Jerry J. Fortin

The best interests of this nation can be served by adopting a republican form of government. Let the people choose their own leader. Have term limits to office. Have a system of recall for representatives. Have fixed election dates. These things would best serve Canadians.

Sometimes crimes are just crimes. Crimes related to money don't always happen because poor people want to be rich, sometimes the rich folks are just greedy. I am not a firm believer in rehabilitation, the penal system was designed and is supposed to incarcerate convicted felons as punishment. The entire concept of "corrections" is a misnomer in my view.

Never vote for Liberals, but vote for the other guys? I am all for electoral and governmental reforms, toss in some constitutional reforms and some tax elimination and you will have my full attention.

Like Kent State, or maybe Mai Lai?

Freedom allows us to do both. The only stop gap in the system is the voter.

It seems that something is in the wings! Questions about campaign spending tend to lead one to believe that the government is taking steps in preparation.

The only thing we lose is apathy towards the system. At least it has people talking, doing is another story but this is a start.

Many! I think the best way to start would be submitted questions, and submitted answers. Both subject to the approval of the "Speaker" of the house. Yet with all due respect just getting the government to respond is a large benefit. The US doen't have this kind of thing. Frankly when they answer with crap, it makes them look bad.

Their parents did the work, this is how they repay and respect those efforts. You would have the citizens of this nation replace their parents and put the icing on the cake of the nanny state?

Tell that to the victims of repeat offenders.

Answer the question..........

Do you have a wife, a daughter, or a sister or a mother? If you do, would you think that a 2.5 year sentence would be enough if they were the victim?

Judges! We need judicial reform big time. They need to preside over procedures, not pass judgment at all, that is what juries are for! Give sentencing to juries as well! Let the judge rule on points of law, and step in when the litigators mess up, but that is all we need them for.

Why do folks always want to tell China what to do? 5000 years of history givers them a world view like we can only hope to achieve. Leave China be, don't mess with them.

Troll? Come on you folks have streamed so far out of the discussion a little levity was required. Get over it........

Twp points for Argus! Well said!!!

Really? Those were your words, not mine. I will suggest that minimum sentencing is somewhere where this debate needs to go. I will allow that some forms of discretion are indeed required on the part of the judges. On the other hand there needs to be some form of foundation from which effective penal servitude is realized. What is the point here anyway? Crimes are simply a reality, and so is dealing with them. Some crimes may be prevented but not all. Some criminals may be rehabilitated, but not all. All that society can do is to act once the crime has been committed and then punish the convicted criminal for the offense. The true argument should be what form that punishment should take. While it is a nice touchy feely kinda thing to say we can "correct" the offender, the reality is that we are simply extending the powers and responsibility of the nanny state. Look, the individual is held responsible and accountable under the law for infractions, the government should not be responsible for anything other than capturing and punishing the individual who violates the law. Swimming pools, exercise rooms, television and movies, libraries, education opportunities, these things are what I would call luxuries in jails, not something required at all. They represent an expense to society, one in which most citizens would likely view as a waste of time money and expense on the public dime. The idea should be to make "correctional facilities" place to avoid. Not to make them as pleasant as possible. You want a deterrent to crime, make the punishment unbearable.

The criminals will hate us? Too bad, it sucks to be them.

I agree!

Sure they are! That doesn't mean that on Friday there will not be a non-confidence vote. The smart move here is to ambush the Conservatives. Talk all week, then drop the hammer on Friday. Harper is in a corner, he will take the hits that are coming from all directions. Opposition parties are having a field day, they can smell the blood in the water.

There is no time but the present. If Iggy blows this call, it will cost him a lot more than folks think. Right now the Conservatives are vulnerable, big time. They are eating a lot of bad press, and Iggy is in the limelight. The damned stars have aligned or something because the Conservatives are trending down, the economy is not getting any better, we are still bleeding jobs and production capacity, and perhaps most importantly Harper is seen giving ground which detracts from his own base support.

So everyone agrees? We need Arctic defense plans?

You mean besides having the criminal off the streets?

The military could employ a lot more citizens needing work. It could consume a lot more goods that need producing in this country. It could provide a lot of secondary education for young people in this country. The military could have used all the stimulus money and bailout money and brought more jobs and security to this nation than anything else.

The new PM of that nation is a real problem for middle east terrorists. He has been there before, and this time I think he wants to do something big. Watch for the signs before the coming of the storm.