Jump to content

Random Video Thread


Brandon
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

So for those that hadn't noticed this had been making the rounds recently, I watched it and wanted to cry a little bit, because I felt some serious Mister Rogers vibes from him (and considering that it turned out that Mr. Rogers was an inspiration for the show) I still remember the week that YTV aired Blues Clues in August of 1998 just because the Keep it Weird era came along and scared me off (also the PJs claimed that they were airing Blues Clues in the Jr. block but they never did, probably because Treehouse tv acquired the rights or something like that)

 

Edited by iHeart
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blue_gold_84 said:

For anyone wondering, he lost the original case at trial in Provincial Court, had the verdict overturned in QB (which was the basis for this report), and then the Crown appealed to the Alberta Court of Appeal and had the original verdict reinstated. This guy also trolled the police station for 5 days once the law first went into place, daring them to give him a ticket so he could go to court. They refused to do so at first because they knew him from all his TV appearances railing against the upcoming law. His argument originally was. That seatbelts in some cases caused injury and he should be free to make his choice to protect himself, but after losing in the Court of Appeal he said “I enjoy risk, and wearing a seatbelt reduces my enjoyment. I’m doing this so my kids can have a more enjoyable life”. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

For anyone wondering, he lost the original case at trial in Provincial Court, had the verdict overturned in QB (which was the basis for this report), and then the Crown appealed to the Alberta Court of Appeal and had the original verdict reinstated. This guy also trolled the police station for 5 days once the law first went into place, daring them to give him a ticket so he could go to court. They refused to do so at first because they knew him from all his TV appearances railing against the upcoming law. His argument originally was. That seatbelts in some cases caused injury and he should be free to make his choice to protect himself, but after losing in the Court of Appeal he said “I enjoy risk, and wearing a seatbelt reduces my enjoyment. I’m doing this so my kids can have a more enjoyable life”. 

The brain-dead have been with us forever. For my part, I was involved in a serious auto accident in the 80's (not my fault BTW) where if we had not been wearing my seat belt, both myself and my wife would have almost certainly died and left our kids, who were 6 and 8 years old, as orphans.  Seatbelts were not mandatory at that time, but we used them as a matter of course.

Edited by Tracker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...