Judges.....two years for murder

[Bonam]

Since what we have now is giving us lower crime, you're going to have to prove that some alternate reality would be better...or that the system is actually a problem.

Nope, I don't need to prove anything. Our society as a whole now gives us what you call "lower crime" (it certainly doesn't feel like lower crime in Vancouver). But there is a lot more to Canada than our justice system. Some parts of our society contribute to crime and others deter it. Where there is economic prosperity, for example, there is less crime (at least violent crime). But where there is less deterrent to committing crimes, there is more crime. It is a bunch of competing factors. Canada is generally a great place to live and so there is not as much crime as in some other parts of the world, but it is not our justice system we have to thank for it.

Do you really think letting murderers out after negligible sentences helps to reduce crime? Honestly?

But does that work? I'm not sure there is evidence to support that it does.

Does it work at what? Reducing crime in a statistical sense? There may be evidence, there may not be. Frankly, I don't care. What matters to me is knowing that a violent criminal is locked away for a good long time, and is not back on the street within months or only a few years of doing the crime. And having longer sentences certainly works to achieve that.

[Smallc]

Canada is generally a great place to live and so there is not as much crime as in some other parts of the world, but it is not our justice system we have to thank for it.

Or perhaps it is...along with the social safety net that you hate so much.

[Bonam]

Or perhaps it is...

And perhaps I'm the queen of England. Or perhaps not.

As for the social safety net, it's certainly possible that it reduces some forms of crime. It'a also possible that it increases some forms. Specifically, lot's of homeless people on welfare means a lot of potential profit for drug dealers and gangs. No welfare -> less money -> less criminals trying to make a profit in the area. Of course then the people without welfare might try to steal food and such. It's a bit of a trade off, and I don't know which effect would win out to provide an overall reduction in crime.

By the way, you didn't answer my question:

Do you really think letting murderers out after negligible sentences helps to reduce crime? Honestly?

[Smallc]

I think that preventing murders helps. I also think that rehabilitation helps. Yes, there are some people who should probably never be let out of jail, but those mechanisms are already in place, and it isn't up to me (who doesn't have all of the facts) to decide if the judge made the right decision or not.

[Smallc]

It's a bit of a trade off, and I don't know which effect would win out to provide an overall reduction in crime.

Oh, and . People without a system to rely on seem to commit far more crime than people who don't need to resort to crime because of a system. You don't seem to mind paying for jails, yet you loath paying for the programs designed to keep people from turing to crime.

Edited May 7, 2010 by Smallc

[Bonam]

Oh, and . People without a system to rely on seem to commit far more crime than people who don't need to resort to crime because of a system.

Gonna pull a smallc and ask for stats on this one.

You don't seem to mind paying for jails,

Actually I'd rather that jails pay for themselves by having the inmates do something productive... but that's a whole other topic obviously.

yet you loath paying for the programs designed to keep people from turing to crime.

Not really. I'm all for education, for example, and the availability of quality public education is probably the single most important factor in reducing crime. When it comes to aspects of the "social safety net" like welfare though, yes, I do oppose it, and I think it potentially contributes to crime in the form of profit for gangs.

Edited May 7, 2010 by Bonam

[AngusThermopyle]

That's silly. I doubt even the staunchest Liberal would want to defend this sort of thing. It's completely absurd, and heartless towards the family of the dead kid.

What was that you were saying?

[Shwa]

Two years? That is practically a life sentence compared to Wayne Ryczak:

"ST. CATHARINES, Ont. — The day after he admitted killing a woman and dumping her body on a rural road, Wayne Ryczak was a free man.

Judge Stephen Glithero sentenced the 55-year-old St. Catharines construction worker to one day in jail Thursday for the death of 29-year-old Stephine Beck.

The one-day sentence is in addition to time Ryczak already served in jail since his March 5, 2007 arrest - time the judge said was equivalent to 30 months."

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2008/05/16/5585856-sun.html

Ironically enough, the above story was from two years ago.

[Argus]

Oh please, crime as a whole is quite low in this country.

Compared to what?

[Argus]

Ummm....no. Crime is and has been falling in Canada:

Police reported crime has fallen. Stats Can appends "police-reported" in front of crime every time they use it because they know very well the majority of crimes are never reported to police.

It's criminal victim survey does not show crime falling, btw.

[Argus]

Oh, and . People without a system to rely on seem to commit far more crime than people who don't need to resort to crime because of a system. You don't seem to mind paying for jails, yet you loath paying for the programs designed to keep people from turing to crime.

Oh please. We're not talking about orphans desperate for bread stealing it off a grocer, here. We're talking about drug addicts wanting their next fix beating old ladies to steal their pensions.

Hell, criminal behaviour is rampant, even if rarely reported. Honesty is rare now, and integrity even rarer. Society seems to accept that everyone lies to us and tries to cheat us and we don't even care. We shrug it off. The police usually don't even have the manpower to investigate blatant fraud, and if they did the courts wouldn't punish it anyway. This kind of thing spreads through society like rot. Ever try to hire a tradesman or contractor? Nobody trusts these people. They know they will lie, cheat and steal all they want without fear, just like mechanics, and so they do so. There was a time when if you passed a bad cheque you could be arrested. Now people do it all the time and nobody cares. Your word means nothing because we've stopped believing anyone is honest.

[Argus]

Two years? That is practically a life sentence compared to Wayne Ryczak:

"ST. CATHARINES, Ont. — The day after he admitted killing a woman and dumping her body on a rural road, Wayne Ryczak was a free man.

Judge Stephen Glithero sentenced the 55-year-old St. Catharines construction worker to one day in jail Thursday for the death of 29-year-old Stephine Beck.

The one-day sentence is in addition to time Ryczak already served in jail since his March 5, 2007 arrest - time the judge said was equivalent to 30 months."

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2008/05/16/5585856-sun.html

Ironically enough, the above story was from two years ago.

It really is unbelievable. Can you imagine having to work with this guy? Imagine him showing up for work, whistling happily after that. You don't "accidentally" strangle someone. It doesn't happen in five seconds. It take prolonged pressure around their throat. He looks like a big guy, and no one with more than half a brain would believe a cockeyed story like his. Unfortunately, it seems some of our judges don't even have that much in the way of brain power.

[Smallc]

Police reported crime has fallen. Stats Can appends "police-reported" in front of crime every time they use it because they know very well the majority of crimes are never reported to police.

OR so you say, but other than crime surveys, which are useless in determining proportionality, there is no proof that crime isn't going down (and if you think that people aren't reporting 99.9% of violent crime, you're crazy. There's no reason to think that people are reporting any fewer crimes than in the past. Even most of the public by 2005 was beginning to recognize that crime was not (and is not) increasing. Crime is getting less severe and less common.

[Smallc]

What was that you were saying?

I'm not a staunch Liberal.

[Smallc]

Gonna pull a smallc and ask for stats on this one.

History shows this. The under class needs to be kept happy. If they aren't, then people die. Our social safety nets throughout the world are much of why we enjoy so much peace and prosperity.

[bloodyminded]

OR so you say, but other than crime surveys, which are useless in determining proportionality, there is no proof that crime isn't going down (and if you think that people aren't reporting 99.9% of violent crime, you're crazy. There's no reason to think that people are reporting any fewer crimes than in the past. Even most of the public by 2005 was beginning to recognize that crime was not (and is not) increasing. Crime is getting less severe and less common.

Most likely you're correct. People keep summoning the crimes that are not reported...but offer no evidence whatsoever that (even if it's true) it hasn't always been the case. Hell, for all we know, under-reporting might once have been worse.

[Wild Bill]

Most likely you're correct. People keep summoning the crimes that are not reported...but offer no evidence whatsoever that (even if it's true) it hasn't always been the case. Hell, for all we know, under-reporting might once have been worse.

I can only speak for myself but have no reason to believe that I am in any way unique!

I have been burgled a few times in my life, both with my home and with my vehicle. Never did anything happen as far as catching the criminal or returning by property. I have family in the police force who tell me that most such crime is done by juveniles and that it is a very frustrating thing for a cop. Rarely are the perps caught and even if they are, they can be taken in front of a judge literally 20-30 times before any punishment more than repeated parole is given. I was told how one little perp here in Hamilton was given more parole for stealing cars and stole a police cruiser after he left the courtroom! He was apprehended and the next time he was brought before a judge (same judge!) he received...more parole!

Over the years there has been one small change. Long ago you would at least have a cop come out and check out the scene. Now they never bother. The desk sargeant just gives you a report number for your insurance claim, over the phone. Can't complain, I guess. Since nothing is going to be done anyway why waste further effort?

We did have one case in our neighbourhood where the police took action after there had been a rash of over 60 breakins! All smash and grabs, where they would kick in your door and race through the house to all the likely places, like bedrooms for jewelry and the like. They would be gone in just a couple of minutes, never carrying anything large so that they could walk down the neighbourhood sidewalk without drawing attention. One poor old lady a few doors down lost over $20k in jewelry! With that many occurrences I guess the cops figured they had to do something so they hid a few officers in the area and waited till something happened. None of my neighbours ever got any property back.

So I can understand if reporting has become less faithful by victims. If there's any serious money involved of course you have to report it to make a claim but too many claims and your insurance goes up. Or, you can't even get house insurance at all! So on the "little ones" you just swallow it and keep quiet.

On one early incident when a cop had actually come to the scene of the crime I remember saying to him "I thought I lived in a good neighbourhood!"

"You do!" he said to me. "Why on earth would a thief bother to rob a BAD neighbourhood?"

It made perfect sense! I guess I wasn't familiar with thinking like a thief.

I realize this is just one personal experience anecdote. However, there is a difference between mere anecdotal evidence and widespread common knowledge and experience.

I'm sure that the "powers that be" who generate crime stats may be fully aware of this phenomenon but they have a vested interest in not examining the problem. Their goal is to show stats of how crime has dropped. They are addressing a political perception. Reality is merely an inconvenience.

Edited May 7, 2010 by Wild Bill

[Argus]

OR so you say, but other than crime surveys, which are useless in determining proportionality, there is no proof that crime isn't going down

There's no proof it is either. And what you and the other supporters of the system don't seem to ever grasp is that it is not absolute numbers which bother people, but the injustice and lack of punishment for the ones who are caught, not to mention the lack of effort at catching others.

(and if you think that people aren't reporting 99.9% of violent crime, you're crazy.

What do you consider violent? Most rapes are not reported. I believe the figure given by most agencies is 90% are not reported. Most common assaults are never reported either. If someone sticks you up with a gun you'll probably report it. If some drunk in a bar slugs you and gets tossed out that's not likely to be reported.

[bloodyminded]

I can only speak for myself but have no reason to believe that I am in any way unique!

I have been burgled a few times in my life, both with my home and with my vehicle. Never did anything happen as far as catching the criminal or returning by property. I have family in the police force who tell me that most such crime is done by juveniles and that it is a very frustrating thing for a cop. Rarely are the perps caught and even if they are, they can be taken in front of a judge literally 20-30 times before any punishment more than repeated parole is given. I was told how one little perp here in Hamilton was given more parole for stealing cars and stole a police cruiser after he left the courtroom! He was apprehended and the next time he was brought before a judge (same judge!) he received...more parole!

Over the years there has been one small change. Long ago you would at least have a cop come out and check out the scene. Now they never bother. The desk sargeant just gives you a report number for your insurance claim, over the phone. Can't complain, I guess. Since nothing is going to be done anyway why waste further effort?

We did have one case in our neighbourhood where the police took action after there had been a rash of over 60 breakins! All smash and grabs, where they would kick in your door and race through the house to all the likely places, like bedrooms for jewelry and the like. They would be gone in just a couple of minutes, never carrying anything large so that they could walk down the neighbourhood sidewalk without drawing attention. One poor old lady a few doors down lost over $20k in jewelry! With that many occurrences I guess the cops figured they had to do something so they hid a few officers in the area and waited till something happened. None of my neighbours ever got any property back.

So I can understand if reporting has become less faithful by victims. If there's any serious money involved of course you have to report it to make a claim but too many claims and your insurance goes up. Or, you can't even get house insurance at all! So on the "little ones" you just swallow it and keep quiet.

On one early incident when a cop had actually come to the scene of the crime I remember saying to him "I thought I lived in a good neighbourhood!"

"You do!" he said to me. "Why on earth would a thief bother to rob a BAD neighbourhood?"

It made perfect sense! I guess I wasn't familiar with thinking like a thief.

I realize this is just one personal experience anecdote. However, there is a difference between mere anecdotal evidence and widespread common knowledge and experience.

I'm sure that the "powers that be" who generate crime stats may be fully aware of this phenomenon but they have a vested interest in not examining the problem. Their goal is to show stats of how crime has dropped. They are addressing a political perception. Reality is merely an inconvenience.

This is interesting, but nowhere does it show any reason to believe that people under-report crime more now than they used to, or always have.

And your last passage is a charge, but it isn't backed up.

[Smallc]

There's no proof it is either.

I have the measuring stick that is used showing it decreasing.

What do you consider violent? Most rapes are not reported. I believe the figure given by most agencies is 90% are not reported. Most common assaults are never reported either.

And if so, that has always been the case.

Edited May 7, 2010 by Smallc

[Wild Bill]

And your last passage is a charge, but it isn't backed up.

How could I possibly do that? I already admitted it was my own personal experience behind my belief.

There will be NOWHERE on the Net I could come up with stats to back up my suspicions. Who would pay to survey people about such an issue? Certainly not the government, who would be the very LAST to want any proof that people have lost faith!

[Army Guy]

There will be NOWHERE on the Net I could come up with stats to back up my suspicions. Who would pay to survey people about such an issue? Certainly not the government, who would be the very LAST to want any proof that people have lost faith!

I can tell you Wild bill I've lost faith, in the entire process. and it pisses me off to hear these stories. When a man can kill another human being and receive a 2 year sentence there is a problem Houston. Regardless of what the stats are saying....and it is not the only case where light sentences have been handed out....far from it...it's time we stop blowing smoke up our own asses and admit we have a problem...

[eyeball]

Does it work at what? Reducing crime in a statistical sense? There may be evidence, there may not be. Frankly, I don't care. What matters to me is knowing that a violent criminal is locked away for a good long time, and is not back on the street within months or only a few years of doing the crime. And having longer sentences certainly works to achieve that.

What matters to me is that experts at crime and rehabilitation deal with these issues.

Having longer sentences creates all sorts of other problems. All that longer sentences would achieve is to make you feel better and frankly I really don't give a crap about that.

[eyeball]

I can tell you Wild bill I've lost faith, in the entire process. and it pisses me off to hear these stories. When a man can kill another human being and receive a 2 year sentence there is a problem Houston. Regardless of what the stats are saying....and it is not the only case where light sentences have been handed out....far from it...it's time we stop blowing smoke up our own asses and admit we have a problem...

Ummm according to the time lines it was a 13 or 14 year old kid, not a man, who killed another kid.

Why didn't you say when a man can kill a kid and receive a 2 year sentence...?

This is why we use impartial experts to decided these cases.

Edited May 8, 2010 by eyeball

[Wild Bill]

Ummm according to the time lines it was a 13 or 14 year old kid, not a man, who killed another kid.

Why didn't you say when a man can kill a kid and receive a 2 year sentence...?

This is why we use impartial experts to decided these cases.

How old do you have to be to be responsible for murder? To some, it's easy! You pick a birthday. The night before, you can't. When dawn breaks, something changes in your brain and it's different.

The immortal scifi writer Robert Heinlein illustrated this point in his novel Starship Troopers. A teacher was describing the social conditions of the late 20th century to a class of young students. He used the example of raising a puppy, where when the puppy messed on the floor you had to scold him and let him know he had done wrong but this didn't mean at all that you didn't love your puppy.

He described how with children below the age of majority the system would let young offenders away with anything , with repeated dismissals and probation, until the magic age of becoming a legal adult. Then they threw them in jail!

He likened this to letting a puppy run wild and mess wherever it wanted until it was full grown and then if it messed on the carpet you shot it!

His point was obvious. It's madness to forego any discipline on young offenders and then suddenly consider them adults from the morning of a birthday!

Heinlein referred to the last half of the 20th Century as "The Crazy Years".