CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8889
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:56 am
 


Lemmy wrote:
EyeBrock wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
He's some average-joe with no political power whatsoever.


Still not getting how this guy has supposedly been treated any different to any other Brit abroad.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/de ... ad-history

These ones were all white. Now dead also.


Those guys are all murderers, EyeBrock. This dude is an alleged drug trafficker, and it's not entirely clear that he was even guilty. Furthermore, the guy in this case is a half-wit of some sort. He'd likely not even be fit to stand a criminal trial in the West. Different circumstances altogether, mate.




....The official Xinhua News Agency quoted China’s Supreme Court as saying Tuesday that although officials from the British Embassy and a British aid organization called for a mental health examination for Mr. Shaikh, “the documents they provided could not prove he had a mental disorder nor did members of his family have a history of mental disease.”

“There is no reason to cast doubt on Akmal Shaikh’s mental status,” the Supreme Court was quoted as saying.....

Take a walk around your city and see what joy, happiness, and prosperity that heroin has wrought!


Attachments:
violinplay.gif
violinplay.gif [ 43.57 KiB | Viewed 174 times ]
Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8942
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:00 am
 


In 6 pages of posts has anyone hit on the entire point?
If you're a civilized country that doesn't use the death penalty you have an obigation to oppose it in countries that still do no matter what it's for.
And highly obligated to protest if it's one of your own citizens.
And not extradite theirs if they're going to kill them.
Period.

Or are we all going to buy Harper's "I will pick and choose" bullshit?


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8889
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:38 am
 


herbie wrote:
In 6 pages of posts has anyone hit on the entire point?
If you're a civilized country that doesn't use the death penalty you have an obigation to oppose it in countries that still do no matter what it's for.
And highly obligated to protest if it's one of your own citizens.
And not extradite theirs if they're going to kill them.
Period.

Or are we all going to buy Harper's "I will pick and choose" bullshit?


What does Harper/Canada have to do with this???


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
Profile
Posts: 12434
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:41 am
 


Yogi wrote:
....The official Xinhua News Agency quoted China’s Supreme Court as saying Tuesday that although officials from the British Embassy and a British aid organization called for a mental health examination for Mr. Shaikh, “the documents they provided could not prove he had a mental disorder nor did members of his family have a history of mental disease.”

“There is no reason to cast doubt on Akmal Shaikh’s mental status,” the Supreme Court was quoted as saying.....


It's hard to prove or disprove much of anything in a trial that took 30 minutes to conduct. SHAM!

Yogi wrote:
Take a walk around your city and see what joy, happiness, and prosperity that heroin has wrought!


I don't disagree with the dangers of heroin. But even if heroin trafficking is going to be capital crime, a guy deserves a fair trial before he's executed. This guy didn't get one.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 51388
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:43 am
 


China and fair? Where?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20854
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:54 am
 


ShepherdsDog wrote:
bootlegga wrote:
ShepherdsDog wrote:
How dare a gwai lo criticize the Middle Kingdom. You must now come to Beijing to pay homage and kowtow, begging for forgiveness.


Well, given the shite the UK (and other European powers) inflicted on them in the 19th century, I'd say they have a lot to apologize for.

Payback for those damned Mongol invasions. :)


Technically, the Mongols invaded China AFTER they invaded Europe. :wink:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20854
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:00 pm
 


Yogi wrote:

Yogi wrote:
So if a foreigner comes to Canada, and violates one of our laws, in your opinion, should they be sentenced according to our laws or the laws of their country of origin? Keep in mind that in some countries it is lawful for grown men to have sex with young girls, for husbands to beat their wives, and in some cultures even murder (family honor) is ok! Should Canada then sentence according to what the offenders Govt. wants? Or, should Canada tell the 'interferring Govt.' to 'piss off'?


:roll: :roll: Don't be an asshat. I've been following this thread since DAY FUCKING ONE so yes I'm very well aware of your stance on the issue!

Speaking of READING posts, you should try it sometime!

I read and reread the post you refer to and I very clearly, ASKED you a few questions and accused you of nothing! So take your superior fucking attitude and go fuck yourself with it!!!


I guess I read 'they should', instead of the 'should they' that you wrote. Sorry for the error on my part. :oops:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14114
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:33 pm
 


bootlegga wrote:
PublicAnimalNo9 wrote:
bootlegga wrote:
I have never argued that the US shouldn't enforce its laws (whether or not I agree with them). My opinion though is that if possible, our government should ask for leniecy and/or extradition to a Canadian prison in instances such as Ronald Smith's (or Gerald(?) Sampson in Saudi Arabia).

Not doing so in essence means you condone the death penalty, which most Canadians do not.


Yeah, apparently most Canadians would rather pay for cold blooded murderers to have a place to live, food and clothing. Gee, maybe they can all go visit him and wish him well while they're at it.


The death penalty was a stupid, vengeful eye-for-an-eye tool that never prevented murders in any way shape or form. The way pro-death penalty supporters talk, they make it sound like there wasn't a single murder in human history UNTIL it was abolished, but you and I and everyone else knows that's bullshit.

Killing prisoners is barbaric and is in no way a deterrent to other murderers, so what's the point? I say lock them up in a deep, dark hole, throw away the key and forget about them.

But if you don't like Canadian laws, petition to change them, start a political party or do something other than just bitching about them. The death penalty was abolished more than 40 years ago, and there still isn't any great desire by Canadians as a whole to bring it back.

But Boot, your way is just as barabric, only it gets to cost the taxpayer large.
The death penalty may not be a deterrent but it sure as hell would prevent someone from doing it more than once..without forcing the taxpayer to pay to house, clothe and feed these those POS's for the rest of their lives.
I think the average Canadian also thinks about guys like Milgaard and Truscot who would have most certainly been wrongfully executed for murders they didn't commit, but times have changed and so has the science of forensics.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20854
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:41 pm
 


PublicAnimalNo9 wrote:
bootlegga wrote:
PublicAnimalNo9 wrote:

bootlegga wrote:
I have never argued that the US shouldn't enforce its laws (whether or not I agree with them). My opinion though is that if possible, our government should ask for leniecy and/or extradition to a Canadian prison in instances such as Ronald Smith's (or Gerald(?) Sampson in Saudi Arabia).

Not doing so in essence means you condone the death penalty, which most Canadians do not.



Yeah, apparently most Canadians would rather pay for cold blooded murderers to have a place to live, food and clothing. Gee, maybe they can all go visit him and wish him well while they're at it.


The death penalty was a stupid, vengeful eye-for-an-eye tool that never prevented murders in any way shape or form. The way pro-death penalty supporters talk, they make it sound like there wasn't a single murder in human history UNTIL it was abolished, but you and I and everyone else knows that's bullshit.

Killing prisoners is barbaric and is in no way a deterrent to other murderers, so what's the point? I say lock them up in a deep, dark hole, throw away the key and forget about them.

But if you don't like Canadian laws, petition to change them, start a political party or do something other than just bitching about them. The death penalty was abolished more than 40 years ago, and there still isn't any great desire by Canadians as a whole to bring it back.


But Boot, your way is just as barabric, only it gets to cost the taxpayer large.
The death penalty may not be a deterrent but it sure as hell would prevent someone from doing it more than once..without forcing the taxpayer to pay to house, clothe and feed these those POS's for the rest of their lives.
I think the average Canadian also thinks about guys like Milgaard and Truscot who would have most certainly been wrongfully executed for murders they didn't commit, but times have changed and so has the science of forensics.


Sorry, but several studies have shown that executing prisoners (at least in the US anyways), actually costs far more in legal costs, appeals, etc than it would have to let them spend the next 50 years in prison.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/20/dea ... index.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/28/opinion/28mon3.html

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

I don't think locking up prisoners who have murdered for the rest of their lives is barbaric at all. It removes a menace to society and prevents him from murdering again just as well, and for less money too.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8889
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:49 pm
 


bootlegga wrote:
Yogi wrote:

Yogi wrote:
So if a foreigner comes to Canada, and violates one of our laws, in your opinion, should they be sentenced according to our laws or the laws of their country of origin? Keep in mind that in some countries it is lawful for grown men to have sex with young girls, for husbands to beat their wives, and in some cultures even murder (family honor) is ok! Should Canada then sentence according to what the offenders Govt. wants? Or, should Canada tell the 'interferring Govt.' to 'piss off'?


:roll: :roll: Don't be an asshat. I've been following this thread since DAY FUCKING ONE so yes I'm very well aware of your stance on the issue!

Speaking of READING posts, you should try it sometime!

I read and reread the post you refer to and I very clearly, ASKED you a few questions and accused you of nothing! So take your superior fucking attitude and go fuck yourself with it!!!




I guess I read 'they should', instead of the 'should they' that you wrote. Sorry for the error on my part. :oops:



[B-o]


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14114
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:56 pm
 


Yeah, and therein lies the problem Boot. It's all the appeals and bullshit the convicted can use to put off the inevitable. But, if we do it smart whereby not only the DNA evidence has to be there, but there also must be at least 2 credible eye-witnesses to it before a death sentence can be handed down, a lot of the appeal process could be done away with in those cases.
But it's our pathetic and gutless legal system that is to blame. For example, let's say the police respond to a home invasion. As they pull up, they hear shots fired and someone runs out of the house. After catching him they go inside and see 2 dead bodies on the floor. Now, when he is finally convicted of murder and sentenced to death, what exactly is there to appeal?? It's that kind of bullshit that makes the death penalty such an expensive sentence.
Oh and I may have gotten confused about your barbarity when you said to "lock them up in a deep, dark hole, throw away the key and forget about them." That's a far cry from simple incarceration :wink:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15779
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:08 pm
 


Lemmy wrote:
EyeBrock wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
He's some average-joe with no political power whatsoever.


Still not getting how this guy has supposedly been treated any different to any other Brit abroad.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/de ... ad-history

These ones were all white. Now dead also.


Those guys are all murderers, EyeBrock. This dude is an alleged drug trafficker, and it's not entirely clear that he was even guilty. Furthermore, the guy in this case is a half-wit of some sort. He'd likely not even be fit to stand a criminal trial in the West. Different circumstances altogether, mate.


Drug smuggling is a capital offence in a lot of countries, including Pakistan and China.

I'm sorry, it's hard for me to feel sorry for any citizens of western countries, where ever they were born, who smuggle drugs into countries that kill you for doing it.

Nobody forced them to do it and they still do it.

I'm sorry there are far more deserving cases at home that need our attention than British drug smugglers.

Getting all up-in-arms trying to get clemency for heroin smugglers in China or anywhere else that has a well publicised death sentence for trafficking isn't in my priority list.

In my view, it's only those with an agenda who are fighting for this unworthy cause.

Looking between the lines for racism or using this to put political pressure on China is just using a bad example for the wrong cause.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20854
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:46 pm
 


PublicAnimalNo9 wrote:
Yeah, and therein lies the problem Boot. It's all the appeals and bullshit the convicted can use to put off the inevitable. But, if we do it smart whereby not only the DNA evidence has to be there, but there also must be at least 2 credible eye-witnesses to it before a death sentence can be handed down, a lot of the appeal process could be done away with in those cases.
But it's our pathetic and gutless legal system that is to blame. For example, let's say the police respond to a home invasion. As they pull up, they hear shots fired and someone runs out of the house. After catching him they go inside and see 2 dead bodies on the floor. Now, when he is finally convicted of murder and sentenced to death, what exactly is there to appeal?? It's that kind of bullshit that makes the death penalty such an expensive sentence.
Oh and I may have gotten confused about your barbarity when you said to "lock them up in a deep, dark hole, throw away the key and forget about them." That's a far cry from simple incarceration :wink:


Good luck getting rid of the appeal system.

And there is nothing wrong (morally or otherwise) about tossing murderers in a deep dark hole and forgetting about them. That doesn't mean I advocate torture, starvation or anything else cruel, what I mean is locking them up and letting society forget about them, which does happen (except for the victims families I suppose).

When was the last time you saw a headline on Paul Bernardo, Clifford Olson, or anyone recent US serial killers? I don't know about you, but I can't remember.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14114
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:57 pm
 


Not talking about getting rid of the appeal system, just needs to be tweaked to prevent the ridiculous abuse by filth.

And meanwhile Paul Bernado et al are getting 3 squares a day, a bed, clothes, a roof, probably cable and internet access. How many Canadians can't even afford the 3 squares a day?
The last figures I saw were $50,000/yr to incarcerate someone in Canada.
I dunno about you, but I'd rather spend that 50k to give even just ONE person a leg up, rather than house, clothe and feed inhuman garbage.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20854
PostPosted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:02 pm
 


PublicAnimalNo9 wrote:
Not talking about getting rid of the appeal system, just needs to be tweaked to prevent the ridiculous abuse by filth.

And meanwhile Paul Bernado et al are getting 3 squares a day, a bed, clothes, a roof, probably cable and internet access. How many Canadians can't even afford the 3 squares a day?
The last figures I saw were $50,000/yr to incarcerate someone in Canada.
I dunno about you, but I'd rather spend that 50k to give even just ONE person a leg up, rather than house, clothe and feed inhuman garbage.


I would love to spend that 50k in other ways too, but I refuse to let my morals be dictated by money.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 116 posts ]  Previous  1 ... 4  5  6  7  8  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: xerxes and 11 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.