Addendum; as i procrastinate:

1. A recent study apparently shows that people become better people after being exposed to 'green' products, but become jerks after actually buying them. I think this is hilarious and kind of ridiculous- but I'm looking forward to reading the study.

2. I realized the earlier today that if you googled my name just right, you might actually come across this blog. Not that I think too many people (anyone?) is actually reading this, but, I had this brief panic attack that I would be applying for jobs and someone would find this and given the poor writing skills, legal reasoning skills and even life skills displayed here- I would never work again. Anyways, I was reminded of this and decided to leave this blog up, and hopefully even update it more regularly.

3. On that note- a local firm is doing a lunch hour reception to talk about jobs at their firm, and they set up a facebook page as an RSVP for students. I'm reasonably sure that this is so they can vet potential articling students' facebook pages. I have a law bar for what is okay with online privacy issues, but this strikes me as a low blow.

Work life balance needs to tip more towards "work".

1. Today was great. But I might be turning into a hippie. After school, I went to hot yoga, and then came home and made a maple-glazed tofu stir fry. How did this happen? I hate hippies.

2. Exams are coming up pretty quick, but there is also so much fun stuff that I want to do in the next few weeks. I moved to winnipeg specifically so that there would not be fun stuff to distract me from school. On Saturday, I'm haging out with a friend of mine, who is friends with the drummer from Hawksley Workman- who is playing here on saturday. So i get to go to the show for free. Kind of excited about that.

3. Also! I am moving into that friends apartment at the end of april. Which is a drag because it's not so close to school- but awesome in every other possible way.

back at school.

Got back into winnipeg yesterday. First day of school today.

1. My break was super super fun. I really like having to squeeze as much fun as possible into a short amount of time. Christmas was great for that. I -almost- saw everyone that i wanted to see.

2. Got my first law school mark back. It was a 'B'. I'm actually really really excited about that. It was in the exam that i was most worried about too.

3. My legal methods class was suppose to start at 1. We (well, slightly more than half of us, lots are still at law games or just taking an extra day to get back) all got there at one, but our prof didn't. i left at like 25 after to get my hair cut. Got an e-mail at 1:45 saying that class was going to start at 2. wtf. My hair looks great.

4. I think i got frostbite bicycling home.

5. Also! I stayed at the library 'till like 9 doing my torts reading for tomorrow. This is balls! I'm not a keener!

(i am a keener and I'm pretty stoked that i stayed at school for 12 hrs on the first day of classes)

6. Pretty sure I got frostbite on the 'ole ears on the ride home. As much as i love the bunny touque- it might be time for a hat that covers my ears.

Lymricks.

Midterms studying:

1.

There once was this druggie named Creighton

Gave his friend some coke, then ran when he started shakin'

s.7 He cried!

but he was denied

'Reasonable Foresight' so he was denied

2.

There once was this old guy named woo

Came down with a terrible flu

Mercier said "Buy!"

and Allan said "Aye!"

Too bad the contract was subject-to!

3.

There once once this man named Athey

got in a terrible car accident dear me

The doctor said stretch

damages he did fetch

and now he's as wealthy as can be!

Oh Alberta... one step forward, two steps back.

Maybe a few steps back.

1. Bill 44 is law today.

Good news, what used to read:

WHEREAS it is recognized in Alberta as a fundamental principle

and as a matter of public policy that all persons are equal in:

dignity, rights and responsibilities without regard to race, religious

beliefs, colour, gender, physical disability, mental disability, age,

ancestry, place of origin, marital status, source of income or family

status;

Now reads:

WHEREAS it is recognized in Alberta as a fundamental principle

and as a matter of public policy that all persons are equal in:

dignity, rights and responsibilities without regard to race, religious

beliefs, colour, gender, physical disability, mental disability, age,

ancestry, place of origin, marital status, source of income, family

status or sexual orientation;

Thanks Alberta! We may be 32 years behind Quebec, but progress is progress right?

the bad news is that tacked on to this bill is this:

Notice to parent or guardian

11.1(1) A board as defined in the School Act shall provide

notice to a parent or guardian of a student where courses of

study, educational programs or instructional materials, or

instruction or exercises, prescribed under that Act include

subject-matter that deals explicitly with religion, sexuality or

sexual orientation.

(2) Where a teacher or other person providing instruction,

teaching a course of study or educational program or using the

instructional materials referred to in subsection (1) receives a

written request signed by a parent or guardian of a student that

the student be excluded from the instruction, course of study,

educational program or use of instructional materials, the

teacher or other person shall in accordance with the request of

the parent or guardian and without academic penalty permit the

student

(a) to leave the classroom or place where the instruction,

course of study or educational program is taking place or

the instructional materials are being used for the duration

of the part of the instruction, course of study or

educational program, or the use of the instructional

materials, that includes the subject-matter referred to in

subsection (1), or

(b) to remain in the classroom or place without taking part

in the instruction, course of study or educational

program or using the instructional materials.

Honestly, to me, this sounds so broad as to be completely meaningless. What the hell does it mean for subject matter to "deal explicitly with sexual orientation"? I'm pretty sure that would include every novel ever written ever. Why can't they be open about it and just say "prescribed under that Act include subject-matter that deals explicitly with religion, sexuality or queer folks".

Seriously. Bill 44. More good than bad. It's just infuriating that we feel the need to temper even the slightest progressive action in Alberta. Gross.

1. First week done. Lots of social events, I guess this is normal. I think I'm a pretty social guy, but I really don't like forced social interactions. I guess this is also normal.

2. First reading assignments were due today. Short journal entries in a P/F course, so really they don't count for much and I probably ought have not sweated them too much. But, i am really shocked at my piss poor writing skills. I re-wrote each of those damn things 4 or 5 times. And they were still balls. It's going to be a long year.

3. I'm pretty stoked on my torts class. The prof really moves quick and the class is exciting and fun. The first chapter of torts was simply a bunch of random law profs trying to describe what tort law is and contracting themselves all over the place. They got pretty, uh, poetic. I think my favorite excerpt is this little out-of-context gem from Justice Linden: "Love can take credit for some of the good things that happen in our world, even though lovers may not start with these effects in mind. Similarly, tort law may achieve beneficial effects, without necessarily setting out to do so, things like compensation, deterrence and education. Thus, whether by design or not, tort law, like love, is valuable not only intrinsically, but also for it's other contributions to a better world."

Michael Bryant

So, as someone who bikes a fair bit I've been reading about the Michael Bryant case a bit.

1. I really like reading the stories on cbc.ca like this one and more than anything, I really love/hate reading the comments that follow.

2. I think it's kind of silly that this is turning into a bicycle safety piece. Bicycle safety is clearly not the issue here. (Anyone who thinks Toronto is a hard city to bike in should come join me for a Winnipeg ride. This city sucks for bikes).

3. Also- I like how everyone is very quick to point out that Sheppard was a bicycle courier and "ALL BICYCLE COURIERS ARE CRAZY!!". This is absurd. I've met lots of bicycle couriers and they've all been super friendly nice people.

4. I've personally been in a situation where someone has tapped my bicycle with their car. It takes a lot to really get me upset, and even though there was no damage to my bicycle, I was enraged. When -I- was in that situation I (mis-?) interpreted a motorist coming into contact with my bike as a serious threat. I completely understand how this could start a fight. (That said, I certainly don't know the half of what actually happened, so maybe I shouldn't take sides.)

5. I was thinking about the charges that are being laid against Bryant- and as someone who has yet to take a single law class, but at least owns a criminal law textbook: Lets assume that Bryant once or twice bumped Sheppard and then attempted to drive off before the altercation began. Now, pretending that we are somewhere with a felony murder rule- could the hit-and-run be considered a felony? Would Sheppards death be a felony-murder?

Okay, okay, that's an absurd stretch. But I don't really understand why the charges that are being laid are being laid. Bryant is charged with Criminal negligence causing death and Dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing death. I don't think anyone here is suggesting that Bryant doesn't know how to drive. If his poor driving skills are responsible for anything it would be the initial bump(s) which started the fight (sorry, altercation). It strikes me that this should be a 2nd degree murder charge, and Bryant should be able to plea self-defense. Is self-defense a legit defense to criminal negligence?

6. The more I read about this on cbc.ca the more annoyed I am that they try to make it very clear that Bryant is an upstanding citizen whereas Sheppard is a bicycle courier. Can they not wait for the police toxicology report to come back before talking about Sheppard being drunk? Is his earlier domestic dispute really relevant to the situation at hand? Do they have to mention that the woman involved in that domestic dispute was the mother of only one of his four children?

7. I can't believe i just wrote so much on a topic which i know so little about. I'm going to end it with this gem from the Small Dead Animals Blog referring to Bill 132, a bill banning pit bulls from toronto: "Since the law's enactment in 2005, pitbulls have killed fewer Ontarians than former attorney general Michael Bryant"