Toronto gun violence leaves two dead

[M.Dancer]

Exclusive? We're hardly that. Most Canadians seem to think mass immigration is normal, but throughout the world, with very few exceptions, you simply cannot immigrate into another country and become a citizen. Most western nations accept very few immigrants. Some accept none, other than those who are ethnic members of that nationality.

Quite true. Only advanced nations allow immigration.

[Smallc]

The death penalty should be reinstated for heinous crimes where there is either DNA evidence or three eyewitnesses. An eye for an eye, you kill one of our citizens, we'll kill you back should read the sign upon entering the country. That would get revenge and closure to the victims family and would free up some jail space for more convicts since there is never a shortage of people willing to commit crime.

I would like to see a referendum on that. Put it to a vote see if it'll pass. I say it would it would be as close as the yes/no Quebec one was as manyt Canadians are in favor of capital punishment.

Justice isn't about revenge. It's about...well... justice. Just as it should be. Capital punishment has been abolished. Get used to it, because its not coming back. Countries are moving away from that kind of thing.

Oh, and don't you know? An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.

[Kitch]

Exclusive? We're hardly that. Most Canadians seem to think mass immigration is normal, but throughout the world, with very few exceptions, you simply cannot immigrate into another country and become a citizen. Most western nations accept very few immigrants. Some accept none, other than those who are ethnic members of that nationality.

Oh I know that we're not currently an exclusive club. I'm saying that I don't want Canada to become so. And I don't think that our actions/morals should be based on what other countries do/believe. We should base them on what we (insofar as "we" can agree) think is right.

[cybercoma]

The death penalty should be reinstated for heinous crimes ... That would get revenge and closure to the victims family

Is revenge actually closure?

[cybercoma]

Why not? Immigration is not a charity program. We're more than generous enough with our absurd refugee system. We certainly should not be taking in immigrants for any other reason than what will help Canada.

I think kitch wasn't recognizing the difference between the refugee system and the immigration system. Regardless, if an immigrant can support themselves in our society, what reason would you deny their application? Should we deport people born here that do nothing to help Canada?

[Argus]

Quite true. Only advanced nations allow immigration.

You are saying Switzerland and Japan are not advanced nations?

Edited October 29, 2008 by Argus

[Argus]

I think kitch wasn't recognizing the difference between the refugee system and the immigration system. Regardless, if an immigrant can support themselves in our society, what reason would you deny their application? Should we deport people born here that do nothing to help Canada?

What reason? How about the fact most of them come from a society in which living standards are absymally bad by our terms. Thus they're willing to live in miserable conditions here and accept jobs which pay very, very poorly, by our terms. Bring in legions of such people and you'll see wages dropping all across the board, followed shortly therafter by living conditions plummeting and the expansion of vast slums.

Business will be happy. It'll get its workers at fifty cents an hour. The newcomers will be happy. That's still ten times what they earn now. And their one room shack now has running water. Woohoo! Luxury! But I don't think those of us who grew up here would appreciate the changes.

I don't know how you earn your living, but I guarantee you there are people on this planet who can do it just as well, and more than willing to take it for a quarter of what you get paid.

Edited October 29, 2008 by Argus

[Mr.Canada]

Is revenge actually closure?

Ask a victim's family of a murder. If you haven't had a family member murdered I doubt you're an authority on the subject. Touchy feely hug a thug ideals that want to free murderers so we don't overcrowd these animals don't cut it, sorry.

[Mr.Canada]

Justice isn't about revenge. It's about...well... justice. Just as it should be. Capital punishment has been abolished. Get used to it, because its not coming back. Countries are moving away from that kind of thing.

Oh, and don't you know? An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.

So you don't want capital punishment, you don't want more prisons, you don't want people in prison cause it's crowded. What exactly do you want to do?

Set murderers free? You do not seem to want anything else.

Edited October 29, 2008 by Mr.Canada

[Mr.Canada]

I think kitch wasn't recognizing the difference between the refugee system and the immigration system. Regardless, if an immigrant can support themselves in our society, what reason would you deny their application? Should we deport people born here that do nothing to help Canada?

We have a lot of Canadians out of work. Why don't we spend our energies on getting them to work first. With immigration remaining high the working wage will not go up as quickly. Which isn't the best thing for Canadians.

[M.Dancer]

We have a lot of Canadians out of work. Why don't we spend our energies on getting them to work first. With immigration remaining high the working wage will not go up as quickly. Which isn't the best thing for Canadians.

Our unemployment rates have been stable for years as new jobs keep on being created. Unemployment is a weak argument as is the desire for inflationary wage increases.

The best way to ensure a wage increase is to be more productive.

[cybercoma]

What reason? How about the fact most of them come from a society in which living standards are absymally bad by our terms. Thus they're willing to live in miserable conditions here and accept jobs which pay very, very poorly, by our terms.

The fact that their "living standards are abysmally bad by our terms" is all the more reason to let them in if they can support themselves. It does not necessarily mean they're willing to live in miserable conditions here. In fact, by moving here it could be argued that they're trying to flee that situation.

Bring in legions of such people and you'll see wages dropping all across the board, followed shortly therafter by living conditions plummeting and the expansion of vast slums.

No one is arguing to bring in legions of immigrants, you're exaggerating claims and like I said above, just because they came from squalor doesn't necessarily mean they're bringing squalor with them.

Business will be happy. It'll get its workers at fifty cents an hour. The newcomers will be happy. That's still ten times what they earn now. And their one room shack now has running water. Woohoo! Luxury! But I don't think those of us who grew up here would appreciate the changes.

Yet another strawman. Businesses can't legally pay people fifty cents an hour and if they're hiring immigrants under the table, what makes you think they'd hire legitimate employees if they didn't have access to abuse immigrants?

Someone born and raised in this country and has had access to the education available here will doubtfully be threatened by immigrants coming here and reducing the value of their jobs.

I don't know how you earn your living, but I guarantee you there are people on this planet who can do it just as well, and more than willing to take it for a quarter of what you get paid.

Maybe there are, but they're not necessarily immigrants. When I lived in Windsor, ON and was working in retail, there were former business owners lined up at a job fair to make $8/hr. These are people that had to close up their shops because of the hit the automotive industry had taken.

You're blaming immigration for reducing wages and destroying your quality of life, but I'd love to see a rational explanation to back it up. I'm not saying you're wrong. I just don't feel your argument is compelling enough to believe.

[cybercoma]

Ask a victim's family of a murder. If you haven't had a family member murdered I doubt you're an authority on the subject. Touchy feely hug a thug ideals that want to free murderers so we don't overcrowd these animals don't cut it, sorry.

So we should not seek an objective rational conclusion. Only persons who've had family murdered should make criminal law? Also, no one said anything about freeing murderers. I said the laws we have are adequate and should be enforced. Considering murder rates have not increased, the laws are adequate. The problem we're faced with is more teens using guns to kill one another. Caught and convicted, of course they should face the penalties; however, instead of just making those penalties more severe--as I said, people don't commit crimes thinking they will be caught, so it won't reduce crime anyway--we should look at ways of actually reducing crime. It's fine that you feel criminals should be punished, but it needs to be taken further and we need to determine how and why people become criminals and what we can do to stop that from happening. It may not be the case for you, but I think that's vastly more important than the selfish gratification of revenge.

[noahbody]

So, it's probably worth while finding ways to educate youth and address poverty to keep them from resorting to this type of violence.

As far as motivations for going gangs in Canada, poverty is likely well down on the list. The need for an identity, peer pressure, poor parenting and a desire for wealth (greed not poverty) are likely the major concerns. Poverty assumes a kid needs to steal a loaf of bread. There is no shortage of help wanted signs at McDonalds and other restaurants in Canada.

[Mr.Canada]

Our unemployment rates have been stable for years as new jobs keep on being created. Unemployment is a weak argument as is the desire for inflationary wage increases.

The best way to ensure a wage increase is to be more productive.

This topic is about why an Ontario judge released a thug 2 times on gun offenses. That's the problem. Liberal judges who are not tough enough on crime.

[M.Dancer]

This topic is about why an Ontario judge released a thug 2 times on gun offenses. That's the problem. Liberal judges who are not tough enough on crime.

We have a lot of Canadians out of work. Why don't we spend our energies on getting them to work first. With immigration remaining high the working wage will not go up as quickly. Which isn't the best thing for Canadians.

1) Then stay on topic

2) make up your mind what you see as the problem

[Mr.Canada]

1) Then stay on topic

2) make up your mind what you see as the problem

You guys are baiting me. I'm taking it. I have to be smarter and stay on topic..you're trying to make the issue immigration. You're trying to deflect blame from your Liberal appointed judges and your Premier and Mayor who cannot do anything about crime.

There answer? Ban handguns. Let's ban murder too. Can we do that?

Edited October 29, 2008 by Mr.Canada

[M.Dancer]

You guys are baiting me. I'm taking it. I have to be smarter and stay on topic..you're trying to make the issue immigration.

You brought up immigration first. In a thread about a white Canadian who murdered someone.

Funny what a few years of unchecked and wide open immigration can do eh?

Go Liberals Go!

I agree you have to be smarter but quite frankly I don't see you as being up to the task.

[Mr.Canada]

A Liberal appointed judge let this guy out of prison twice before on gun charges. This is the third time and he finally killed someone. It's sad really that the white Liberal elite who hold all that guilt still cannot admit when wrong even when it costs lives.

We should be calling for that judges resignation or a complete judicial review by the AG. to ensure that these judges are following the law prudently.

[M.Dancer]

A Liberal appointed judge let this guy out of prison twice before on gun charges.

Cite

[Sir Bandelot]

If someone lets a polecat in the henhouse, they should be held responsible for what happens. At the very least families of murder victims in cases like this one should be able to sue the judge and the legal system for incompetence. Especially if there is no evidence of rehabilitation, and if the perpetrator is considered likely to re-offend.

Lawsuits would only bring in money, I know but it would be one minimal step towards bringing them to accountability for their erroneous decision. We pay taxes for these people to do their jobs, and if they fail in ways that bring severe harm, they should be held liable.

Edited October 29, 2008 by Sir Bandelot

[M.Dancer]

A Liberal appointed judge let this guy out of prison twice before on gun charges. This is the third time and he finally killed someone. It's sad really that the white Liberal elite who hold all that guilt still cannot admit when wrong even when it costs lives.

We should be calling for that judges resignation or a complete judicial review by the AG. to ensure that these judges are following the law prudently.

He wasn't "let out" of prison. He was released because he had served his sentence.

In June of last year -- just 17 months into his sentence-- the parole board was obliged by federal "mandatory release" laws to let Weese move to a halfway house, despite misgivings about his violent past. When he disappeared from the halfway house just three month later and did not resurface until last December, the board did the only thing it could--make him go back to jail for the remainder of his sentence, which ended this past May.

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story....139c4d2&p=2

As well he has only been previoulsy charged once for firearms offences.

[Mr.Canada]

"Take Kyle Weese, 24, who plead guilty to one count of "discharging a firearm with intent to wound, maim or disfigure" and was sentenced to four years, which ended up being a year and a half. Yet for the Feb. 9, 2005, shooting he was originally charged with "aggravated assault, assault with a weapon, possessing a dangerous weapon, careless use of a firearm and carrying a concealed weapon."

Source

WHY ONE CHARGE?

This is what I call outrageous. You think that these sort of decisions are protecting the Canadian public...wow.

Judges need to be held accountable for their decisions and must be made to explain their decisions when it comes back to harm Canadians.

[eyeball]

I don't know how you earn your living, but I guarantee you there are people on this planet who can do it just as well, and more than willing to take it for a quarter of what you get paid.

This makes crime sound even more appealing. Ironically when governments get into the business of suppling the demand for vices the price probably drops by about 3/4's. Funny how that works eh?

All in all though I bet the underworld is a lot less glamourous or lucrative for the Joe Six-guns that work in it imagine it will be when they get drawn to it. I suspect income gaps in the underworld grow even bigger and faster than they do in the rest of the economy.

[cybercoma]

A Liberal appointed judge let this guy out of prison twice before on gun charges. This is the third time and he finally killed someone. It's sad really that the white Liberal elite who hold all that guilt still cannot admit when wrong even when it costs lives.

We should be calling for that judges resignation or a complete judicial review by the AG. to ensure that these judges are following the law prudently.

Do you know the particulars about why this person was let out of prison "twice before on gun charges"? I'd be interested in actually knowing why, rather than dealing in ad hominem attacks on judges.