:Ontario Election
octopi wrote:
I've governed my blazer....


Just a little excessive no? Also... 160 is the govern limit on your blazer? Seems comparatively low to me...
Author:  octopi [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 9:52 pm ]
Post subject:  RE:Ontario Election
No, my point is that its not excessive. Sometimes the speed of traffic is 130+ in the middle lane, left lane faster, so its quite easy to get going too fast without knowing it.
Author:  Naveg [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:10 pm ]
Post subject:  RE:Ontario Election
Laws aren't made to accommodate people. People have to make accommodations for laws. You're right, the speed of traffic is sometimes 130 in the middle lane, and even faster in the left lane. That's one of the reasons this law was created - to slow people down.
Author:  TheFerret [ Wed Oct 10, 2007 11:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: RE:Ontario Election
md @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 11:30 am wrote:
For reference ID is a voter card, pasport, or other form of provincial or federal issue photo ID. A health card doesn't count.

Also, please vote for anyone who says they'll revoke the law that just came into effect on the 30th. It would really make my life oh so much better.


You can use a health card to get on the voters list, all you need is something else that says proof of address...

And btw, I did vote...
Author:  Clayton [ Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:27 am ]
Post subject:  RE:Ontario Election
I'm know that cars do get fast at some points, especially on 400-series highways. But that just re-enforces the point that your speedometer isn't just something installed for esthetics.
Author:  Zampano [ Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Ontario Election
md @ Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:46 pm wrote:
Zampano @ 2007-10-10, 2:46 pm wrote:
md, if you were going that fast, your position looks very nearly indefensible.


I don't think that means what you think it means. Unless you are saying that I can easily beat the charge. And no I wasn't going *that* fast, fast perhaps... but not enough that I should have been charged under the new law. The cop is simply an ass.


"The cop is an ass" . . . That's always the best defence! Very Happy

Btw: How fast exactly were you going?
Author:  md [ Thu Oct 11, 2007 6:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: RE:Ontario Election
Naveg @ 2007-10-10, 10:10 pm wrote:
Laws aren't made to accommodate people. People have to make accommodations for laws. You're right, the speed of traffic is sometimes 130 in the middle lane, and even faster in the left lane. That's one of the reasons this law was created - to slow people down.


Nope, this law was created in response to an incident where two people WERE racing, and hit and killed a police officer. Their lawyer claimed they were simply speeding. That and to get even more money: to get your licence back: $150, to get yoru car back: whatever the tow company says; you have no choice of who tows it, and then you have the minimum 2K fine. Oh, and you can't appeal the suspension or impount, nor get your costs refunded it it's shown you weren't speeding. Did I mention I'm really really upset with this law and the unconstitutionality of it?

Zampano wrote:
"The cop is an ass" . . . That's always the best defense! Very Happy

Btw: How fast exactly were you going?


I didn't say it was a defense, I was simply stating a fact about how he was acting. My defense is quite solid. And I shan't say how fast I was going. It was less then 50km/h over the limit however, by a not insignificant amount.
Author:  CodeMonkey2000 [ Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:11 pm ]
Post subject:  RE:Ontario Election
Hahaha, way to be reckless md!

Anyway about the elections, John Tory is an idiot for wanting funding for faith based schools. I'm glad he lost. Why would anyone want to support schools that teach pseudo science?
Author:  Tony [ Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:17 pm ]
Post subject:  RE:Ontario Election
Well probably whoever enjoys their faith based bubble. Free money, yey! Though accuracy of their teaching isn't the (main) issue. Any such funding will ultimately come out of the cuts to the public education. Which is bad.
Author:  Dan [ Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: RE:Ontario Election
Tony @ 11th October 2007, 10:17 pm wrote:
Well probably whoever enjoys their faith based bubble. Free money, yey! Though accuracy of their teaching isn't the (main) issue. Any such funding will ultimately come out of the cuts to the public education. Which is bad.


Indeed, but what i find hyprcital about the libreals is that they will not fund any more faith based schools but they allready do fund the cahtholic school bords and they have no plan to stop this funding. Realy it should be all faith based or none, and since we have (or should have) speration of church and state it should be none (just the public schools).

I adgree that parents should have the right to brain wash there childern and desotry there education of eveletion and sicence but they should do it out of there own pocket.
Author:  CodeMonkey2000 [ Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:55 pm ]
Post subject:  RE:Ontario Election
Plus having faith based schools is a form of segregation. Only children affiliated with that certain faith may attend that school, and everyone else get excluded.
Author:  Dan [ Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: RE:Ontario Election
CodeMonkey2000 @ 11th October 2007, 10:55 pm wrote:
Plus having faith based schools is a form of segregation. Only children affiliated with that certain faith may attend that school, and everyone else get excluded.


I never realy understood how that gets past the humman rights laws that say you can not disrimatnete on such grounds. You could not do that with anything eltes. You could not set up a restront or genrocy store that only chirstions could shop at or set up a comper rapair store that only atheistis can use just as you could not have a bar that only servers white peoleop.

I guses from some reason it is ok to disrimatinte when it comes to education?


Also they will not let unbaptised and unconfirmed teachers work there, witch is even more crazy.
Author:  CodeMonkey2000 [ Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ontario Election
According to the UN it is a violation of human rights. But for the wrong reasons IMO.
Some article on CBC
Author:  Tony [ Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:31 pm ]
Post subject:  RE:Ontario Election
You could.. in a way. I think I could get away with operating a private club that repairs computers for its members only. Then I could choose to approve only atheists into this club of mine.

Though it being an exclusive private club, I don't really have a claim on any of the public funding.
Author:  Mazer [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: RE:Ontario Election
CodeMonkey2000 @ Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:55 pm wrote:
Plus having faith based schools is a form of segregation. Only children affiliated with that certain faith may attend that school, and everyone else get excluded.

Really? Where did you hear that one? From what I've seen, pretty much anyone can go to a Catholic school if their parents want them in. I can see it being a problem for people of a completely different religion, but in that situation one wouldn't want their kids going there anyways.

:


You can syndicate this boards posts using the file backend.php or view the topic map using sitemap.php.

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy