As I said yesterday. I support free speach.
What a peech.
Maybe he meant to write he supports free peaches. I could get behind that.
Live frea or dye!
Maybe he meant to write he supports free peaches. I could get behind that.Typical leftard. All about the redistribution of wealth!(Mmm. Peaches.)
CC: It seems to me you missed the very substantive point the doctor made about HRC complaints, to wit: "Filing a human-rights complaint is such a simple process — you can do it in minutes over the Internet, and you don't even need a lawyer — that one can hardly be surprised that it has become such a popualr pastime among cranky grievance-mongers."The need to hire a lawyer to file a complaint in the courts, and the expensive complexity of the legal process, filters out complaints from your ignorant, rude, unsophisticated and unemployed or unemployable layers of Canadian society and restricts access to legal relief to your better classes. This not only promotes more efficient use of the court's resources it protects your better classes from having to deal with those idle complainers who disdain productive or socially useful work.Simply stated, it is just as easy, and just as productive, to file an HRC complaint as it is for Dr. Roy to spring to his keyboard and blog. And while I support freedom of speech as much as Dr. Roy, it does seem to me he has a point about giving ignorant and unproductive people a free forum.
Let's see... "idle complainers" and "ignorant, rude, unsophisticated and unemployed or unemployable" people. Gee, wouldn't that describe 99.9% of "Teh Blogging Tories" right there?
he has a point about giving ignorant and unproductive people a free forum.Ignorant and unproductive people tend to inhabit the same societal stratum as people who are systematically excluded from society -- those with mental or physical disabilities, or those who are from communities who have suffered from extreme prejudice -- is the problem.The solution isn't to raise the barrier so that that entire stratum is excluded. It's to make the process such that frivolous complaints are detected early, with minimal cost in terms of resources.Incidentally I have no knowledge of how to achieve that. I'm more of an idea rat.
And while I support freedom of speech as much as Dr. Roy, it does seem to me he has a point about giving ignorant and unproductive people a free forum.Speaking of ignorant and unproductive...Does Dr. Roy have any data with regard to the scale of this problem? Maybe he does...maybe he and and his wingnut retard brethren are clogging up the system with frivolous complaints.In any case, it seems rather weak to take this bizarre idiot's assertions about the HRC's at face value.Anyway, I just checked the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal's web site. They have smart forms that can be filled out and filed electronically. Although that might encourage the submission of a greater number of frivolous complaints, with all the information organised digitally, it probably also means that a lot of work involved in the intake, triage, forwarding, response and record-keeping/statistics is significantly improved.Regardless, it's always a bad idea to take anything these liars say seriously.
M@ sez:"The solution isn't to raise the barrier so that that entire stratum is excluded. It's to make the process such that frivolous complaints are detected early, with minimal cost in terms of resources."Meddling with the process in such a manner would deprive the defense bar of substantial amounts of work, and income. When you have an insurance company on the hook, you want to milk that case a bit before you cut it loose.When you're an insurance company, there's a real deterrence value in letting the defense bar milk your case a bit.
Post a Comment