Federal prison overhaul plan

[Jerry J. Fortin]

In my view the Conservatives are headed in the right direction with this. Eliminate early release, the sentence should be fulfilled as a pre-condition to release. The next step is longer and mandatory minimum sentences for violent crimes. The use of a weapon in the commission of a violent offense should carry with it a minimum 10 year sentence, in addition to the sentence for the crime committed.

The next step should be the elimination of the luxuries within the system. Not simply just earning the right to use these luxury facilites, but instead eliminating them out right. The step to follow is of course some program to see that costs of maintaining these prisoners are recouped through some work programs.

One step at a time we can begin to modify the system to actually make the concept of being contained within it a simple and cost effective deterrent.

[M.Dancer]

In my view the Conservatives are headed in the right direction with this. Eliminate early release, the sentence should be fulfilled as a pre-condition to release. The next step is longer and mandatory minimum sentences for violent crimes. The use of a weapon in the commission of a violent offense should carry with it a minimum 10 year sentence, in addition to the sentence for the crime committed.

The next step should be the elimination of the luxuries within the system. Not simply just earning the right to use these luxury facilites, but instead eliminating them out right. The step to follow is of course some program to see that costs of maintaining these prisoners are recouped through some work programs.

One step at a time we can begin to modify the system to actually make the concept of being contained within it a simple and cost effective deterrent.

While I have no problem giving parole to those who deserve it, the practice of concurrent sentences bugs me. If a chap is convicted of murder, and convicted of rape....let him serve each sentence in order...if after 15 years of his life sentence they say, you have been a good prisoner, we commute the rest of this sentence..now serve your 10 years for rape...etc etc..

[nicky10013]

If it was meant to say that "tough justice" can reduce crime, the evidence (to the countrary) can be found right before our eyes: down south, in the system this goverment appears to be aspiring to, they have the highest rate of inprisonment in the entire developed world, and also (and by far, like, in the multiples), the highest rates of violent crime.

BTW, here in Canada our incarceration levels are pretty high already compared to other developed countries (references were posted in another thread).

But rational thinking and common sense was never an obstacle to ideology. And on this agenda, government is acting exclusively on the grounds of ideology and populism.

The US actually has the highest incarceration rate in the entire world head and shoulders above the #2 country China. Ahahaha. You'd think you'd know you have a problem if you lock up more people than an authoritarian country, but nope, they're proud.

Anywho, I noticed the OP's article is from the Vancouver Sun. I saw a similar article but from the Globe and Mail. The jist of the story is that the Conservatives are knowingly using crime as a divisive wedge issue. They've seen all the stats and know all their crime programs don't work, but they also know that tough on crime sounds good and people would rather listen to "lets lock them up forever" by hard nosed politicians than "that doesn't work, here's something that might" by university professors.

Link:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politi...article1300457/

[Argus]

If it was meant to say that "tough justice" can reduce crime, the evidence (to the countrary) can be found right before our eyes: down south,

No, it actually can't. American crime is the result of the boiling pots of underclass filling their inner cities. No matter what they do there is going to be heavy crime there until they address the problem of their massive slums.

The societal causes of our violent crime can mainly be traced to immigration from the third world.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

No, it actually can't. American crime is the result of the boiling pots of underclass filling their inner cities. No matter what they do there is going to be heavy crime there until they address the problem of their massive slums.

The societal causes of our violent crime can mainly be traced to immigration from the third world.

Perhaps more accurately, most crimes are committed by the poor. Raise the living standards and reduce crime.

[eyeball]

No, it actually can't. American crime is the result of the boiling pots of underclass filling their inner cities. No matter what they do there is going to be heavy crime there until they address the problem of their massive slums.

The societal causes of our violent crime can mainly be traced to immigration from the third world.

Nonsense. Most violent crime in our country is alcohol fueled domestic violence. The most common trait amongst incarcerated prisoners in Canada is that they suffer from fetal alcohol syndrome. Ironically the same provincial governments that will be responsible for actually dealing with the real costs of only appearing to get tough and crack down sell the alcohol that's causing most of the real grief.

As for the crime that has galvanized your's and Harper's attention, most of that is caused by the prohibition of pot, something that people, amongst other things, use for morning sickness...go figure.

Edited September 26, 2009 by eyeball

[ba1614]

Yeah SERIOUS drug criminality like growing 1 cannabis plant or passing a joint to your brother while watching a hockey game.(trafficking)

Please cite the last one or two cases of this occuring (charges being laid for passing a joint to their brother while in their own residence).

Thanks.

Indeed, I'd also like to see evidence of people being locked up for a single pot plant as well, let alone locked up in a federal pen.

Edited September 26, 2009 by ba1614

[DrGreenthumb]

In my view the Conservatives are headed in the right direction with this. Eliminate early release, the sentence should be fulfilled as a pre-condition to release. The next step is longer and mandatory minimum sentences for violent crimes. The use of a weapon in the commission of a violent offense should carry with it a minimum 10 year sentence, in addition to the sentence for the crime committed.

The next step should be the elimination of the luxuries within the system. Not simply just earning the right to use these luxury facilites, but instead eliminating them out right. The step to follow is of course some program to see that costs of maintaining these prisoners are recouped through some work programs.

One step at a time we can begin to modify the system to actually make the concept of being contained within it a simple and cost effective deterrent.

I don't think ANYBODY is against mandatory minimums for VIOLENT crimes and victimizers, its the mandaTORY minimums for consensual acts like smoking pot that people are against.

[DrGreenthumb]

Indeed, I'd also like to see evidence of people being locked up for a single pot plant as well, let alone locked up in a federal pen.

Marc Emery was charged with trafficking and locked up for a 9 month sentence for passing a joint to a supporter at a pro-legalization rally. This was under current laws. With a conservative crackdown on peaceful canna-people we can only expect the situation to get worse

[DrGreenthumb]

Indeed, I'd also like to see evidence of people being locked up for a single pot plant as well, let alone locked up in a federal pen.

Thats what conservative bill c-15 intends to change if it passes the senate.

[ba1614]

Marc Emery was charged with trafficking and locked up for a 9 month sentence for passing a joint to a supporter at a pro-legalization rally. This was under current laws. With a conservative crackdown on peaceful canna-people we can only expect the situation to get worse

I was asking for evidence to support anyone incarcerated for even a few plants, or the '1' you claimed had people locked up.

Marc Emery isn't your average individual and has a lengthy arrest record. He rubs his agenda in the faces of police and politicians and doesn't expect trouble when he does something that IS illegal. Whether you agree with it's legality or not, they were waiting for him to screw up, and acted when he did.

I didn't agree with his arrest, and incarceration for this incident, but it is not the norm, far from it. I doubt there has been anyone else incarcerated for the same. This was a witch hunt, nothing more. I'll never understand why he plead guilty to it, but that's another debate.

For the record, I wholeheartedly support legalization, or at the very least de-criminalization, and I'm publicly involved and supportive of the effort to get the legislation passed/changed. Using outlandish claims that people are being jailed for a single joint, or plant, is dishonest and does nothing to further the honest debate on the subject.

[eyeball]

Using outlandish claims that people are being jailed for a single joint, or plant, is dishonest and does nothing to further the honest debate on the subject.

There's two sides engaged in an honest debate on this subject? Where's the evidence of that?

The police just concluded their annual sweep of people's garden's in my region. They say each plant they busted averaged about a kilo and the total haul was worth a couple of million dollars. Apparently much of this would have been used to fund terrorism.

Edited September 27, 2009 by eyeball

[Molly]

I don't think ANYBODY is against mandatory minimums for VIOLENT crimes and victimizers, its the mandaTORY minimums for consensual acts like smoking pot that people are against.

You found one. I'm opposed to mandatory minimum sentences pretty much wherever they appear, because the one and only thing they are guaranteed to produce is miscarriages of justice.

The best, most noteworthy example of it is Robert Lateimer, still serving a sentence 10 X as long as his judge or jury saw as appropriate.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

BC bud fuels the munchies, not terrorism. Its simply foolish to believe otherwise.

[ba1614]

There's two sides engaged in an honest debate on this subject? Where's the evidence of that?

The police just concluded their annual sweep of people's garden's in my region. They say each plant they busted averaged about a kilo and the total haul was worth a couple of million dollars. Apparently much of this would have been used to fund terrorism.

If we don't strive for honest debate we'll never have it. There's lots of dishonesty in the MJ debate, on both sides. That's what frustrates me, and I'll call out those on both sides when they sling BS.

The police have been busy around here as well. Most of the busts I've been hearing on the radio have been in the few hundred plants range. Although I know of a few very small personal grows getting found as well, which I agree is a complete waste of resources.

Plants averaging a Kilo is impressive! I call BS on that claim, like I do for many the police make regarding busts. They always claim waaaaaaay more value than it really is.

This deserves a thread of it's own, and I apologize for getting into this and derailing this one.

[ba1614]

BC bud fuels the munchies, not terrorism. Its simply foolish to believe otherwise.

Agreed

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Legalize it and sell it in government stores. Watch you deficit problems go away. Tax the production and watch you debt problems go away.

Think for just a minute about this people. Dedicated taxation, directed toward deficit and debt.

[ba1614]

Legalize it and sell it in government stores. Watch you deficit problems go away. Tax the production and watch you debt problems go away.

Think for just a minute about this people. Dedicated taxation, directed toward deficit and debt.

You don't need to convince me, legalize, tax, and control it. Combine that with taking it out of the true criminals hands,(big commercial growers), and it's a no brainer, imo.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

You don't need to convince me, legalize, tax, and control it. Combine that with taking it out of the true criminals hands,(big commercial growers), and it's a no brainer, imo.

It is an astute path to take. They need to add prostitution to the list of things to legalize, then sex crimes can be handled in a more fearsome manner.

[Argus]

Nonsense. Most violent crime in our country is alcohol fueled domestic violence.

In a sense, you're correct. I should have added the ongoing difficulties with Canada's aboriginal community.

As for the crime that has galvanized your's and Harper's attention, most of that is caused by the prohibition of pot, something that people, amongst other things, use for morning sickness...go figure.

I've never seen any information, study or evidence to support that conclusion. Certainly drugs are heavily involved, but my understanding is that the harder drugs are responsible for most of the crime.

[Argus]

It is an astute path to take. They need to add prostitution to the list of things to legalize, then sex crimes can be handled in a more fearsome manner.

I wouldn't mind trying legalized prostitution. Actually, technically, it already is lega. It's communicating for the purposes of prostitution which is illegal, along with having any kind of shelter for the activity. It's utterly ridiculous to me that the police will zealously go after a "house of ill repute" so that the girls have to instead ply their trade on street corners and in alleys.

I also wouldn't mind legalizing pot, insofar as we can get away with it without unduly freaking out our puritan neighbours (and major trading partner and main source of tourism). Maybe if we just made it a big fine for being caught in posession... dunno.

[Argus]

Marc Emery was charged with trafficking and locked up for a 9 month sentence for passing a joint to a supporter at a pro-legalization rally. This was under current laws. With a conservative crackdown on peaceful canna-people we can only expect the situation to get worse

Challenge the system and they'll make an example of you. Big surprise there.

I know a number of realatively heavy pot smokers and none has ever had any problem with police.

[Argus]

You found one. I'm opposed to mandatory minimum sentences pretty much wherever they appear, because the one and only thing they are guaranteed to produce is miscarriages of justice.

The best, most noteworthy example of it is Robert Lateimer, still serving a sentence 10 X as long as his judge or jury saw as appropriate.

The popularity of mandatory minimums is directly related to the public's lack of confidence in the judgement of our judges. If we didn't have so many judges who were so bloody weak-minded, and so "forgiving" of violent offenders, and a parole system far too eager to push people out the door, regardless of whether they'd been reformed or not, people might be more willing to leave it up to the judges as to what proper and JUST sentences should be.

To put it another way - if you had more conservative judges you'd have less of a call for mandatory minimums.

[Argus]

Legalize it and sell it in government stores. Watch you deficit problems go away. Tax the production and watch you debt problems go away.

Think for just a minute about this people. Dedicated taxation, directed toward deficit and debt.

I like the idea, but again, the problem is the Americans. The tightened controls on the borders have already had an enormous cost to us in terms of tourism, and in delays and costs for imports/exports. The Americans are bananas about pot. I'm not sure what their reacton would be if we legalized it but I'm willing to bet they'd be really clamping down at the border.

[Argus]

Perhaps more accurately, most crimes are committed by the poor. Raise the living standards and reduce crime.

And if you can figure out how to do that - given our standard of living is already amongst the highest in the world, maybe you ought to be prime minister.

That being said, the standard of living of the people in the Jane-Finch area is several orders of magnitude above that of the vast majority of people on this planet.

Every society, however wealthy, is going to have its losers. The trick is not in simply saying we need to "raise the standard of living" but in figuring out how best to deal with losers.