and then there's the ongoing inference that us sociopathic poker players are going to 'deal with them.'
Do you care this much when someone robs your corner store, mine gets robbed almost monthly and I've never bothered to learn the offenders name, or cared enough to wish the crackheads who do it any harm.
Probably more advantageous to poker as a whole to drop the gangsta' mentality and commentary.
Kristy,
Not sure if you were pointing that comment at me... but I think you are reading into my inquiry the wrong way... I play in a lot of poker rooms around the city... and often.
What I want to know is if I know these guys or if I have played with them in the past... I leave the gangsta shit for the gangsta's.... as far as I'm concerned, they were caught and will have to deal with LE.
And YES If I frequented a corner store, and it got robbed... my first question would be "who was it? anyone we know?"
not pointing at you. I just think if we want our game recognized as involving skill like chess for example, we'd all do well to work hard to try and remove the 'gangsta' mindset.
I'm suggesting that we treat this the way we would any other robbery... With a certain amount of indifference. (Thus highlighting to the masses that we're ordinary people playing an ordinary game[no I don't completely believe this-but its an easy angle to market])
Put a little lipstick on our pig, so the yokels will let it in the jamboree...particularly at this time of increased publicity and change.
I am sooo using that "lipstick on the pig" line....
Hahah
EDIT: I guess I should add something useful too..
In my work I deal with the whole gangsta mentality everyday, and I can say beyond the shadow of a doubt that it is a pointless philosophy, and a game that nobody wins. If you feel the need for protection, or if you feel the need for a gang, ask yourself why are you afraid. That is where these "needs" come from - fear. Stop and look where the fear comes from, and be honest with yourself - which is probably the hardest thing in the world to do.
we need minimum sentences imposed when firearms are used.
5 years if a gun is used
10 if it's discharged (even in the air)
20 if someone is shot/killed.
note: the operative word is minimum
We do have minimum sentences.
Unfortunately we have judges that will not impose these sentences.
From the Criminal Code of Canada:
344. Every person who commits robbery is guilty of an indictable offence and liable
(a) where a firearm is used in the commission of the offence, to imprisonment for life and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of four years; and
(b) in any other case, to imprisonment for life.
We do have minimum sentences.
Unfortunately we have judges that will not impose these sentences.
From the Criminal Code of Canada:
344. Every person who commits robbery is guilty of an indictable offence and liable
(a) where a firearm is used in the commission of the offence, to imprisonment for life and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of four years; and
(b) in any other case, to imprisonment for life.
That's an interesting subtitle given the subject up for discussion Hobbes..though I doubt thats why you chose it.
Why will the judges not impose the minimum sentence?
I remembered the quote from Leviathan and it is now my new poker mantra....
As for your question. (IMHO) They do not impose the sentences cause it's easier on them. They either plea bargain it down or just impose a sentence based on case law, that way they have less chance of having the sentence overturned. And if it's one thing Judges hate, it being over ruled on appeal.
Remeber: Punishment for the crime should come first and foremost followed by rehabilitation.
That's a great answer Hobbes, Thank you!..but I'm still in the corner with the tree hugging hippies.
Were we taking the proactive route I've hoped for- the need for punishment would be lessened or (slips on rose-coloured glasses) non-existant?
Gun crime IS serious, but as always I resent the parental and reactive role of our legal system (a sentiment that WILL apply to most issues of legality for me.)
You out-class me, you toss around 'Bellum omnium contra omne'..and all I can think of is Kevin Smith quote (and out of context entirely-but I think in the general view of our legal system the idea applies)
"...destroys who we are, by inhibiting our actions, by inhibiting our decisions, out of, out of fear of some, some intangable parent figure who shakes a finger at us from 1000s of years
ago, and says, do it and I'll fucking spank you."
The current min sentences etc. are just another faulty 'deterrent' system.
I haven't even had a morning coffee yet- so incase what I've written so far falls under MDSguy's unintelligible list I'll summarize with:
If you want to stop gun crime- get rid of the guns, and/or educate the users. You can't 'punish' crimes that haven't happened.
Omar Jermaine Betty, 25, and Ryan Shields, 26, both of Toronto; and 21-year-old Ezra Lottery of London each face 18 counts of robbery, 18 counts of forcible confinement, two counts of discharging a firearm endangering life and attempted murder.
I actually went to school and had a few classes with one of them. yikes,
Comments
Spoken like a true 'gangsta'
Kristy,
Not sure if you were pointing that comment at me... but I think you are reading into my inquiry the wrong way... I play in a lot of poker rooms around the city... and often.
What I want to know is if I know these guys or if I have played with them in the past... I leave the gangsta shit for the gangsta's.... as far as I'm concerned, they were caught and will have to deal with LE.
And YES If I frequented a corner store, and it got robbed... my first question would be "who was it? anyone we know?"
N
I'm suggesting that we treat this the way we would any other robbery... With a certain amount of indifference. (Thus highlighting to the masses that we're ordinary people playing an ordinary game[no I don't completely believe this-but its an easy angle to market])
Put a little lipstick on our pig, so the yokels will let it in the jamboree...particularly at this time of increased publicity and change.
Other times I just skip over them.
^-^
maybe
Hahah
EDIT: I guess I should add something useful too..
In my work I deal with the whole gangsta mentality everyday, and I can say beyond the shadow of a doubt that it is a pointless philosophy, and a game that nobody wins. If you feel the need for protection, or if you feel the need for a gang, ask yourself why are you afraid. That is where these "needs" come from - fear. Stop and look where the fear comes from, and be honest with yourself - which is probably the hardest thing in the world to do.
Mark
'Fo Shizzle my crew would fuck your shit up
Mark
'Fo Shizzle my crew would fuck your shit up
(Don't ban me, I'm playin)
Mark
We do have minimum sentences.
Unfortunately we have judges that will not impose these sentences.
From the Criminal Code of Canada:
344. Every person who commits robbery is guilty of an indictable offence and liable
(a) where a firearm is used in the commission of the offence, to imprisonment for life and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of four years; and
(b) in any other case, to imprisonment for life.
That's an interesting subtitle given the subject up for discussion Hobbes..though I doubt thats why you chose it.
Why will the judges not impose the minimum sentence?
I remembered the quote from Leviathan and it is now my new poker mantra....
As for your question. (IMHO) They do not impose the sentences cause it's easier on them. They either plea bargain it down or just impose a sentence based on case law, that way they have less chance of having the sentence overturned. And if it's one thing Judges hate, it being over ruled on appeal.
Remeber: Punishment for the crime should come first and foremost followed by rehabilitation.
Were we taking the proactive route I've hoped for- the need for punishment would be lessened or (slips on rose-coloured glasses) non-existant?
Gun crime IS serious, but as always I resent the parental and reactive role of our legal system (a sentiment that WILL apply to most issues of legality for me.)
You out-class me, you toss around 'Bellum omnium contra omne'..and all I can think of is Kevin Smith quote (and out of context entirely-but I think in the general view of our legal system the idea applies)
"...destroys who we are, by inhibiting our actions, by inhibiting our decisions, out of, out of fear of some, some intangable parent figure who shakes a finger at us from 1000s of years
ago, and says, do it and I'll fucking spank you."
The current min sentences etc. are just another faulty 'deterrent' system.
I haven't even had a morning coffee yet- so incase what I've written so far falls under MDSguy's unintelligible list I'll summarize with:
If you want to stop gun crime- get rid of the guns, and/or educate the users. You can't 'punish' crimes that haven't happened.
What "club" has the money on the tables, or is this just incorrect info?
I would say this is incorrect info. But that's how she reported it. I have never seen money on the tables there.
That's how she reported it, don't shoot the messenger.
I actually went to school and had a few classes with one of them. yikes,