Oleg Bach Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 To help us find where is the disease, the best thing that murderers can do though is to ask to be executed. You fool - why would you give them what they want - you freak - you want to reward a killer - are you nuts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 The stats don't support your claim that all of them are likely to get out. I think they clearly do. Of the 83, only 17 were denied parole......but even then, they could be given parole at some future date before their 25 years is up - if they're good boys and girls......but perhaps I can re-word my statement and say "those that are granted early eligibility for parole are extremely likely to get out early". 17 were denied parole, 2 had their parole revoked and 2 had their parole revoked and are unlawfully at large. 3 were dead and 1 deported. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 You fool - why would you give them what they want - you freak - you want to reward a killer - are you nuts? Killers don't want to be scapegoats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 certainly... we should anticipate all those clamoring for a return "to the noose" would provide substantive detail supporting said need... supporting detail other than raw emotions and an almost visceral need for retribution . - where are those statistics that show the homicide rate increased when the death penalty was removed? - where are those studies to show the deterrent effect of capital punishment? - how to explain that conviction rates for 1st degree murder have steadily increased in the absence of the death penalty... other than to accept that Canadian juries are more willing to convict in the absence of not being compelled to make a life and death decision. - where are the studies/statistics to rationalize the improper incarceration of those much publicized wrongful convictions... convictions that would have resulted in their execution if the death penalty had not been abolished Firstly, I don't think there are many people clamouring for a return to the noose - they simply want Life to mean Life, even though most would be OK with consideration of parole after 25 years. It doesn't matter whether homicide rates go up or down - nor does it matter if it's much of a deterrent.....it's society's statement of revulsion at killing another human being and having an appropriate punishment. If homicide rates go down, all the better but that's not really the point...there are always going to be bad seeds in society and nothing can prevent that. We do need to do a few things on sentencing because violent crime is becoming more rampant - even more "acceptable" it seems. Over the years, we seem to have put quite a few programs in place to prevent crime and to nip it in the bud. These programs are evident in schools, municipal programs, police community outreach efforts, prison programs & education, and homeless initiatives....yet violent crime is much higher than 25 years ago. Keeping the bad apples off the street for longer periods is an option that at least will help keep society safer from repeat violent offenders. We've been trying a lot of carrots but you still need to be able to whack a bad guy with a big honkin' stick. In 2004, the violent crime rate dropped by 2%, the largestdecline since 1999. The violent crime rate has dropped 10% over the past decade, after having increased for most of the 1960s, ‘70s and ‘80s. The 2004 rate of 946 violent incidents per 100,000 population is 55% higher than the rate 25 years ago. Link: http://www.hamiltonpolice.on.ca/NR/rdonlyr...nCanada2004.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 Violent crime is a very specific and problematic issue. It should be addressed through changing the penal system in such a manner as to provide natural life sentencing in protective confinement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 Violent crime is a very specific and problematic issue. It should be addressed through changing the penal system in such a manner as to provide natural life sentencing in protective confinement. Violent crime is not so specific since it includes homicide, attempted murder, assault, sexual assault, other assaults, other sexual offences, abduction and robbery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 Violent crime is a very specific and problematic issue. It should be addressed through changing the penal system in such a manner as to provide natural life sentencing in protective confinement. That sounds fair. I do like the idea of having these people under the protective wardship of the Queen...where they are in protective confinement - where no harm can come to the offender - the definition of class or grace is - "The underserved mercy of God" - we have to be more godly in these respects and grant protection to those that murder - they are victims also - and should not be killed but held for their own safety and for the publics well being at large - our approach must be in good faith - not just in angry spite - if it's spiteful we are no better than them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 it's society's statement of revulsion at killing another human being and having an appropriate punishment. I think an appropriate punishment should take into account that movies, games and sports have all become more violent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 Violent crime is not so specific since it includes homicide, attempted murder, assault, sexual assault, other assaults, other sexual offences, abduction and robbery. I think that is a nice little group, sums things up nicely! Take that crowd into "protective" custody, and ensure they cannot harm anyone else, ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 I think that is a nice little group, sums things up nicely! Take that crowd into "protective" custody, and ensure they cannot harm anyone else, ever. Half our country's GDP (Gross Domestic Product) will go to it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 Half our country's GDP (Gross Domestic Product) will go to it! I doubt that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 I doubt that. Let's do the math! In Canada, common assault accounting for nearly two-thirds of the 302,000 violent crimes committed in 2004. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 Okay you did the math, but you provided no number as an answer. Are you assuming that these clowns be supplies with swimming pools and spas, like they have at their disposal now? I think you can spend a lot less on them in "protective" custody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted June 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 Of course, those against the death penalty don't really care what the majority wants when it disagrees with their won views but still, the stats might give some good input for discussion. 1998 poll. The most recent polls do not show support for the death penalty and have been posted here before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 Many jurisdictions make deficits illegal. Which ones? A few potholes, huh? How about bridges and overpasses collapsing and leaving commuters crushed? Which ones? Our prisons are bursting at the seams. Which ones? Perhaps the Tories will put up the statistics to back up their stance on things. Perhaps you might want to try the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 Okay you did the math, but you provided no number as an answer. Are you assuming that these clowns be supplies with swimming pools and spas, like they have at their disposal now? I think you can spend a lot less on them in "protective" custody. The main negative effect on GDP growth after one or two generation will come more from forfeited revenues or missed opportunities than from direct wasteful spending on jails. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted June 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) Which ones? Ontario made deficits illegal for hospitals in 2001. Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and New Brunswick made deficits illegal. Only two of those provinces changed their law to ensure they weren't breaking the rule on deficits. Which ones? Quebec. Manitoba. Which ones? All of them. Or are you under the impression they have capacity and staff? Perhaps you might want to try the same thing. Maybe you won't be so obtuse. Many of these things you know already. You think Alberta didn't make deficits illegal? That an overpass bridge in Quebec didn't collapse? That our prisons are not filled to the rafters? Edited June 9, 2009 by jdobbin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 The main negative effect on GDP growth after one or two generation will come more from forfeited revenues or missed opportunities than from direct wasteful spending on jails. Murderers have the most potential to do better if only because they start from very low or far behind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) Murderers have the most potential to do better if only because they start from very low or far behind. If you want to give them another chance at life, join the L.A.R.K. (Liberals Accepting Responsibility for Killers) (link) program. Edited June 9, 2009 by jbg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 With capital punishment, we may well make the symptom disappear without curing the disease. If the disease is murder how does stopping murder constitute cure of a symptom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 If you want to give them another chance at life, join the L.A.R.K. (Liberals Accepting Responsibility for Killers) (link) program. Behave! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 Put the criminals behind bars, that is where they belong. Violent offenders deserve to be in jail and nowhere else. I do not believe anyone has the right to take a life, not me, or any of you, and especially the government. Still, something has to be done to prevent re-offenders, capital punishment and duration of natural life sentences are the only two ways of doing that. So I am left with one viable option, and I believe it to be the only possible means of dealing with the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 Put the criminals behind bars, that is where they belong. Violent offenders deserve to be in jail and nowhere else. I do not believe anyone has the right to take a life, not me, or any of you, and especially the government. Still, something has to be done to prevent re-offenders, capital punishment and duration of natural life sentences are the only two ways of doing that. So I am left with one viable option, and I believe it to be the only possible means of dealing with the problem. The most backwards nations on earth sanction state killing of human beings - we are not quite America - but we could be - we are not quite China, but we could be...and we are not Saudi Arabia - but could be. We are not that far ahead of these more backward nations - why step back and be backwards - we are one of the few paces on earth that still practice Judeo Christian law.................................."You shall not kill - anyone - ever....although Christ did mention tieing a rock around the necks of child abusers and pediphiles - and tossing them into the sea to drown - This is the only hint of Capital punishent in the NT --- but he also says that offenders will wish "the were never born" _ that would be thoughtful confinement - that takes away your life..but lets you breathe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 ALSO: They should let the people know that if you kill ------------you get a type of captial punishment worse than death - that there will be homes for the very aged within prison walls - THAT - you will not be executed but worse - the execution will last the duration of your natural life - this buisness about being out in 5 years after killing someone is silly - five years pass quickly for a young person - IF they knew that if they killed they would leave prison feet first - that would be a deterent. Death is easy - a life time behid bars is not so easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) Yes, just like RCMP officers. You don't seem to trust anyone or anything. Sure I do. But I don't trust those agencies and organizations which have repeatedly proved themselves to be dishonest and/or incompetent. Edited June 9, 2009 by Argus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.