[hamiltonguyo]

Donny_Brasco Donny_Brasco:

ThePolitician ThePolitician:

Donny_Brasco Donny_Brasco:

ThePolitician ThePolitician:

How many hand outs do you have to give people Donny?

Well if its going to cost us $1,000,000 to have a person go through the legal system and end up in jail for 10 years I'd say that anything less then that and we are ahead.

Furthermore, investing in people tends to pay off by creating tax paying, working citizens.

We can close the door to people, expecially youth at risk.

We can keep our jails full.

The only think more hard time is going to do is to scare people who have committed crime so much that they'll shoot at cops and steal cars and run over innocent people to get away.

Take away all of the frivoulous costs associated with our prison's these days and turn them into places that people actually detest and fear and that will kill two birds with one stone.

1 - Create a stronger deterrent for possible criminals.

2 - Keep the costs down so that 1 mil you quote is not even close.

I think Hitler already thought of that.

I don't see where Hitler comes into it?

[ThePolitician]

Tricks Tricks:

They do have a lot of things in prison that they shouldn't. They should hate prison, somehow, I don't think they give a flying fuck.

Went to school with a guy who ended up in juvy hall a few times. He would get out and brag about how he loved it because he got McDonald's food and never had to do any work. Nice deterrent. That same fuckwad was still breaking the law the last time I saw him; he was out but had a radio anklet on and was only allowed out of his house for 1 hr a day.

[xerxes]

ridenrain ridenrain:

I remember some study that it was not the punisment but the high chance of being caught, and punished, that was the biggest deterent.

Remember that it was the Liberals who were relying the convicts to vote Liberal.

And that worked so well didn't it?

Last I checked, Canada has about 35,000 prisoners in total in the country (which is less than the state of Maryland, FYI). Of those, less than half were eligable to vote. And if you take an average federal prison, there are likely prisoners from a variety of provinces and ridings, so whatever prisoners did vote, it was unlikely it was an election altering vote.

[VitaminC]

I think you guys have missed the point of that article.....

It quoted a person who said there was the possibility of a Charter challenge to a law tha imposed a mandatory 10 year sentence.....

In our system of justice the punishment has to fit the crime, so if you set out the punishment without even knowing what crime was committed, that could pose a problem, right?

I personally don't think that 10 years is too high......but the idea that you have a blanket punishment that is not related to the crime that was committed doesn't really fit with our system.....

Worse crimes should get worse punishments.......I mean what if someone was speeding with a rifle in their car.....should they be sentenced to 10 years for breaking the Highway and Traffic act with a gun??

Or what if someone "poaches" a deer outside of hunting season using a gun? You think they should go to jail for 10 years?

No? That's why blanket minimum sentences like that don't jive with our system of justice.....

Each crime we have should have its own min/max sentences if you ask me.

[ridenrain]

xerxes: If you're going to quote & comment, what about this one:

ridenrain ridenrain:

To put this in perspective:
During the election, Paul Martin & the Liberals were pushing the idea of a handgun ban. The state taking the legal property of law abiding citizens!
and Sue Barnes, the Liberal justice critic, suggested the Conservative penalties are "draconian"?

This is just another example of Libs / NDP ignorance of the opinions of real Canadians.

[xerxes]

What I don't like about mandatory sentencing is the fact that it leaves nothing to a judges discretion. Vita has a good example of where discretion is needed. Another example are the crazy drug laws in the US. In the US, it doesn't matter if you have 10g of, let's say, pot on you or 100kg, you automaticcaly get 10 years minimum.

It's naive to think that a blanket sentence is a solution because a case will always come along which shows that the world isn't so cut and dried as people would have it.

[PluggyRug]

VitaminC VitaminC:

I think you guys have missed the point of that article.....

It quoted a person who said there was the possibility of a Charter challenge to a law tha imposed a mandatory 10 year sentence.....

In our system of justice the punishment has to fit the crime, so if you set out the punishment without even knowing what crime was committed, that could pose a problem, right?

I personally don't think that 10 years is too high......but the idea that you have a blanket punishment that is not related to the crime that was committed doesn't really fit with our system.....

Worse crimes should get worse punishments.......I mean what if someone was speeding with a rifle in their car.....should they be sentenced to 10 years for breaking the Highway and Traffic act with a gun??

You are making things up again.

The current punishment(s) do not fit the crime(s) thats what this is about.

And....when some judges with balls get appointed and stick it to the punks, we might see a little change for the better.

If juvenile hall is feeding the inmates on MacDonald's poison it's no wonder they come out all screwed up.

[VitaminC]

PluggyRug PluggyRug:

The current punishment(s) do not fit the crime(s) thats what this is about.

I agree with that, and I think most people do too. That's why we should change the laws so certain crimes have their sentences increased.....

Making it mandatory that everyone who commits a crime with a gun serves 10 years, or an extra 10 years or whateve wouldn't do that .....

Maybe everyone who commits a violent crime with a gun would work....Although some people's definition of what constitutes a violent crime would be different.....

The comment in the article was not about whether or not sentences should be increased.

It was about a Charter challenge related to the fact that it is a "general punishment" that applies to all crimes instead of having specific punishments that relate to specific crimes....

The Article The Article:

The opposition, while willing to deal with the governing party to fight a spate of gun violence in urban centres, say the Conservative penalties could run afoul of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms' guarantee that the punishment must be proportional to the crime.

"If we go to 10 years, all we're doing is providing a long court challenge that is probably going to be successful in striking it down, so I don't see us as a country engaging in that kind of activity," said NDP justice critic Joe Comartin.

[hamiltonguyo]

There is already minimums for different crims involving guns thats the whole point is to make them bigger...

[VitaminC]

hamiltonguyo hamiltonguyo:

There is already minimums for different crims involving guns thats the whole point is to make them bigger...

Sure, and I think each offence needs to be looked at separately......

I think a rape with a gun is worse than a car-jacking with a gun, and I don't think they should both have the same punishment.

But I guess you can ask the question, is rape with a gun worse than rape with a knife.....Should someone who rapes someone else at gunpoint get 20 years, but someone who does it at knifepoint only get 10 years? Does the weapon really make a difference in that case?

I think each crime needs to be looked at really closely on it's own.

[hamiltonguyo]

Each of those already has different minimum sentances. each of them are just getting raised.

[QBC]

Ya know, as much as I agree with tougher penalties, the courts have to enforce the laws we already have. We really don't need new laws, just the resolve to punish the criminals instead of slapping them on the wrist. As for "whats wrong with the liberals and NDP?" It's partisan politics at it's best. If this had been a Liberal idea, the conservatives would have opposed it just because. Pretty much anything Harper tries to do will be opposed, just because.

[Canadaka]

[quote=Jayimcdn]
The con want to change our laws, we voted them in remember on this platform, so let them do it.
[/quote]

you may have voted for them, but myself and a large portion of Canadians did not, hence them having a small minority where thank goodness they will not be able to push through much of there platform.

[hamiltonguyo]

so your agaisnt tougher sentances for criminals?

[ridenrain]

Do we need more examples to refresh our collective memory?

$1:

Teen shot dead at Toronto funeral
Last Updated Fri, 18 Nov 2005 23:26:55 EST
CBC News
A teenager was shot to death Friday afternoon outside a west Toronto church during the funeral of another gun victim.

$1:

Family of slain Toronto teen remembers their 'bright light'
Last Updated Thu, 29 Dec 2005 07:34:21 EST
CBC News
Jane Creba, the 15-year-old Toronto girl who lost her life in a Boxing Day shooting spree that may have involved youth gangs, is being remembered by her family as a "loving and caring soul with a cheerful open heart."

$1:

Toronto Mayor David Miller said:
"The most important way we can deal with that is to arrest the criminals responsible and put them in jail so we send a strong message. If you have a gun and use it, you're going to jail."