Wild Bill Posted February 15, 2008 Report Posted February 15, 2008 What is the cost of crime? We say that jailing people costs too much but no one ever takes into consideration what it costs for these people to remain free. What will it cost society to meet Micheal Levi's needs for the rest of his life? What does our catch and release legal system cost society when people have scores of convictions for property crimes and are still walking around committing more? That's the problem, governments too often just look at their own spending priorities and budget, not what it will take to really deal with the problems. This is not just the fault of our legal system. One way or another our government and courts have to deal with these people whether it is prison or mandatory treatment for substance abuse in proper institutions, not just as out patients. It's called "off-loading" and it's one of the oldest political tricks in the book! Jails and such cost the GOVERNMENT money! Criminals on the loose cost us, usually through our insurance companies and our monthly premiums. True, governments pay with taxes collected from us but the difference is that we see those taxes in hard and obvious numbers. Whatever costs are shoved onto us are hidden in the day to day costs of just living. Politicians don't like us having a clear picture of how much they rake from us and how they spend it. To most politicians the solution to a tight budget is to find a way to off-load a cost onto the public at large, without being obvious about it. There are all kinds of examples. One might be the "Blue Box" recycling program. Our leaders chose to have the separation of metal, paper and plastics done by US, at the source. We get lectured about how easy it is to properly recycle and implications that if we don't comply we're merely lazy. What's never mentioned is the TIME involved! Labour time would cost the local municipal government. Making us do it means their budget looks good. Of course, the inevitable problem is that they off-load a LOT of the labour for a LOT of such programs onto the taxpayer. If you are working 8-10 hours a day, perhaps with another hour or two for the highway commute you can rapidly get stressed for time and energy, especially if you're trying to have some time for your family. If you oppose any of these "motherhood" programs of course you're labeled as an "evil polluter who wants to kill the planet". In many other countries trash is picked up as found by the curb and separation is done at large centres. These centres provide jobs, sometimes as a form of "workfare" but more usually just "regular" style. The more progressive actually burn the trash to produce electricity, using modern technologies that are amazingly "clean". Our politicians find it easier to just "dump" the problem on us, if you'll pardon the pun. If your city has lagged behind in running its public transit system the city will start touting walking programs and bicycle use. Ads are much cheaper than some new buses. Does your city need some new snowplows? Make the citizen shovel the sidewalk in front of his own property. Here in southern Ontario if you have an accident on the highway and your car is still driveable you're expected to drive it yourself to an "accident reporting centre". There you will be given an accident report for you to write up yourself. Instead of an actual police officer you'll deal with a cheaper civilian employee. My brother had a minor dent on the QEW between Hamilton and Toronto a few years ago and was introduced to this new system. What he found most amusing was questions on the report asking "Were you driving in an unsafe or dangerous manner?" The idea of some bureaucrat actually expecting honest answers to such posers had him in stitches! Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Muddy Posted February 16, 2008 Report Posted February 16, 2008 The guy will be out on the street in three years. I agree there is room for corporal punishment in our society. Public flogging would do two things. The crimial will do anything to never be flogged again. The other is it will deter other thugs from emulating. Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted February 17, 2008 Report Posted February 17, 2008 We need to change the system. Violent crimes must be considered to be a threat to society, with that understanding that justification for removing the threat to society can be found in permanent removal from society. Lock them up, and throw away the key, there is an effect means of prevent any re-offenders for you. Once under lock and key the individual can be given the opportunity to earn limited freedoms and privileges, or chose to live in isolation from others. Given the available choices I am sure that they would desire to work. Those that sought penal employment could be used at the pleasure of the government to preform duties in the service of the public such as construction efforts or any endeavor involving labour. Working to earn the keep would have an entirely new meaning to individuals. It needs to get done folks. They need to understand that crime really doesn't pay. Quote
Argus Posted February 17, 2008 Report Posted February 17, 2008 (edited) Why not water-boarding? Torture is gaining a respectability it hasn't enjoyed since WW2. I have little sympathy for Enrique Quintana but that would change if he was crippled in retaliation. Why? Most people would see that as ironic justice. I fail to see how two wrongs will make anything right. Why would crippling a brutal thug who did his best to murder a man in a cowardly fashion, and left him a quadriplegic be "wrong"? I wonder how you would feel, unable to use your arms and legs for the rest of your life, if five years after his sentence (he probably won't even serve that long) the man who did it to you sends you a video of himself partying on a beach with beautiful women, dancing to music and laughing at the camera. Will you think justice has been done as he sneers at you and gives you the finger then goes back to his partying? And you slumped in a wheelchair unable to even use your arms. Perhaps a more appropriate sentence for Quintana is to be the personal assistant for Levy for the rest of his natural life. He can help change his diapers and clean his bedding, help feed him and dress him and bathe him - for the rest of his life. That should be his sentence. and if Levy dies early - which he probably will, then he can be placed at the disposal of some other quadriplegic to help him. But since we can't enforce such a thing - put a bullet in his forehead and drop him into a grave. He's vermin and we should not be concerned with the rights or welfare of vermin. For that matter, drop his two friends in there with him. Twenty month conditional sentence? This for a guy who took part in this violent attack and struck Levy with beer bottles? All three ought to go away for life. Edited February 17, 2008 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted February 17, 2008 Report Posted February 17, 2008 I agree in principal but I'm not sure how you could force someone into gainful employment. Both the Americans and the British still have prison sentences which include "hard labour". Clearly they have ways of enforcing the labour part of that on prisoners. I'd suggest we have a look and adopt the same methods. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted February 17, 2008 Report Posted February 17, 2008 That is excellent news!10 years for the bastard. HA! Nine and a half. He's served one and a half. That leaves eight. However, he will be eligible for parole after 1/3 of his sentence, which means at just over 3 years - or in another one and a half years. Want to bet he won't get it? What gets me is the crown was only asking for four years. Four years for chopping a person's neck with an axe and severing his spinal column. It's absolutely disgusting. One of the others got a conditional sentence - which means no jail time - and the other got a couple of years. This guy will be a quad for the rest of his life. These guys will be living it up, snorting coke and partying in another couple of years. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
eyeball Posted February 17, 2008 Report Posted February 17, 2008 Why would crippling a brutal thug who did his best to murder a man in a cowardly fashion, and left him a quadriplegic be "wrong"? It just wouldn't be me. You can always take the law into your own hands you know, like Mack Bolan or the Punisher. There's nothing stopping you...or is there? Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.