UShaditComing Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 Best way to stop criminals from reoffending is to make jail terms longer and less desirable. The main reason why US crimne rates are down and prison rates are up is the 3 strikes rule.... And in a nutshell that's the attitude which explains why the US has so many people in jail and the taxpayer is footing the bill. Good for you but just keep you silly ideas on your side of the border thank you. You've got to be a conservative American and probably even a libertarian because you are for less freedom and higher taxes and you think you are the opposite. Duhhhhh! Talking to Americans! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 (edited) And in a nutshell that's the attitude which explains why the US has so many people in jail and the taxpayer is footing the bill. Good for you but just keep you silly ideas on your side of the border thank you. You've got to be a conservative American and probably even a libertarian because you are for less freedom and higher taxes and you think you are the opposite. Duhhhhh! Talking to Americans! Why are you concerned about the relative freedom or lackthereof for criminals? Isn't it the freedom of the law abiding citizen that we should be concerned with? If you use that as a starting point, the USA has many more freedom's than we Canadians do. Talking to Canadians! (in a PC way so as to avoid a HRC complaint) lol Edited March 7, 2008 by White Doors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UShaditComing Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 Of ocurse it's the freedom of the lawabiding citizen we need to be concerned with. Now you are getting to the issue! Now you need to start thinking for yourself as opposed to listening to the easy solution crap which is spewed by Harper and his gang of louts. How do we accomplish our common goal? Do we attempt to rehabilitate and trust the judgement of the professionals who make the decision on whether or not a person is safe to release to the streets or do we just buy all the emotional crap about criminals reoffending. Sure the professional make some mistakes and they always will but the objective is to help them get better at what they are doing. There is only one correct approach and that is to attempt to rehabilitate and judge when a criminal is safe to be released. This is just common sense which you appear to be now agreeing with or you wouldn't be pursuing the question. The Us simply has it wrong and Harper's louts have it wrong too because they only want to take the easy way out and that has been proven to not work south of the border. Get it yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 Of ocurse it's the freedom of the lawabiding citizen we need to be concerned with. Now you are getting to the issue! Now you need to start thinking for yourself as opposed to listening to the easy solution crap which is spewed by Harper and his gang of louts. How do we accomplish our common goal? Do we attempt to rehabilitate and trust the judgement of the professionals who make the decision on whether or not a person is safe to release to the streets or do we just buy all the emotional crap about criminals reoffending. Sure the professional make some mistakes and they always will but the objective is to help them get better at what they are doing. There is only one correct approach and that is to attempt to rehabilitate and judge when a criminal is safe to be released. This is just common sense which you appear to be now agreeing with or you wouldn't be pursuing the question. The Us simply has it wrong and Harper's louts have it wrong too because they only want to take the easy way out and that has been proven to not work south of the border. Get it yet? That certainly explains the 40+% recidivist rate.....because we trust professionals.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 Of ocurse it's the freedom of the lawabiding citizen we need to be concerned with. Now you are getting to the issue! Now you need to start thinking for yourself as opposed to listening to the easy solution crap which is spewed by Harper and his gang of louts. How do we accomplish our common goal? Do we attempt to rehabilitate and trust the judgement of the professionals who make the decision on whether or not a person is safe to release to the streets or do we just buy all the emotional crap about criminals reoffending. Sure the professional make some mistakes and they always will but the objective is to help them get better at what they are doing. There is only one correct approach and that is to attempt to rehabilitate and judge when a criminal is safe to be released. This is just common sense which you appear to be now agreeing with or you wouldn't be pursuing the question. The Us simply has it wrong and Harper's louts have it wrong too because they only want to take the easy way out and that has been proven to not work south of the border. Get it yet? I get it in the sense that I see you think the current system in Canada was workign fine. I see.. So you could pull up a statistic, say, % of crimes perpetrated by people on parole? How about, % of parole's who reoffend? I mean, you have strong opinions on this so I am assuming that you have done your research and are making an honest, intellectual argument here and not just a knee-jerk ideaological one. biding my time until I see you again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UShaditComing Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 I get it in the sense that I see you think the current system in Canada was workign fine.I see.. So you could pull up a statistic, say, % of crimes perpetrated by people on parole? How about, % of parole's who reoffend? I mean, you have strong opinions on this so I am assuming that you have done your research and are making an honest, intellectual argument here and not just a knee-jerk ideaological one. biding my time until I see you again. Thank you and my work is done with you because I have you thinking now. All that's left to do is to determine how well Canada's approach is working and to find ways of making it work better. My approqch is both ideological and sensible but never knee-jerk. Knee-jerk is what I accused you of before you came to your senses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UShaditComing Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 That certainly explains the 40+% recidivist rate.....because we trust professionals.... Considering that you are not adding anything of value to this conversation why not just follow along with your finger and you might learn something from others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 Thank you and my work is done with you because I have you thinking now. All that's left to do is to determine how well Canada's approach is working and to find ways of making it work better. My approqch is both ideological and sensible but never knee-jerk. Knee-jerk is what I accused you of before you came to your senses. I believe in mandatory minimim sentences and reverse onus parole for all violent crime, not only gun related violent crime. I believe that the recidivism rate is a way too high and it needs to be reduced. If we have to keep cnvicted criminals in jail longer and at more expense to protect the rest of society, I am very very happy to do so. Is that what you mean? Thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 (edited) Considering that you are not adding anything of value to this conversation why not just follow along with your finger and you might learn something from others. He added a statistic that strikes to the very heart of your argument, that rehabilitation is better than jail. Is it? Is it really? You can, of course, choose to ignore it, but it does not go very far in advancing your argument for others to see here. By evading and not facing facts, you will have convinced the many voters in Canada who read this site that mandatory minimum sentences are indeed valid and thereby helping Harper achieve his majority so he can sweep to power an unleash the true evil of his agenda. You don't want that do you? Edited March 7, 2008 by White Doors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UShaditComing Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 He added a statistic that strikes to the very heart of your argument, that rehabilitation is better than jail.Is it? Is it really? And that convinced me that you don't understand either. It's not a question of 'either or'. It's a question of both applied in a sensible manner which is devoid of the silly emotional garbage which Harper's gang depend on so much. I suspect that for you too it's as simple as hearing of a sex offender reoffending after being released on parole and that seals the whole issue for you. Just what Harper needs for his program of taking the quick and easy way out and letting our children and grandchildren pay for it all later. While responsible Canadians look to the US to see what has been proven to not work. You're both a waste of my time. Neither of you are adding anything of substance because you are both more interested in arguing an agenda which you can't support yourselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 And that convinced me that you don't understand either. It's not a question of 'either or'. It's a question of both applied in a sensible manner which is devoid of the silly emotional garbage which Harper's gang depend on so much. I suspect that for you too it's as simple as hearing of a sex offender reoffending after being released on parole and that seals the whole issue for you. Just what Harper needs for his program of taking the quick and easy way out and letting our children and grandchildren pay for it all later. While responsible Canadians look to the US to see what has been proven to not work. You're both a waste of my time. Neither of you are adding anything of substance because you are both more interested in arguing an agenda which you can't support yourselves. translation: We have statistics on our side and you do not so you are taking your ball and going home. This is entirely your right, but you just added another seat for Mr Harper in his march to majority status and his evil agenda. Shame on you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UShaditComing Posted March 7, 2008 Report Share Posted March 7, 2008 translation: We have statistics on our side and you do not so you are taking your ball and going home.This is entirely your right, but you just added another seat for Mr Harper in his march to majority status and his evil agenda. Shame on you! You're not even smart enough to understand that I don't dispute any of your statistics. I may or my not but I haven't even bothered to look at them yet because I took your word on them being correct. Have a nice day if that's possible for your ilk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trex Posted March 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 A high percentage of convicts are not in jail for violent crimes. Mandatory minimums means the judge can't decide what the sentence should be even if in the particular case, it would be worse for society if the offender was put in jail. For example if the offender was a person who otherwise made positive contributions to society, a volunteer, charity worker or someone whom people need, parent, etc. Some fine people, distinguished physicists and doctors, are drug addicted to opiates. But their work is not impaired by a private problem they have, addiction. If they are arrested for it, under mandatory minimums they must go to jail, carte blanche. Could be the greatest person in the world in every other way. Can someone explain Why they should go to jail, in any case? Second the privatized prison industry commands billions of dollars, and jobs in support industries around it. There is a possible conflict of interest when it is a "growth" industry, just as shareholders demand increasing growth in any business, to make profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 Can someone explain Why they should go to jail, in any case?When you explain to us which countries you consider so-called dicatatorships. Coward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UShaditComing Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 A high percentage of convicts are not in jail for violent crimes. Mandatory minimums means the judge can't decide what the sentence should be even if in the particular case, it would be worse for society if the offender was put in jail. For example if the offender was a person who otherwise made positive contributions to society, a volunteer, charity worker or someone whom people need, parent, etc.Some fine people, distinguished physicists and doctors, are drug addicted to opiates. But their work is not impaired by a private problem they have, addiction. If they are arrested for it, under mandatory minimums they must go to jail, carte blanche. Could be the greatest person in the world in every other way. Can someone explain Why they should go to jail, in any case? Second the privatized prison industry commands billions of dollars, and jobs in support industries around it. There is a possible conflict of interest when it is a "growth" industry, just as shareholders demand increasing growth in any business, to make profit. Now there is one intelligent approach to the problem and the question! Of course jail is not the answer in most cases and it only turns out a hardened criminal in a lot of cases. It could be 40% if you believe the stats put forward by the two that I have been arguing with. Fines are a great way to deal with a lot of crime and once a person learns his lesson with a fine then he probably won't reoffend in a lot of cases. It sure worked for me when I got caught not wearing a seatbelt! Maybe it's because some people need to hate so much that they can't bear the thought of somebody not getting a good licking for a minor crime. They're the ones who spank their children I bet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UShaditComing Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 When you explain to us which countries you consider so-called dicatatorships. Coward. And then there's Shady who can only grunt out insults. It wasn't necessary to read his signature to see that he's a Raygun lover. grunt, grunt Shady. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trex Posted March 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 Maybe it's because some people need to hate so much that they can't bear the thought of somebody not getting a good licking for a minor crime. They're the ones who spank their children I bet. Or maybe they just want to have a useless argument. I don't come here for that, but to exchange ideas with other people who have some. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trex Posted March 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 It wasn't necessary to read his signature to see that he's a Raygun lover. I wouldn't know, have never read it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 And then there's Shady who can only grunt out insults. It wasn't necessary to read his signature to see that he's a Raygun lover. grunt, grunt Shady I don't grunt out insults. I've asked trex to defend his ideas, and he's refused. It tells you a lot about a person who can't or won't defend his own arguments.He's made the claim that America is as bad, or worse then so-called dictatorships. I would just like to know which countries he considers so-called dictatorships. Is that such a ridiculous question to ask? I think not. As for my signature. I've referenced both Ronald Reagan (proper spelling) and John F. Kennedy. And I certainly won't apologize for admiring them both, and recognizing their many achievements. Grunt, grunt UShaditComing. Grunt out some more insults. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrGreenthumb Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 And then there's Shady who can only grunt out insults. It wasn't necessary to read his signature to see that he's a Raygun lover. grunt, grunt Shady. Hey dude after reading this thread I'm kinda sorry for my rude comment in the other thread, it seems we share a common dislike of Conservative policies. I couldn't help myself, you kinda walked right into that one, not a lot of opportunities that ripe in life heheh. It was really just in fun, distasteful, well yeah, but kinda funny you gotta admit?No hard feelings ok? Anyways, just wanted to agree that mandatory minimums and 3 strikes laws are terrible mistakes. Ruin good people's lives, and the lives of their loved ones. Also I think pretty much everything Harper has done and ever will do damages Canada. Everyday we leave him in charge of our country our precious freedoms will slip away. We need to oust this wannabe dictator and fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UShaditComing Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 Hey dude after reading this thread I'm kinda sorry for my rude comment in the other thread, it seems we share a common dislike of Conservative policies. I couldn't help myself, you kinda walked right into that one, not a lot of opportunities that ripe in life heheh. It was really just in fun, distasteful, well yeah, but kinda funny you gotta admit?No hard feelings ok? Anyways, just wanted to agree that mandatory minimums and 3 strikes laws are terrible mistakes. Ruin good people's lives, and the lives of their loved ones. Also I think pretty much everything Harper has done and ever will do damages Canada. Everyday we leave him in charge of our country our precious freedoms will slip away. We need to oust this wannabe dictator and fast. Refresh my memory greenthumb, are you the kid who wants to take children away from their parents if the parents get in financial difficulty? Among a few other unsavory ideas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 Everyday we leave him in charge of our country our precious freedoms will slip away. We need to oust this wannabe dictator and fast.Very nice hyperbole. Name one "precious" freedom that has slipped away since he's been in office. And just because you may disagree with him politically, doesn't mean he's a wannabe dictator. You do a disservice to legitimate dialogue in forums such as these when you use that type of intellectual dishonesty.Oh, and trex, I'm still waiting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UShaditComing Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 Greenthumb is right on that one Shady. There's lots to jump on the kid for but when he gets it right it makes you look foolish when you question him. Of course many freedom have slipped away and if he's worth his salt he should be able to name you a few. Then you will be once again proven wrong by a foolish kid. Now show us what you're made of Greenthumb so I won't have to do it for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trex Posted March 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 ??? Waiting for what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 You've got to be a conservative American and probably even a libertarian because you are for less freedom and higher taxes and you think you are the opposite. Duhhhhh! Talking to Americans! Is everything US bad, Canada good? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
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.