[Patrick_Ross]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/s ... TopStories

$1:

Dion fights 'soft on crime' image with new agenda

Liberal Leader Stephane Dion outlined his party's law-and-order strategy today in an attempt to rebuff Tory claims that he's soft on crime.

"We need to adopt a comprehensive and effective approach that deals with every aspect of fighting crime: preventing crime, catching criminals, convicting criminals through competent and quick administration, and rehabilitating criminals," Dion said during a speech in Mississauga, Ont.

Dion committed in his speech to increasing the amount of judges and prosecutors in courts and to putting more police officers on the streets.

He said judicial appointments are being left unfilled because the Tories only want candidates that share their social conservative values.

"I call on the Conservative government to let the courts do their job, and start appointing highly qualified judges free from ideological interference," said Dion.

The delay has resulted in a backlog of criminal cases and dismissals, said Dion.

Additional details of the Liberal plan include:

-funding for a 400-officer RCMP team to fight organized crime, gangs, drugs and gun activity
-tougher laws to fight Internet predators that target children and measures to battle identity theft
-increased security at places of worship in "at-risk communities"
-amend the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) to make it mandatory for companies to notify clients if their personal information is jeopardized.
-legislation that would target spam emails, making them an offence

The Liberals will additionally offer their support in Parliament to the Tories on the issue of reverse-onus bail conditions for gun crimes -- which would require the person under arrest to justify their release.

The Conservatives have already tabled a bill on the issue in the House of Commons but it still has to make it through the Commons justice committee.

The Liberals, Bloc Quebecois and the NDP have previously acted together to water-down Tory measures on tougher sentencing.

While Dion is offering to cooperate on the reverse-onus issue, he favours better policing as a more effective solution to crime.

[ridenrain]

Is this the same "tough on crime" party that closed the Alberta forensics lab in 2005, or left the RCMP dangerously undefunded for a decade?
The same party that was under investigation by the RCMP on 33 different occasions and was eventually convicted by Gomery?
What, do you think it's easy to fight crime?

33 investigations of the Liberal party.

[hwacker]

I can smell the bullshit from here.

[Delwin]

I'm glad we have a party that aims to offer a well rounded approach to fighting crime :

$1:

preventing crime, catching criminals, convicting criminals through competent and quick administration, and rehabilitating criminals

It is a welcomed change from the more time, more jails approach of "other" political parties.

$1:

Reforms to youth criminal justice law and policy are on the Conservative agenda, including proposals to sentence youth aged 14 and up as adults for repeat and serious crimes and to amend the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) to include deterrence and denunciation as mandatory sentencing principles.

If it we' up to them, we would have children in jail, junkies, pot heads. Pretty much anyone but the illegal firearm owners.

[hwacker]

Delwin Delwin:

I'm glad we have a party that aims to offer a well rounded approach to fighting crime :

$1:

preventing crime, catching criminals, convicting criminals through competent and quick administration, and rehabilitating criminals

It is a welcomed change from the more time, more jails approach of "other" political parties.

$1:

Reforms to youth criminal justice law and policy are on the Conservative agenda, including proposals to sentence youth aged 14 and up as adults for repeat and serious crimes and to amend the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) to include deterrence and denunciation as mandatory sentencing principles.

If it we' up to them, we would have children in jail, junkies, pot heads. Pretty much anyone but the illegal firearm owners.

Yeah you like guys that diddle little kids as teachers. And if you think that dions words mean anything just wait till next election you'll get a real surprise.



jeeze how gullible can some people be?

[ridenrain]

You guys are pretty much indefensible on this charge, eh?
From the Chretien days of Sgt. Pepper to Paul Martin's Trust investigation meddling, they left Liberal red fingerprints over everything.
Just look through this forum and review the capital punishment threads and see which supporters pick which side.

[hurley_108]

hwacker hwacker:

jeeze how gullible can some people be?

Gullible enough to elect Harper.

[Delwin]

ridenrain ridenrain:

Is this the same "tough on crime" party that closed the Alberta forensics lab in 2005, or left the RCMP dangerously undefunded for a decade?
The same party that was under investigation by the RCMP on 33 different occasions and was eventually convicted by Gomery?
What, do you think it's easy to fight crime?

33 investigations of the Liberal party.

Why don't we try to stay focused on proven guilt instead of the allegations ? Do those investigations include the false claims against Goodale ?

$1:

Liberals cleared in trust case

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/182200

$1:

the Gomery inquiry cleared Paul Martin

http://www.cbc.ca/news/story/2006/01/23 ... 60123.html


I can see why the RCMP cuts were a mistake now, with all of the false allegations to follow up on, they could certainly use more cash.

How many Liberal MP's were convited in that period ? While your at it, how much did the crime rate drop again ?

[themasta]

Sounds like more of the same old, same old. Let's give rapists and murderers an outlet for their feelings because their daddies touched them as children. If they can express their feelings of rejection and hurt in a comfortable setting, then maybe, just maybe, they won't rape, kill, then rape, dismember and eat people ever again. All it takes is a little understanding and a whole lotta love. Hugs for everyone!
Everyone knows that the Liberals are soft on crime, we've had a number of years to figure that one out. What makes people think that they would make any changes for the better when all we've seen is deterioration of the justice system (more like "injustice system")?

[Orpheus_Emerged]

What'd it take, three posts before this became a matter of 'us versus them'?

The Liberal party is filled with corruption, it was inevitable with that much power and wealth in so few hands for so long, and they were caught on it.

Mandatory sentencing, lower ages for adult prosecution, and more policemen, whether proposed by either party, is a bad idea for treating the symptoms of a minor diseases.

We have low crime, even lower violent crime, and the majority of the crime we do have revolves around drugs, car theft, and a plethora of white collar transgressions.

We're one of the safest countries in the world to live in, and getting safer, this is a non-issue created to portray an image - and people are falling for it.

I've lived in the East Side of Vancouver, supposedly the centre of violent crime and drug addiction in Canada, and I have no fear of walking through it drunk at night alone.

[ridenrain]

The PMO who influences the RCMP would never stoop to stand in the way of an investigation.

[Bodah]

DP

[Bodah]

Delwin Delwin:

I'm glad we have a party that aims to offer a well rounded approach to fighting crime :

$1:

preventing crime, catching criminals, convicting criminals through competent and quick administration, and rehabilitating criminals

It is a welcomed change from the more time, more jails approach of "other" political parties.

You have a problem with mandatory jail time for people who commit violent offenses ? And mandatory jail time for offenses committed with fire arms ?

[Orpheus_Emerged]

Delwin Delwin:

You have a problem with mandatory jail time for people who commit violent offenses ? And mandatory jail time for offenses committed with fire arms ?

Yes, the very idea of mandatory sentencing would define all crimes as identical, which is of course impossible - the punishment for a man who stole for greed and one who stole to support his starving family should be different, using the classic example.

Each individual criminal has a different motivation and personality, some are kids who've just made a mistake and others are hardened career criminals with extreme psychological disorders.

Special care should be taken for teenagers, jailing them at that age would deny them their lives , as it's one of the most pivotal periods of personal development.

Furthermore, one criminal may reform within a short period, learn a trade or find religion, and then what would be the purpose of keeping him in prison any longer?

You could be effectively creating crime, rather than destroying it.


And besides, mandatory sentencing isn't a deterrent, it exists only to bring comfort and a sense of justice to those who feel threatened or wronged - if the idea is to prevent crime and reform prisoners, then it fails by design.

[Patrick_Ross]

Delwin Delwin:

I'm glad we have a party that aims to offer a well rounded approach to fighting crime :

$1:

preventing crime, catching criminals, convicting criminals through competent and quick administration, and rehabilitating criminals

It is a welcomed change from the more time, more jails approach of "other" political parties.

Right. How would you respond to this:

http://www.justicemonitor.ca/conditionalsentance.htm

$1:

Conditional sentencing was enacted in 1996 by Jean Chrétien’s Liberal government despite heavy criticism from opposition parties. Under this alternative sentencing option, an offender sentenced to a term of imprisonment of less than two years could be ordered to serve that sentence in the community rather than in prison. This legislation was drafted in an effort to reduce Canadian incarceration rates.

Since the introduction of conditional sentencing, the use of prison sentencing has been in steady decline while the use of conditional sentencing and probation has been steadily increasing.

Conditional Sentencing has now become widely used in cases of child pornography, major assault, sexual assault and other sex related offences, as well as for homicide convictions.

All offense are eligible for conditional sentencing, except those with a minimum term of imprisonment. During a sentencing hearing, neither the prosecution nor the defense need to establish that a conditional sentence is appropriate or inappropriate, or that a convict will or will not be a danger to the community. A judge has full power to grant a conditional sentence regardless of circumstances, as long as no minimum sentence is required.

The year conditional sentencing came into effect (1996/97) the number of jail sentences dropped by 5%. The following year (1997/98) rates dropped another 9%, and in 2000/01 rates plummeted another 18%. 31% of conditional sentences over that time period were for a violent offence. (Source: Statistics Canada)

While the use of conditional sentencing has grown in popularity, the terms of such sentences have decreased. The mean length of conditional sentences in 1997/98 was 7.5 months, declining to 5.4 months by 2000/01. In 1997/98 13% of conditional sentence terms were greater than 12 months. This percentage also dropped by 2000/01 to 7%. (Source: Statistics Canada)

The Liberal party's conditional sentencing allows rapists and child molesters to serve their sentences in the community. Given that deterrence must be one of the four pillars that must be part of any criminal justice program (the other three being punishment of offenders, rehabilitation of offenders and protection of the community), how does conditional sentencing, under these circumstances -- for which we have the Liberals to thank -- serve these principles of criminal justice? Where is the protection for the community?

It actually gets worse than this. Much worse. The Liberals were also responsible for legislation allowing convicted criminals to be granted a two- (sometimes as much as three-) to-one credit for time served while awaiting trial toward their sentencing. In a situation wherein criminals in Canada often face no more than three years in jail for their offences, how does this support any of the principles of criminal justice?

$1:

$1:

Reforms to youth criminal justice law and policy are on the Conservative agenda, including proposals to sentence youth aged 14 and up as adults for repeat and serious crimes and to amend the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) to include deterrence and denunciation as mandatory sentencing principles.

If it we' up to them, we would have children in jail, junkies, pot heads. Pretty much anyone but the illegal firearm owners.

Here's the Liberal record on youth justice: http://www.justicemonitor.ca/youthoffenders.htm

$1:

The degree of leniency displayed in youth sentencing is an issue of particular concern to Canadians. Inadequate sentences are the result of a legislative framework stressing that the needs of the offender be placed above other considerations. In sentencing, judges are instructed to consider rehabilitation first and foremost, with emphasis placed on keeping the offender in the community. Lesser emphasis is to be placed on deterrence and condemnation of youth crime.

The Young Offenders Act

The highly controversial Young Offenders Act was passed by Trudeau’s Liberal government in 1982, replacing the Juvenile Delinquents Act of 1908.

The Young Offenders Act applied to those between the ages of 12 and 17, protecting offenders under the age of 12 from any threat of prosecution (under the previous Act offenders as young as seven could be charged). The act specified a maximum sentence of two years except in cases where an adult could face life imprisonment. In such cases the young offender could be subject to a maximum sentence of three years. The act also called for identity protection for the offender throughout the court proceedings.

Canadians took issue with several aspects of the act including the minimum age it created, the light maximum sentences, and conflicting interests guiding the decision to transfer a youth to adult court (the needs of the youth were to be considered alongside the public’s safety).

After the adoption of the Young Offenders Act the number of violent juvenile crimes skyrocketed in Canada, with a large number of repeat youth offenders. Violent crime rates climbed steadily throughout the 1980s, remained stable (at the same high levels) in the 90s, and have been increasing since 1999 . (Source Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics)

Not much better. You might want to check your own party's record on youth justice before hurling condemnations at opposing parties.