PIK Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 So harper makes a mention of it and MP Mcguinty jumps all over it, pretty well saying I dare you to bring it to the people, 69% of canadians agree with harper that in special cases it should be used. So my question is ,do you support it and how dumb is mcguinty for not checking the pulse 1st of canadians before going on the attack.Personally it is a tough choice, bernardo, williams, olsen, I could live with them getting it but not for all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) So harper makes a mention of it and MP Mcguinty jumps all over it, pretty well saying I dare you to bring it to the people, 69% of canadians agree with harper that in special cases it should be used. So my question is ,do you support it and how dumb is mcguinty for not checking the pulse 1st of canadians before going on the attack.Personally it is a tough choice, bernardo, williams, olsen, I could live with them getting it but not for all. No And not dumb.I mean he is dumb, but not in this case. Edited January 26, 2011 by guyser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 no thanks... milgaard, etc, etc.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted January 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 no thanks... milgaard, etc, etc.... I know what you mean, but in the 3 I mentioned they are guilty. In todays society with DNA and other investigation tools, would it not be alot harder now to railroad a guy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 I know what you mean, but in the 3 I mentioned they are guilty. In todays society with DNA and other investigation tools, would it not be alot harder now to railroad a guy? Ask Guy Paul Morin and the cigarettes.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 As Harper said, by and large, Canadians don't want to re-address the death penalty. I'm satisfied with ensuring that heinous criminals never, ever get out of jail - except in a box. Having said that, the Milgaards and Trustcott cases are a red herring. These were cases of single crimes where in retrospect, after years of reflection and the introduction of DNA testing - there was some room for doubt. Harper - and many Canadians like myself - are expressing personal views with regards to heinous multiple crimes like Bernardo and Pickton - crimes that leave absolutely no room for doubt. I would lose no sleep over these deranged scumbags rotting in jail for 10 years, exhausting all legal avenues that might be at their disposal - and then finally facing the Grim Reaper's noose - or needle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 it's worse punishment, and cheaper, to keep them in jail for good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 I know what you mean, but in the 3 I mentioned they are guilty. In todays society with DNA and other investigation tools, would it not be alot harder now to railroad a guy? It doesnt matter the DP is just terrible public policy. It doesnt accomplish anything and it costs way more money than life imprisonment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 it's worse punishment, and cheaper, to keep them in jail for good. I fail to see how it is cheaper.... I would consider the death penalty for certain crimes...crimes against children for instance. And where there is a mechanism that goes even beyond the shadow of doubt...whether that is a trial after the convcition for murder to determine whether the death penalty is appropirate..weighing alll the evidence again, so that a Milgaard, Morin etc would not be subject to it. Bernardo, Olsen....I would be quite content to let them hang. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) I fail to see how it is cheaper.... It costs less money, thats how. Bernardo, Olsen....I would be quite content to let them hang. Right but youre not going to rework your criminal justice system around the odd extreme case... especially when theres absolutely no benefit to doing so. Edited January 26, 2011 by dre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 I know what you mean, but in the 3 I mentioned they are guilty. In todays society with DNA and other investigation tools, would it not be alot harder now to railroad a guy? sure that's what they thought when Milgaards "friends" testified against him with eyewitness accounts...any system with humans involved is fallible... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 In todays society with DNA and other investigation tools, would it not be alot harder now to railroad a guy? I would not want anyone to be naive enough to believe that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 And where there is a mechanism that goes even beyond the shadow of doubt...whether that is a trial after the convcition for murder to determine whether the death penalty is appropirate..weighing alll the evidence again, so that a Milgaard, Morin etc would not be subject to it. You have undermined your own position. Unfortuneately u don't live in a perfect world and the justice system isn't perfect, anymore then some consider it justice. My feelings and emotions will have to take a back seat to reality. Every election cycle this topic comes up for discussion. It goes nowhere. Lets open up an abortion thread next. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 I would not want anyone to be naive enough to believe that. I could see DNA aid in convicting for something they didn't do, DNA only shows they may have been present at some time or that their DNA contaminated the crime scene not that they committed the crime... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 I know what you mean, but in the 3 I mentioned they are guilty. In todays society with DNA and other investigation tools, would it not be alot harder now to railroad a guy? Medical Examiner, Charles Smith. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 Medical Examiner, Charles Smith. Ahh good point ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 You have undermined your own position. How so? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 It costs less money, thats how. Well based on your obviously accurate opinion...I stand down...I mean, how could 30 years room and board cost less than 20 feet of rope... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) Well based on your obviously accurate opinion...I stand down...I mean, how could 30 years room and board cost less than 20 feet of rope... I found it hard to believe too , but looking around all the sites said it was the cost of appeals and the millions that would be spent on them. If 2 appeals go on, and at say $1.2m each, that gives us 40 years of costs to keep him lokced up. ETA....that last meal costs a bitch too ! Edited January 26, 2011 by guyser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) Well based on your obviously accurate opinion...I stand down...I mean, how could 30 years room and board cost less than 20 feet of rope... You already partially explain this yourself. I would consider the death penalty for certain crimes...crimes against children for instance. And where there is a mechanism that goes even beyond the shadow of doubt...whether that is a trial after the convcition for murder to determine whether the death penalty is appropirate..weighing alll the evidence again, so that a Milgaard, Morin etc would not be subject to it. Its hard to say exactly how the dp would work in Canada if implemented but the chances are there would be a constitutional requirement to put a whole lot of additional protections in place for the accused in a capital case, including automatic appeals, access to lots of expensive expert witnesses, and more burden on the prosecution (which makes it cost more) etc. Basically that means a whole lot of extremely high paid people doing thousands of hours of work.... Lawyers, pshyciatrists, expert witnesses, jury consultants appellate lawyers, judges, etc. And the trial will probably take years. It doesnt take very much of this activity before the costs exceed life imprisonment which I believe costs about 2 million dollars. Not only that but the guy spends 10 years on deathrow (which is the most expensive place to incarcerate someone) anyhow so youre still only off the hook for a portion of the incarceration costs. About the only redeeming quality of the death penalty is that it would be a lot of fun to see some of these guys fry, and many of them do deserve it. People might get a sense of satisfaction out of it. Thats it though. Beyond that its terrible public policy. Edited January 26, 2011 by dre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 There was a country that did it this way until about 10 years ago. 1) Once the ruling of guilt is determined. The head of the family gets to decide or be the spokesperson for the family on the choice of Capital punishment or Prison. The Courts then ask the Clerics to intervene if Capital punishment is chosen. The Clerics ask the Head for forgiveness and offer compensation to spare a life. The Head of the family can choose forgiveness compensation and walk away or he can continue to press for Capital Punishment. All this is done in the open. Its not backroom deals. Then.... IF the head proceeds to Capital Punishment. The Convict remains before the public as justice will be open and transparent. Then, after the 3rd time of asking the family head for giveness the Cleric stands aside. The Head of the court enforcement takes over to deliver Capital Punishment. A rifle is produced. The Rifle is then Given to the Head of the Family and he is to perform the Execution. Moments later... The Convict is DEAD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) It doesnt take very much of this activity before the costs exceed life imprisonment which I believe costs about 2 million dollars. according to this site, then cost of imprisonment is $259.05 per day...that works out to 2.8 million over 30 years. http://www.vcn.bc.ca/august10/politics/facts_stats.html We need not model ourselves after the US. When can do it more efficiantly. After all, it would be only for the most extreme cases where multiple layers of evidence leaves us without doubt such as Bernado's videos or Olsens confession. Edited January 26, 2011 by M.Dancer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 We need not model ourselves after the US. When can do it more efficiantly. Wishful thinking.. After all, it would be only for the most extreme cases where multiple layers of evidence leaves us without doubt such as Bernado's videos or Olsens confession. Just so I understand this... Olsen, would confess knowing there was a death penalty? Homolka would risk rising above the fear of the Death Penalty to approach the police that ultimately convicted Bernardo? IIRC people are not happy with the deal the crown cut with Homolka because the evidence suggests she was the killer. Infact there appears to be less on Bernado compared to Homolka yet she got off with another deal. I believe we would just end up with more "Backroom Deals" like happens in the states. TO understand what a backroom deal is... Think of being drunk and having cocaine in your car and getting off scott free Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 Think of being drunk and having cocaine in your car and getting off scott free If that is your opinion then I really must discount everything you have said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) hmm, i will locate your sense of humour again, or find one for myself... either way one of us will benefit. Edited January 26, 2011 by madmax 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.