Connect with us

Opinion

Are we the drivers, that we warn our children to look out for?

Published

3 minute read

I often ask myself; “Are we the drivers we warn our children about”?
School zones are important safety zones for the children, all the children, not just yours. Recently I have seen some hair-raising episodes of bad driving and parking in school zones.
In one school zone there is a crosswalk, a fire hydrant, no stopping signs, and an idle-free sign. I have seen parents roaring up, stop, wait, idle on the crosswalk, by the fire-hydrant, under the no-stopping sign and the idle-free sign.
I have had parents pass me and cut in to enter parking lots, to pick up a child. Recently a woman looked like she was texting on her phone, laying on the passenger seat. She was moving into oncoming traffic, before looking up and moving over. What would have happened if it had been a child, a parent walking a child and not an SUV?
School zone hours are before school, 8-9:30, when all the children arrive, during lunch, 11:30-1:30, and after school, 3:00-4:30. They do not just apply to everyone else, they apply to us even when we are running late, our children are ill or hurt, the weather is bad or when we are texting.
We want our children to be safe. We want all the children to feel safe. The school will not force your 6 year old to wait on the street at 40 below, because you are 30 seconds later because you followed the speed limit. We do not want our children to walk around vehicles stopped on the crosswalk. Fire fighters would be horrified if someone was unnecessarily hurt longer than needed, because the access was blocked to the fire hydrant, I know I would be.
Today, a truck was tailgating the car in front, passing me in a school zone. People talking on phones, doing their hair, eating and speeding through a school zone with children in sight. Texting and other distractions are much more dangerous in an elementary school zone, than on other roads.
We all lead busy lives but the signs are there and the rules are in place for a very important reason. “To protect our children”.
Can you do your part, or are you the driver you warn your children about? Honestly?

Follow Author

Carbon Tax

Carney fails to undo Trudeau’s devastating energy policies

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill and Elmira Aliakbari

On the campaign trail and after he became prime minister, Mark Carney has repeatedly promised to make Canada an “energy superpower.” But, as evidenced by its first budget, the Carney government has simply reaffirmed the failed plans of the past decade and embraced the damaging energy policies of the Trudeau government.

First, consider the Trudeau government’s policy legacy. There’s Bill C-69 (the “no pipelines act”), the new electricity regulations (which aim to phase out natural gas as a power source starting this year), Bill C-48 (which bans large oil tankers off British Columbia’s northern coast and limit Canadian exports to international markets), the cap on emissions only from the oil and gas sector (even though greenhouse gas emissions have the same effect on the environment regardless of the source), stricter regulations for methane emissions (again, impacting the oil and gas sector), and numerous “net-zero” policies.

According to a recent analysis, fully implementing these measures under Trudeau government’s emissions reduction plan would result in 164,000 job losses and shrink Canada’s economic output by 6.2 per cent by the end of the decade compared to a scenario where we don’t have these policies in effect. For Canadian workers, this will mean losing $6,700 (annually, on average) by 2030.

Unfortunately, the Carney government’s budget offers no retreat from these damaging policies. While Carney scrapped the consumer carbon tax, he plans to “strengthen” the carbon tax on industrial emitters and the cost will be passed along to everyday Canadians—so the carbon tax will still cost you, it just won’t be visible.

There’s also been a lot of buzz over the possible removal of the oil and gas emissions cap. But to be clear, the budget reads: “Effective carbon markets, enhanced oil and gas methane regulations, and the deployment at scale of technologies such as carbon capture and storage would create the circumstances whereby the oil and gas emissions cap would no longer be required as it would have marginal value in reducing emissions.” Put simply, the cap remains in place, and based on the budget, the government has no real plans to remove it.

Again, the cap singles out one source (the oil and gas sector) of carbon emissions, even when reducing emissions in other sectors may come at a lower cost. For example, suppose it costs $100 to reduce a tonne of emissions from the oil and gas sector, but in another sector, it costs only $25 a tonne. Why force emissions reductions in a single sector that may come at a higher cost? An emission is an emission regardless of were it comes from. Moreover, like all these policies, the cap will likely shrink the Canadian economy. According to a 2024 Deloitte study, from 2030 to 2040, the cap will shrink the Canadian economy (measured by inflation-adjusted GDP) by $280 billion, and result in lower wages, job losses and a decline in tax revenue.

At the same time, the Carney government plans to continue to throw money at a range of “green” spending and tax initiatives. But since 2014, the combined spending and forgone revenue (due to tax credits, etc.) by Ottawa and provincial governments in Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia and Alberta totals at least $158 billion to promote the so-called “green economy.” Yet despite this massive spending, the green sector’s contribution to Canada’s economy has barely changed, from 3.1 per cent of Canada’s economic output in 2014 to 3.6 per cent in 2023.

In his first budget, Prime Minister Carney largely stuck to the Trudeau government playbook on energy and climate policy. Ottawa will continue to funnel taxpayer dollars to the “green economy” while restricting the oil and gas sector and hamstringing Canada’s economic potential. So much for becoming an energy superpower.

Continue Reading

Daily Caller

‘Holy Sh*t!’: Podcaster Aghast As Charlie Kirk’s Security Leader Reads Texts He Allegedly Sent University Police

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Harold Hutchison

The person in charge of the security detail for Turning Point USA (TPUSA) founder Charlie Kirk says he warned Utah Valley University (UVU) police about access to a rooftop days before Kirk’s assassination, shocking podcaster Shawn Ryan on Monday.

Kirk was assassinated during a TPUSA event at UVU on Sept. 10, during which he was debating attendees. Brian Harpole of Integrity Security Solutions read Ryan texts during the episode of “The Shawn Ryan Show” of him allegedly flagging for UVU’s police chief the rooftop used by Kirk’s alleged assassin on Sept. 8, two days before the assassination.

WATCH:

“We have some correspondence with the chief of the school uh on that day, on Monday, before Charlie was killed and why this hadn’t come out and why he won’t stand up like a man and admit this, I don’t know, but he’s watching a bunch of men lose their careers and he’s okay with it,” Harpole told Ryan. “On Monday before, this correspondence went to Chief Long. ‘Hello, Chief Long. We received this message today from the student group. ‘There is a student roof access pretty close to where CK will be set up at the Utah Valley. (The Sorenson Center has a couple of staircases that go up to walkways on the roofs.)’”

“He comes back and the so, for edification, the Sorenson Center was the building in front of the Losee Center and so, he comes back he says you want uh access to the roof and came back and said I was told students have access above us,” Harpole continued. “If this is true it would be nice to either have it controlled access or allow one of my guys to be there as well if possible. He comes back and his last correspondence was, ‘I got you covered.’ What else am I to do when a command level person from an accredited police department says, ‘I’ve got this area.’?”

Text exchange between Brian Harpole and UVU police official. (Screenshot/YouTube/Shawn Ryan Show)

Text exchange between Brian Harpole and UVU police official. (Screenshot/YouTube/Shawn Ryan Show)

“That was the chief of police for the UVU Police Department. We’ve called him. He’s never called us back,” Harpole added as Shawn Ryan responded by saying “Holy shit.”

UVU did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Video released of the immediate aftermath of the assassination of Kirk shows the alleged gunman making his escape by dropping off the roof and fleeing. Authorities arrested Tyler Robinson, 22, early on Sept. 12, accusing him of fatally shooting Kirk.

“Probably literally all they had to do is post anybody at that stairwell,” Harpole said.

Continue Reading

Trending

X