the reality is that the jails in the united states, a country that has long enforced these kinds of draconian rules that conservatives like ford want to enforce here, are full of retards that never get properly diagnosed or tested and will never rehabilitate because they can't. we do the opposite and call it humane and hopeful, but it isn't humane and hopeful, and the outcome is not much better. the last thing canada should want is to get in the habit of throwing retards in jail, like the americans do. but the evidence is also clear that not giving them the support they need frequently leads to terrible outcomes. the middle point is returning to the institutionalization model that was abandoned due to neo-liberalism.

there is little question that this crazy law will be struck down. this is not consistent with canadian law.

the courts have repeatedly blocked things like mandatory minimums and cash bail and it is clearly frustrating conservatives, who are no doubt asking "what can we do to keep people in jail?", and what they aren't learning is that the science is clear: jail doesn't work.

there is a subset of criminals that legitimately don't understand what they're doing due to fas, complications of shs exposure, drug abuse as adults or other causes of mental retardation. the system has not dealt with this well; it's dealt with it backwards. it argues that an inability to form mens rea makes guilt impossible. but nobody is of greater threat to the community than a severely mentally damaged person with a history of lashing out. there needs to be a way to get the mentally damaged into hospitals, rather than jails, and keep them there, against their will. these people will never be rehabilitated and that's not the point of incarcerating them. they need to be humanely warehoused out of the general public.

if this was done effectively, it would lock up most repeat offenders. but this is a hole in the criminal law that isn't going to be patched with draconian laws that order people to behave and beat them with dominance if they refuse. they're retarded. they don't understand. it needs to be addressed with science.

what's left is mostly "crime of passion" where intent can be established and the courts mostly already refuse bail for this and property crimes which are mostly the result of poverty and need to be addressed with greater social spending.

the courts won't let the government break the system like this, at least for now.

the other option, of course, is to stack the benches with ignorant judges, and the harper, ford and trudeau governments certainly tried, but perhaps ran out of time. we're going to need to get the conservatives out of ontario very seen if we don't want to threaten long term damage to the tribunal system, but that's separate from this.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/toronto/article/ontarios-new-cash-bail-rules-on-hold-judge-rules/

this is a shitty way to bring up a valid criticism about the direction of canada's military, which i've brought up myself.

there was a big attempt to eliminate sexual abuse in the army under the trudeau pmo. this was driven by the pmo's backwards ideology, and not by the direction of the military. in fact, there was a major purge of army people for resisting it.

conservative feminist ideology argues for the state to act as a leviathan so that women can walk around naked downtown at 4:00 am without fear of being assaulted. i exaggerate only slightly. it's less that i disagree in principle and more that i'm concerned about the unintended consequences of getting to that end point. but the military is an exception.

a state that acts as a leviathan to protect soldiers from sexual assault will be useless on the battlefield. soldiers that cannot defend themselves are useless to that state and should not be soldiers. yes, enemy forces will use rape as a tactic, and it's required to understand and react to that expectation.

canada needs to put less of an emphasis on protecting vunerable soldiers from harm and more of an emphasis on developing soldiers that can protect themselves when required. that is not necessarily gender-based, but it will require telling some women that they don't make the team and will have to accept it. that's the point of an army.

the military is not a social assistance program, but canada has treated it like one for too long, and the last pmo took disturbing steps into parody in the way it expanded that that should be reevaluated and reversed.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/pentagon-hegseth-canada-cadets-controversy-9.7327986