Federal prison overhaul plan

[eyeball]

If the plants are in the ground it is cultivation, and the weight is irrelevant, and they go by the number of plants. Any lawyer would destroy any prosecutor that tried to estimate finished weight to be used in the charges. There has to be dried product for the weight to matter.

I realize what you're saying, I'm just trying to follow some of the illogical things we're hearing to their logical conclusions.

The article you posted just stated the estimate of the cop,(outrageously as mentioned) nothing about charges relating to that weight

No it didn't...but its hard not to wonder how much of the same sort of outragous hyperbolic thought has gone into this prison overhaul plan. Lots according to expert criminologists who have panned the idea. That's not surprising, given the sorts of politicians that are pushing for it and things like C-51. Note how often these routinely quote police and use the first hand information police provide 'from the front lines' so to speak, to backdrop and bolster their demands to perpetually crack down and get tough.

The old 'carnage on the streets' shtick police use to describe the violence they see on the street comes to mind. What about the 50% of their calls that are to quell domestic disputes, most of them fuelled by alcohol? We don't hear too much from the usual suspects about that it seems. It'll be interesting to see how fast our prisons start filling up with the people that are arrested in these cases under a mandatory sentencing regime.

[Argus]

To get this back on the actual subject - there have already been innumerable discussions about the wisdom of criminalizing or legalizing drugs - here is what I would do if I had control of our prison system.

First, I think we can all agree the present system does not work except insofar as it keeps criminals away from the general population. It does very little to reform them because it's a harsh, violent society in there, and people who spend time in a harsh, violent society tend to become - well, yeah.

I think it would help us if we could do something about the crime rate - in prison.

So here's how Argus' own private prison works.

For most prisoners - ie, not the crazy violent ones.

Ten rooms in a square surrounding a kitchen. Ten men living together, pre-assessed so that you don't get, for example, nazis and blacks in the same block. High tech surveilance. Every prisoner implanted with a small, electronic device which allows them to both be monitored as to location and allows them to access that block. Camera in the block. Cells which are modest but comfortable, with private bathrooms including showers.

Each floor has its own rec room/TV room. Again, access to the floors is controlled, all public spaces monitored by CCTV.

Everything in the facility would be privilaged, including residing there. You have to earn those privilages with hard work and effort, and proper behaviour, including respectful behaviour to staff. Act up, and you lose privilages, such as access to TV, such as TVs in your cell, computers, video games, magazines, exercise, whatever. It all comes with the cost of proper behaviour. Act up and you get tossed into another building which is nothing but long rows of shared cells with bunks.

Outside the residences would be a sort of a community area, like a small town in the open with parks, shops, bars and restaurants, work places and educational and treatment facilities. You work, you live in your residence, you go to restaurants and shop for goods with the money you earn. All of this is only if your behaviour is acceptable. I would also like to see female prisons incorporated into this. They have a separate residence, but they can go into the same common, public area with the men, work alongside them, go to restaurants with them, etcetera. In effect, this would be a community - but of people not allowed back into the greater community.

How would all this be paid for? I'm not sure how the economics would operate. The prisoners labour would pay for some of it. Yes, they'd be paid, but very little. In fact, we might even have them pay for their rooms and such, encouraging them to learn better skills in order to get better jobs there and thus afford nicer, larger rooms.

What about punishment?

Ten hour work days to start. Don't think this is onerous. Much of the world works longer hours, and we used to work 12 hours or more a day. They MUST work, must learn skills, must take remedial education, must take job/drug rehab and psychological help - which MUST be available to them all.

And this is not a place for serial rapists, the habitually violent, and killers, at least not at the start. Those people would go to a work farm or mine in the north. Hard labour is what I prescribe for them for at least some years. In time, perhaps, they can earn a trip to one of these prisons to finish their sentence, depending on their behaviour.

Parole would be an exception, not the rule, and only available to those who have demonstrated that they have corrected their attitude on life.

[eyeball]

First, I think we can all agree the present system does not work except insofar as it keeps criminals away from the general population. It does very little to reform them because it's a harsh, violent society in there, and people who spend time in a harsh, violent society tend to become - well, yeah.

I think it would help us if we could do something about the crime rate - in prison.

What a refreshing change of viewpoint. If Argus can be rehabilitated anyone can.

So here's how Argus' own private prison works.

Whatever...just keep the overarching moralistic vengence out of it and things will be infinitely better than what we've got.

Of course a more civilized prison system wil cost more money so you better make sure you are not maintaining stupid laws that threaten to overload it with people for no good reason. That means less morality and more science in the case of the most ineffective laws on our books. Ignore these and you'll do nothing but breed the sort of contempt and cynicism that rejects justice in favour of vengence and we'll be right back to square 1.

I still say our policies towards substance use, legal and illegal, are causing the most and worst violence that's afflicting our society and bedeviling our justice system and these need to be thoroughly overhauled from bottom to top and back again.

[Mr.Canada]

We haven't built a new one in over a decade 1997 afaik was the last one we built. Not to be confused with the Superjails which are DC and CC time but Federal Pens for the most dangerous and violent cons. We need to start building them now.

Big Prisons take about 5 years to build so we need to start now.

Our two most heavily populated Pens in Kingston are Joyceville and Collins Bay which happen to be over filled now. This will only get worse in 5 years time adding to the already crowded Pens we have now.

Plus we are allowing 250,000 immigrants a year into Canada, by that alone Canada's population will grow by 1.25 million in 5 years much of those people settling in Ontario.

Instead of setting criminals free because we don't have room to incarcerate them lets build more Pens and lock them up where they belong.

We need to start building more prisons now in order to head off a disaster waiting to happen. Some would say it has already begun to happen.

Setting violent offender free on bail isn't a good option. We need to keep these perps off the street and away from the law abiding citizens.

As far as DC goes the building of the New Toronto DC in Mimico is a good start. It's going to look like Metro East and house a lot of criminals waiting trial while closing down the Don Jail. This is a step in the right directing as the new NTDC will be much bigger and will have a much higher capacity then the Don currently has. Which is over crowded and often is 3 to a cell.

Privileges should be earned not given. Many of you have zero experience on what goes on inside of a prison and only know what you read in the papers and see on tv. Let me tell you that these guys and girls in there are plotting everyday on how and what to get away with. How to get dope in, which officers can they exploit to be mules(a mule is a guard who is paid outside to bring stuff inside, it happens all the time don't kid yourselves). Who will control what and when.

Not to mention the amount of violence that occurs daily, much of it race related. No matter what the media tries to say about all the races getting along out on the street, the prison system is divided upon racial lines, people stick with their own race in prisons, that's reality and theirs violence along those lines.

I think many people need to wake up and go take a tour of a prison and see what's going before deciding they know best based on partisanship. Lots of these guys don't give a crap about politics and only want to get away with more.

Keep that in mind before you set these animals free to wreak havoc on the rest of society.

Edited October 3, 2009 by Mr.Canada

[eyeball]

Big Prisons take about 5 years to build so we need to start now.

Why? This makes no sense when crime, including violent crime, is going down.

The only reason for doing so appears to be entirely ideologically and politically driven for the prupose of garnering votes and placating the more virulent aspect of the Conservatives base of support.

[Mr.Canada]

Why? This makes no sense when crime, including violent crime, is going down.

The only reason for doing so appears to be entirely ideologically and politically driven for the prupose of garnering votes and placating the more virulent aspect of the Conservatives base of support.

The West, The East and the Don Jails have been stacked with 3 to a cell sometimes 4 to a cell for the last 15 years maybe longer, go tell the administrators that crime is going down. Crime may be going down per capita but the numbers of actual criminals are going up as our population is going up. Even that is not a great tool to use eyeball as if you look at the trends it goes up and down all the time. A graph would look like a mountain range and not a steady decline.

[Keepitsimple]

Here's an article by Lorrie Goldstein that appeared the the Toronto Sun this morning (my bold):

Criminals should earn their parole

The next time you hear a professor, prisoners' rights advocate, defence lawyer, opposition MP, or journalist tell you Canada's justice system is too tough on criminals, remember this.

Suppose someone is convicted of a violent crime such as sexual assault or manslaughter and the judge sentences him to nine years in prison.

As Sun Media legal affairs columnist Alan Shanoff has explained it, here's what a "nine-year" sentence typically means in Canada. It means unsupervised temporary absences after 18 months, day parole in a halfway house after two-and-a-half years, full parole after three years and, at most, statutory release after six. Statutory release automatically reduces most prison sentences by a third, save for murderers and those designated as dangerous offenders.

In addition, if the accused was denied bail, judges usually take two days off the sentence upon conviction for every day spent in custody before trial. (A bill before the Senate would reduce this to one day in most cases, with a maximum of 1.5.)

Two years ago, a federal task force report titled "A Roadmap to Strengthening Public Safety" recommended the federal government end statutory release, which has a failure rate of 40%, and replace it with "earned parole."

"Today, an offender working hard at rehabilitation is often treated no differently than an offender who is seeking only to continue his criminal lifestyle," the report concluded. Many violent criminals "have no interest in rehabilitation and are content to 'wait out' the system, until they reach statutory release ... The panel believes that any arbitrary release that is not made based on rehabilitation is counter-productive and, when aggravated by shorter sentences, reduces public safety."

It also recommended increased spending on rehabilitation and new prison construction to alleviate dangerous overcrowding in outdated facilities. Despite this, all the usual suspects have attacked earned parole ever since as an assault on prisoners' rights.

This is absurd. Earned parole would be a first step in restoring Canadians' faith in their justice system. PM Stephen Harper should implement it, although realistically, it would take a Conservative majority government to do so.

Link: http://www.torontosun.com/comment/editoria...267341-sun.html

Edited October 3, 2009 by Keepitsimple

[Mr.Canada]

Good article KIS and very true. The problem is that the left like to set criminals free for some reason and don't believe in keeping citizens safe. So I agree it will take a Tory majority in order to save the Canadian public from these animals.

[noahbody]

Did YOU read the damn thing you suggested people read? Sheesh...

Sorry, you can grow an extra plant, 200 in total for personal use without facing a mandatory jail term. If you get busted, just be sure to say it is for personal use.

Why would the judge ask to see the evidence? You said that confiscating pot is no different than confiscating alcohol from underage people, you said this in response to my pointing out that the cops destroyed confiscated pot plants.

The judge would need to see evidence of trafficking and there would be evidence of the number of plants. Confiscating pot grown for personal use (under 201 plants) would be done the way it's always been done. If you're being charged with having over 201 plants you can bet they'll keep the evidence. What's so hard to understand?

[Mr.Canada]

Breaking the Law is breaking the law (every time I read this I think of Judas Priest) and it cannot be ignored. Until the laws change they are what they are dal with it. If someone breaks the law in Canada we need to set an example of them and lock them up for a good long time. We don't need any more victims. One repeat offender hurting someone else while out on bail is one too many.

The time to get tough on crime is now, the man to do it is our very own PM, Stephen Harper. We cannot trust the Liberals to do it, they don't even have a policy or a plan yet even though we've been waiting for four years.

[jdobbin]

Breaking the Law is breaking the law (every time I read this I think of Judas Priest) and it cannot be ignored.

You mean how the election law was broken? Or was that bending it to one's own need?

Edited October 4, 2009 by jdobbin

[Mr.Canada]

You mean how the election law was broken? Or was that bending it to one's own need?

What election law?

[Keepitsimple]

What a refreshing change of viewpoint. If Argus can be rehabilitated anyone can.

Whatever...just keep the overarching moralistic vengence out of it and things will be infinitely better than what we've got.

The moralistic vengence that you speak of only applies to violent criminals - those that have snubbed their nose at society and civility. The wooly-headed Left would have you believe that Conservatives want longer sentences for everyone.....and they conveniently ignore that money is also planned to be invested in rehabilitation. Like Argus tries to point out - have different "tiers" of incarceration where people can earn their way to a less constrained environment and at the same time, learn that hard work pays dividends. It's simple psychology - when people are given things for nothing - whether you're bad or good, they don't learn anything......make them earn it and there is a value attached to it.

[Guest TrueMetis]

Breaking the Law is breaking the law (every time I read this I think of Judas Priest) and it cannot be ignored. Until the laws change they are what they are dal with it. If someone breaks the law in Canada we need to set an example of them and lock them up for a good long time. We don't need any more victims. One repeat offender hurting someone else while out on bail is one too many.

The time to get tough on crime is now, the man to do it is our very own PM, Stephen Harper. We cannot trust the Liberals to do it, they don't even have a policy or a plan yet even though we've been waiting for four years.

and Breaking a stupid law is breaking a stupid law. Most people don't seem to care when you do that.

[Sir Bandelot]

Violent crime in 15-year decline: report

Violent crime has steadily declined in Canada over 15 years, says a new report.

The report's figures show a 12 per cent overall decline in crime since 1991.

The Vital Signs annual report, released Tuesday, compiles statistics on a variety of subjects in an attempt to demonstrate the health and well-being of communities across the country. Its figures are based on research collected from community foundations in 16 participating communities.

The report says the largest declines have been in violent crimes, such as homicide, attempted murder, assault, sexual offenses, abduction and robbery.

Since 1991, homicides have dropped 32 per cent, sexual offenses by 36.4 per cent and abductions by 64.5 per cent, according to the report.

Alright, now that we know that (and some of us have known about it for some time) I would like to ask why the urgent need for mandaTory minimums?

And why so hot to remove the gun registry? Its existence seems to coincide nicely with the drop in violent crimes...

I guess that gun licensing is just not considered mandaTory, but jail for non-violent offenders is...

[Mr.Canada]

If crime is really declining as you claim how is it our prisons are over crowded?

Truth is yes crime per capita is decreasing for some crimes but the raw numbers are going up because our population is increasing.

[noahbody]

Violent crime has steadily declined in Canada over 15 years, says a new report.

Alright, now that we know that (and some of us have known about it for some time) I would like to ask why the urgent need for mandaTory minimums?

Here's the reason for the decrease:

"The overall crime rate in Canada rose steadily from 1960 to 1990, it peaked in 1990/91, then started dropping throughout the 1990s. These fluctuations are attributed in part to the "baby-boom" and "baby-boom echo", where the proportion of Canadians between the ages of 15 and 25 was very high for many years before it dropped sharply -- by 18% -- in 1991. Despite decreases in both the proportion of teens aged 15 to 19 and crime rates in the 1990s, overall rates of violent crime are still three times higher than they were in the 1960s, and rates of property crime are twice as high."

Here's what's important:

A report on youth crime released by the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics in May 2008 (for 2006) stated that while overall crime rates have dropped, youth violent crimes have increased 30 per cent since 1991.

http://www.thefreeradical.ca/Violent_crime...tics_Canada.htm

Gang violence is the growing problem in Canada. What mandatory minimums do is provide a clear and consistent deterrent to committing violence. If I was running a gang "you'll be out in no time" would be a big part of my sales program.

And why so hot to remove the gun registry? Its existence seems to coincide nicely with the drop in violent crimes...

It's impossible for the long gun registry to have any impact on violent crime. Only 2% of homicides are committed with registered long guns.

[Sir Bandelot]

What mandatory minimums do is provide a clear and consistent deterrent to committing violence.

That all depends on what statistics you want to quote. Canada is pretty new at this game of mandaTory minimums, so for some information we could look at the United States. I've looked it up before... lots of people in jail, lots of violence. No clear corellation that shows mandaTory minimums work at all. But it does appear to create lots of jobs for the prison industry, so it's not completely a bad thing...

Edited October 6, 2009 by Sir Bandelot

[Oleg Bach]

Federal prisons are storage facilities much like our welfare system - those that design these facilities don't have a clue on how to reform their wards...and frankly don't care.

[Mr.Canada]

Bottom line is being in society is a privilege, if you break the law you lose that privilege and are removed from society.

We have tried it the liberal way and letting many violent people out on bail and while out on bail or parole have killed more citizens. The system is broken and is being taken advantage of. We need to end that. The majority of Canadians don't care if these people are rehabilitated or not they just want them off the streets where they cannot hurt anyone else. Canadians would vote for more prisons being built.

If the next election is about crime I don't think the Liberals have a chance, we've been living with their system of justice since the 1970's and people are tired of criminals walking nearly free and with no restraint or severity in sentencing shown. Canadians are tired of violent criminals getting out on bail or parole or mandatory release dates after 2/3 's and parole eligibility after 1/6 th. Canada is sick of it.

[DrGreenthumb]

Intent isn't triggered by amount, unless that amount is over 200 plants.

This is no different than the cops confiscating alcohol from underage people. Pot is still illegal so plants will be confiscated. But it is clear that you won't go for prison if you are growing more than a few plants for yourself.

That's bullshit. If you are growing 6 plants for yourself, automatic jail. ( an average liscened medical user in Canada is liscenced to grow 25 plants for their personal use)In fact they can charge with "intent" to traffick with only 1 plant. Passing a joint is legally considered "trafficking". Marc Emery was sentenced to 9 months in a sakatoon jail for that EXACT offence, under the the old laws. Anyone who thinks that the cops are not going to add the trafficking charge onto anyone possessing more than a gram or two is a moron. The cops almost always add the trafficking charge as it is so that people will make a deal and plead guilty to the lesser charge of possession.

Indoor pot plants rarely produce more than 1.5 ounces. That is a far friggen cry from 2lbs. Cops regularly lie and estimate the value of their busts from 1000-1500 dollars per plant. Lying pigs.

How can you tell when a cop(or a conservative) is lying?

Their lips are moving.

Edited October 7, 2009 by DrGreenthumb

[Guest TrueMetis]

That's bullshit. If you are growing 6 plants for yourself, automatic jail. ( an average liscened medical user in Canada is liscenced to grow 25 plants for their personal use)In fact they can charge with "intent" to traffick with only 1 plant. Passing a joint is legally considered "trafficking". Marc Emery was sentenced to 9 months in a sakatoon jail for that EXACT offence, under the the old laws. Anyone who thinks that the cops are not going to add the trafficking charge onto anyone possessing more than a gram or two is a moron. The cops almost always add the trafficking charge as it is so that people will make a deal and plead guilty to the lesser charge of possession.

Indoor pot plants rarely produce more than 1.5 ounces. That is a far friggen cry from 2lbs. Cops regularly lie and estimate the value of their busts from 1000-1500 dollars per plant. Lying pigs.

How can you tell when a cop(or a conservative) is lying?

Their lips are moving.

There are some dickwad cops out there. Cops were I live at the most will take it away and usually ignore it.

[Mr.Canada]

That's bullshit. If you are growing 6 plants for yourself, automatic jail. ( an average liscened medical user in Canada is liscenced to grow 25 plants for their personal use)In fact they can charge with "intent" to traffick with only 1 plant. Passing a joint is legally considered "trafficking". Marc Emery was sentenced to 9 months in a sakatoon jail for that EXACT offence, under the the old laws. Anyone who thinks that the cops are not going to add the trafficking charge onto anyone possessing more than a gram or two is a moron. The cops almost always add the trafficking charge as it is so that people will make a deal and plead guilty to the lesser charge of possession.

Indoor pot plants rarely produce more than 1.5 ounces. That is a far friggen cry from 2lbs. Cops regularly lie and estimate the value of their busts from 1000-1500 dollars per plant. Lying pigs.

How can you tell when a cop(or a conservative) is lying?

Their lips are moving.

This isn't true at all. I've known people who have been caught with a dime or two and just get it taken away, no jail time or even charges. This was when I was a teenager. I still know people that smoke pot but they're adults and don't get pulled over by the police or put themselves into situations where they would have contact with police. Nor do they dress in a manner that would arouse suspicion from the police.

Many people bring it on themselves. If someone dresses and carries themselves a certain way what do they expect imo.

Your post is pure hyperbole.

Marc Emery made it a point to make an ass of himself and try to embarrass the legal system at every opportunity so no wonder they were hard on him. He could've just went about minding his own business and no one would have cared but he had to make a political statement. He gets what he has coming to him.

[Sir Bandelot]

We have tried it the liberal way and letting many violent people out on bail and while out on bail or parole have killed more citizens. The system is broken and is being taken advantage of. We need to end that. The majority of Canadians don't care if these people are rehabilitated or not they just want them off the streets where they cannot hurt anyone else. Canadians would vote for more prisons being built.

If the next election is about crime I don't think the Liberals have a chance, we've been living with their system of justice since the 1970's and people are tired of criminals walking nearly free and with no restraint or severity in sentencing shown. Canadians are tired of violent criminals getting out on bail or parole or mandatory release dates after 2/3 's and parole eligibility after 1/6 th. Canada is sick of it.

How about some real facts, instead of just your unsubstantiated personal opinion of the problem. Earlier I posted a link that pulls the rug out from under every statement you make here. Crime levels decreased, and it was under the Liberal government. Yet you just come along and spout off junk as if it were the gospel. So how about some real facts to back up your statements, refute the claims in the latest report. Or do you just want to play the antagonist, for fun and amusement.

And your brilliant mathematical deduction that, while crime rates are going down, the number of crimes is increasing because the population is increasing leaves me speechless... not only cans't Johnny read, he cans't add too good neither

[Visionseeker]

If crime is really declining as you claim how is it our prisons are over crowded?

Truth is yes crime per capita is decreasing for some crimes but the raw numbers are going up because our population is increasing.

Let me guess, you failed math.

Our prisons are overcrowded because of simple demographics, and our ridiculous prohibitionist stance on narcotics which doubly motives addicts and immediate suppliers to engage in illegal acts.

While our population is increasing, the age group most apt towards committing crime (14 to 25) is significantly diminishing as a proportion of the population. Able-walkers make for terrible get-away vehicles.

"Raw" numbers are declining because our population is aging beyond the crime prone.