Jump to content

Tories to crack down on parole for non-violent offenders


Recommended Posts

Society is not getting a justice system, it's getting a vengence system.

Or a results-oriented, rehabilitation system.

We're going to get more criminals too,

If we do a better job of rehabilitating criminals and give those who show no sign of rehabilitation further time to do so, why do you think we'd have more criminals?

and they'll also be a lot tougher and meaner, just like the system and the society that's cultivating them.

If society cares if criminals are rehabilitated, it is meaner?

It's hard to believe that those who have taken the position that our justice system should be about rehabilitation are now taking the position that rehabilitation is vengeance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 205
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Or a results-oriented, rehabilitation system.

If you like good results why are the prison farms I mentioned above being shut down?

If we do a better job of rehabilitating criminals and give those who show no sign of rehabilitation further time to do so, why do you think we'd have more criminals?

I don't believe we will be doing a better job at rehabilitation because I don't think the people pushing this crap give two shits about rehabilitation - they're way more interested in getting elected. As soon as they are the last thing they'll be interested in is spending money on coddling prisoners, which is what many people call rehabilitation.

We'll have more criminals simply because society will become meaner and less forgiving and the tendency of long prison sentences to cause the development of gangs of criminals inside and outside of prisons are guaranteed to produce even harder meaner criminals.

If society cares if criminals are rehabilitated, it is meaner?

No that's not what I said at all. Please don't put your own words in my mouth.

It's hard to believe that those who have taken the position that our justice system should be about rehabilitation are now taking the position that rehabilitation is vengeance.

What position, what rehabilitation? You must be listening to your own words not mine. My position is that we are replacing justice with vengence, not rehabilitation.

Edited by eyeball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simply bringing back the death penalty will fix nothing. Mandatory minimums are a good start in my view. I would suggest that ANY violent offense have an automatic minimum 10 year sentence. Weapons offenses should have a mandatory minimum 10 years sentence. In addition to this I would suggest a minimum 10 year sentence for crimes committed during the tenure of their sentence in custody.

Law breaking needs to be made into a very serious offense to society. The idea of committing an offense MUST be made into something to be avoided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the final analysis, I don't really care about the numbvers. I care about what's fair - and what's just....and I care that the sentences and the way we handle parole reflects society's reprehension toward these crimes.

Right... but you need to fix the law before you do that because it doesnt match societies reprehension for crimes in the first place. Especially where some drugs are concerned.

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/16300

55 per cent of respondents think marijuana should be legalized in the country

A majority thinks pot should be legalized, so cracking down on marijuana "crimes" would not at all be an example of the "sentences and parole matching socieities reprehension".

Im all for taking serious crimes seriously, but the criminal code needs a lot of work before any big crack-down happens. We criminalize a lot of people needlessly in ways society is not on board with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the final analysis, I don't really care about the numbvers. I care about what's fair - and what's just....and I care that the sentences and the way we handle parole reflects society's reprehension toward these crimes.

It seems obvious that the right wing doesn't care about the numbers. I see deficits rising further and further until extremely difficult decisions are made on taxes or cuts.

Van Loan is saying $60 million a year. Experts are saying $200 million a year. And that is with this change only.

It was the PCs who originally created the accelerated paroles because of deficits and the belief there was a better way to handle non-violent offenders. They had a majority back then too.

Edited by jdobbin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don t even need to build a prison.......just build a bunch of city type prison's up North, no guards

no fence just air drop food into them once in awhile if they try to escape? if the cold doesn t get them

the Polar Bears will! If they kill each other? oh well who cares...of course this would be only for the

worst of the worst,as for the rest of them build some prisons out on Sable Island!!

there is nowhere to go out there!

Why waste time and just shoot everyone thought to have committed a crime? Save time on prisons and courtrooms. It should be done especially for people who don't use their turn signals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why waste time and just shoot everyone thought to have committed a crime? Save time on prisons and courtrooms. It should be done especially for people who don't use their turn signals.

Nah.....don t need to be to hasty! Just keep them away from the rest of us

on some remote Island somewhere is good enough! Sable would work perfectly

although the horses out there may not like it......... :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was the PCs who originally created the accelerated paroles because of deficits and the belief there was a better way to handle non-violent offenders. They had a majority back then too.
The main concern for someone convicted of a crime should be punishment and where possible restitution.

Let's think back to...what...1971? Wasn't that about the time when a Liberal Solicitor General stood up and said some inane thing about how the "justice" system in Canada would change...“From now on, we have decided to stress the rehabilitation of individuals rather than the protection of society.”

Or did I dream that?

Another Liberal low-life

Edited by Hydraboss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is not just about money, its about incarcerating people who are non-violent for longer times. That makes me think about drug users. Again we are looking at a more US-style legal system, one which has incarcerated millions of Americans, who cannot get their lives back on track again when the prison sentence is over, because of the stigma of being an ex-con.

Ironic that at a time when many countries are going the other way, eliminating harsh sentencing and having alternative programs in place, Canada is doing the exact opposite.

If prohibition were eliminated there would be no need for drug pushers and the money would be removed from organized crime. I believe this is a better approach.

The neocons are actually dinosaurs, there is nothing really "new" in their ideology. A better name would be something like the Retro cons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is not just about money, its about incarcerating people who are non-violent for longer times. That makes me think about drug users. Again we are looking at a more US-style legal system, one which has incarcerated millions of Americans, who cannot get their lives back on track again when the prison sentence is over, because of the stigma of being an ex-con.

Ironic that at a time when many countries are going the other way, eliminating harsh sentencing and having alternative programs in place, Canada is doing the exact opposite.

If prohibition were eliminated there would be no need for drug pushers and the money would be removed from organized crime. I believe this is a better approach.

The neocons are actually dinosaurs, there is nothing really "new" in their ideology. A better name would be something like the Retro cons.

Please supply of list of sentences available to judges in the US for the crime of drug-using. If the only crime these people committed was the using of drugs, I am curious how long they are incarcerated for that.

Thanks,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please supply of list of sentences available to judges in the US for the crime of drug-using. If the only crime these people committed was the using of drugs, I am curious how long they are incarcerated for that.

Thanks,

If you must get into semantics over this, we can do that.

There is no law explicitly called "drug-using", and nowhere in my post do I in fact call it that. I said, "this makes me think about drug users." I don't think that statement hard to understand.

The law is possession, as opposed to trafficking. And the definition of possession as opposed to trafficking, is drugs for personal consumption. That's using.

In context of non-violent offenders, some might argue that the "dealer" is potentially more violent since they are often connected to gangs. Whereas the "user" is inherently less violent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's violence and then theres harm. He caused a lot of harm to a lot of people. He did get 150 years..

Yep, he recieved 150 years, in the United States. And yes, there's violence and harm. Non-violent criminals can do great harm, hence the proposed changes in the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Politicians believes no education, no peace, no kindness to people who are not perfect, no convert them to gentle men. They believes to "crack down" others with power, with violence, with bully. What's the difference with the methods criminals uses, they don't want to find the deep reason that cause all the problems and find solutions, because many problems are caused by themselves, they want help interest groups to robber people through legislation and they have their own need in their own political career.

If a guy bilks investors of millions or a guy guns down an innocent person while trying to shoot up competitors in the drug trade, parole should be a distant possibility, period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, he recieved 150 years, in the United States. And yes, there's violence and harm. Non-violent criminals can do great harm, hence the proposed changes in the law.

I have no problem with that concept, when there is clearly demonstrated harm. But its not the case with all forms of no-violent offenders, is it. So maybe we need to revist the definition of "harm" to society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finger pointing does little to solve a problem now does it? Who cares who should be blamed for this mess. Why not simply deal with the problem?

Which is why I have asked for numbers. Let's see the long term pros and cons of the doing this and examine a variety of ways in dealing with the problem. At the moment, I see a spending program which are piled on top of other spending programs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you must get into semantics over this, we can do that.

There is no law explicitly called "drug-using", and nowhere in my post do I in fact call it that. I said, "this makes me think about drug users." I don't think that statement hard to understand.

The law is possession, as opposed to trafficking. And the definition of possession as opposed to trafficking, is drugs for personal consumption. That's using.

In context of non-violent offenders, some might argue that the "dealer" is potentially more violent since they are often connected to gangs. Whereas the "user" is inherently less violent.

That's partly what I was getting at. You want to make a statement about how drug users are incarcerated and I want to know the sentences that are given to them. I agree with your distinction...personal use vs dealing. So, what are the sentences commonly given to people convicted of possession of...say...a quarter ounce? How about 3 or 4 grams of weed? Anyone who says that someone in possession of a kilo of cocaine only has it for personal use is full of shit.

So how many people are put behind bars for carrying a gram of hash? Three x's? A couple of joints? And I am not talking about people that have prior convictions for dealing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite a deflections from the fact that the PCs introduced accelerated paroles.

So how is that different from what you assert? How far back would you like to go? You blame the Cons for accelerated parole, and I counter with the beginning of the end of the justice system. Only when I do it, it's

Quite a deflections from the fact that the PCs introduced accelerated paroles.

The system is screwed up, and in your eyes it's never a Liberal's fault. Impossible you say. Can't happen. Must be a Conservative's fault instead. And when someone (anyone other than a Liberal) tries to propose something to fix it, you make some off-hand statement about how it's Harper's fault...or Mulroney's fault...or the NDP's fault.

Who the hell cares? Just fix the damn system and get on with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No doubt. Let's just see the costing up front since there is a public desire not to push the deficit to a permanent fixture too.

I don't care what it costs.

The lax parole laws in Canada have made sentences a farce for decades. What the story you quoted failed to mention is that parole is almost guaranteed after 1/3 of sentence is served for non-violent offenders, inc drug dealers and fraud artists. What is the point of having a judge decide on a proper sentence when the parole board will automatically release after 1/3rd is served?

That is on top of the fact that sentences for many of these people are a joke to begin with. Fraud is rising, esp through the use of various internet schemes. I read an article the other day that estimated the world-wide losess to phishing schemes alone were about $2 trillon

That's not a misprint. T- Trillion.

National Post

And you know what will happen to these guys if they get caught? A slap on the wrist if they're reallyl, really unlucky. If they actually do go to jail, they're guaranteed to be out on day parole after 1/6th of the sentence is served.

In parts of this country the police will not even bother to investigate fraud. Why should they when the courts will, at worst, slap the criminals on the wrist? It's very hard to prove, takes a lot of time, effort and police work, and in the end the guy walks away laughing.

It's past time for us to start cracking down on these people before we wind up living in the equivilent of Nigeria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how many people are put behind bars for carrying a gram of hash? Three x's? A couple of joints? And I am not talking about people that have prior convictions for dealing.

One problem with it is that it varies from state to state. Or maybe even, county to county, judge to judge. But jail time or no, the stigma of criminal conviction lasts a lifetime. Even if the "soft" crime was commited decades ago. It goes beyond the reach of the courts and jails, when employers will not risk hiring an individual because they hold a prior conviction, mostly for their own personal liability issues.

I'm not saying that employers should be forced to hire people they don't like, for whatever reason. I'm saying that the "punishment" already goes well beyond the courtroom. Even if they walk out of court without jail time, they carry that stigma basically forever. The problem is, what is the appropriate definition of criminal in these particular types of cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Popular Now

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,698
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    IPEM Group of Institutions
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Ethan Wylde earned a badge
      First Post
    • Yakuda went up a rank
      Experienced
    • QuebecOverCanada went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • Jeary went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Gator earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...