Jerry J. Fortin Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 Extended periods of solitary confinement constitutes torture. It not only makes inmates unhinged and delusional, but raises the likelihood of violent behaviour. Maybe we shouild pull out their fingernails. Or we could make use of Rape rooms. The sky's the limit. On the other hand, we just treat them with comfort and let them out early. Some people deserve to have their freedom taken away, and some need to pay for their crimes. We are talking about people who piss on the rights of others. We are talking about criminals guilty of mistreating citizens. We are talking about the expectation of justice from the perspective of the victims of those crimes. Society needs to recognize that the consequences of crime are extremely dire. Quote
bloodyminded Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 On the other hand, we just treat them with comfort and let them out early. Some people deserve to have their freedom taken away, and some need to pay for their crimes. We are talking about people who piss on the rights of others. We are talking about criminals guilty of mistreating citizens. We are talking about the expectation of justice from the perspective of the victims of those crimes. Society needs to recognize that the consequences of crime are extremely dire. I don't see how it's one or the other: either letting prisoners out too early, or abusing them while they're incarcerated.. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Wild Bill Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 The parliamentary watchdog has stated that the cost of the Tories' new program would be an extra $1 billion per year in prison costs. Facing against that, we have the cost of crime to victims in Canada, which is estimated at some $47 billion per year. In addition, there is an estimated $10 billion per year cost for security devices and protection. $47 billion? You've touched on the REAL factor here, Scotty! The cost of crime management is born by governments and can be seen in their budgets. The cost to the public is much harder to see. In an ideal world for a politician, they would have just enough cops and courts to APPEAR to be protecting the public but actually spend very little, so that they could use our tax money on their own pet projects, like keeping themselves in office! It's called off-loading, and it's a concept as old as government. It might cost $40k/yr to incarerate a burglar. If he's on the street, he might be responsible for hundreds of thousands of dollars in theft from people's homes! Sure, there's insurance but we pay for that, big time! Basically, every time someone shouts at you that we should not have more prisons he's really saying that you should have to put up with far more danger and costs to yourself! The biggest hypocrisy is that by and large you're limited in how you may protect yourself! Don't dare hurt that burglar! He might sue you! Even if he doesn't win he will cost you a lot in time and lawyers. So governments want to do a cheap job of protecting the public and at the same time tell the public not to protect itself, because that's what police and the court system is for! It's just nuts! Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Jerry J. Fortin Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 I don't see how it's one or the other: either letting prisoners out too early, or abusing them while they're incarcerated.. I refute the premise of your statement, I will suggest that it has been society that has been abused not the prisoners. We need less citizens in prisons, not more. Prisons should not be places we desire to go to. Violent offenders are a special breed of criminal, and we need to recognize that reality. These are the people who cause citizens the greatest grief and I will suggest that the public would agree. For them, the only solution is incarceration, permanently. To let them out represents a risk to society. Non-violent offenders should be made to "work" off a predetermined debt as levied by a judge. If they don't want to work then join the violent offenders on Ellesmere Island. Crime is a dirty business, dealing with it cannot be expected to make anything clean by any stretch of the imagination. Its a mess that we need to deal with. Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 (edited) $47 billion? You've touched on the REAL factor here, Scotty! The cost of crime management is born by governments and can be seen in their budgets. The cost to the public is much harder to see. In an ideal world for a politician, they would have just enough cops and courts to APPEAR to be protecting the public but actually spend very little, so that they could use our tax money on their own pet projects, like keeping themselves in office! It's called off-loading, and it's a concept as old as government. It might cost $40k/yr to incarerate a burglar. If he's on the street, he might be responsible for hundreds of thousands of dollars in theft from people's homes! Sure, there's insurance but we pay for that, big time! Basically, every time someone shouts at you that we should not have more prisons he's really saying that you should have to put up with far more danger and costs to yourself! The biggest hypocrisy is that by and large you're limited in how you may protect yourself! Don't dare hurt that burglar! He might sue you! Even if he doesn't win he will cost you a lot in time and lawyers. So governments want to do a cheap job of protecting the public and at the same time tell the public not to protect itself, because that's what police and the court system is for! It's just nuts! It is indeed. Edited March 30, 2011 by Jerry J. Fortin Quote
Saipan Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 (edited) Prisons ARE NOT the answer. No, 'cause there are no questions. 1. Canada needs to make work camps - camps that allow prisoners to earn money for their release. You can call them "work camps", we call them prisons - where they can't simply walk away as it often happened. And camps that allow in demand skills to be learned so that jobs are available to give criminals an option other than crime for status and survival. EVERYONE has that option in this democratic country. 2 Canada needs to give the option of death for willing convicts. Yes. And castration should be mandatory. Main problem is that the victims are not compensated from the work of the criminals. Edited March 30, 2011 by Saipan Quote
bloodyminded Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 (edited) I refute the premise of your statement, I will suggest that it has been society that has been abused not the prisoners. We need less citizens in prisons, not more. Prisons should not be places we desire to go to. Violent offenders are a special breed of criminal, and we need to recognize that reality. These are the people who cause citizens the greatest grief and I will suggest that the public would agree. For them, the only solution is incarceration, permanently. To let them out represents a risk to society. Non-violent offenders should be made to "work" off a predetermined debt as levied by a judge. If they don't want to work then join the violent offenders on Ellesmere Island. Crime is a dirty business, dealing with it cannot be expected to make anything clean by any stretch of the imagination. Its a mess that we need to deal with. I'm not in total disagreement. But I also believe that prisoners have to be treated humanely. I understand that not everyone agrees, and I can understand the sentiments; but I maintain that it must be so. I will also add that "violent criminal" doesn't always tell us very much. The differences between these people--the potential threats they pose, and even what sort of human being we're dealing with--vary as widely as the diference between a violent offender and a person who has never committed a crime, really. That is to say, some of the worst people in the world are violent offenders...they contain a depravity that is hard for some of us to imagine. But many other violent offenders are of an entirely different psychological make-up, and are not bad people at all. Edited March 30, 2011 by bloodyminded Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
bloodyminded Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 Yes. And castration should be mandatory. Castration should be mandatory for convicts? Get help. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Shwa Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 I'm not in total disagreement. But I also believe that prisoners have to be treated humanely. I understand that not everyone agrees, and I can understand the sentiments; but I maintain that it must be so. I will also add that "violent criminal" doesn't always tell us very much. The differences between these people--the potential threats they pose, and even what sort of human being we're dealing with--vary as widely as the diference between a violent offender and a person who has never committed a crime, really. That is to say, some of the worst people in the world are violent offenders...they contain a depravity that is hard for some of us to imagine. But many other violent offenders are of an entirely different psychological make-up, and are not bad people at all. Yep, and at this point the discussion must turn categorical and hopefully be reflected in the laws. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 Kudos to Scotty for starting this thread. Just over 232,800 adults were admitted to some form of custody in 2005/2006 (a 4% increase from the previous year) PrisonJustice.ca There were just over 302,000 violent crimes accounting for about 1 in 10 criminal incidents, with common assault accountingfor nearly two-thirds of these. The total violent crime rate dropped by 2% Stats Canada 2004 The U of Ottawa study puts the cost of violent crime to victims at $20B. That is ~$66K per crime. Reducing violent crime by 5% a year would recover the $1B. So... How many more prisoners would be held with the extra $1B in federal funds ? What kind of prisoners would be housed with the extra funds ? How much longer would prisoners be held as a % of their sentence ? How effective are longer prison terms in discouraging offenders (repeat, first-time) in committing property crimes, and crimes of violence ? Not questions for anybody in particular, just questions. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
cybercoma Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 Conservative thinking on this is dishonest. Crime goes up: we need more prisons and police because there are more criminals. Crime goes down: we need more prisons and police because being tough on crime works. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 Also note Statscan says 34% of crimes are reported. Canada.com Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Saipan Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 Castration should be mandatory for convicts? For dangerous convicts. Get help. Rape and other victims need that. Quote
bloodyminded Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 (edited) Yep, and at this point the discussion must turn categorical and hopefully be reflected in the laws. I agree, and to some degree it is. Each offense must take particulars into account. While some people see this as "coddling criminals," I think it's nothing more than a basic recognition of the lived reality of being a complex organism living in a complex society. The notion--and i think some people do believe it--that it's a simple matter, you commit this type of crime, and you get this type of sentence. (Life in prison or the death penalty are two perennial favourites, to be applied as catch-alls in every murder case, for example)...well, I think it's a failure of the imagination, and a rejection of the pretty obvious truth that there are differences in different circumstances, and that differences are important. And then there's the floated notion of a "three strikes" law. Blech. Edited March 30, 2011 by bloodyminded Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
eyeball Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 Also note Statscan says 34% of crimes are reported. Canada.com I guess this could be true, I saw a couple passing a joint between them the other day but I didn't report it. Should I have? Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
bloodyminded Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 For dangerous convicts. Ah. you mean a minority of convicts. Not what you said. Unfortunately, I can't yet read your mind. (And I'm becoming less and less convinced I'd want to. ) Rape and other victims need that. They do. So your answer is castration (mandatory) and the Big Government initiative of the death penalty. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Michael Hardner Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 I guess this could be true, I saw a couple passing a joint between them the other day but I didn't report it. Should I have? I think that law is in legal limbo right now, but that's for another thread. Are you saying you doubt Statscan ? Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Michael Hardner Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 They do. So your answer is castration (mandatory) and the Big Government initiative of the death penalty. Castration and death penalty are not on the table at this point, but the $1B is. Should we talk about what's really at issue today or should we poke at Saipan's medieval beliefs ? Granted, the latter is more fun. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Saipan Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 I guess this could be true, I saw a couple passing a joint between them the other day but I didn't report it. Should I have? Very serious crimes are not reported (rape, robbery etc.) because it would involve police presence and finding things like pile of "grass" etc. Quote
cybercoma Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 (edited) I think that law is in legal limbo right now, but that's for another thread. Are you saying you doubt Statscan ? I don't think (s)he doubts statscan, but it's what the comment "only 34% of crime is reported" infers that is in doubt. When I worked in retail, shoplifters would get away on occasion, but we never bothered calling the police unless we knew exactly who the person was. Otherwise, it was a waste of their time and ours to call them because they're not going to bother opening a huge intensive investigation for shoplifting. Edited March 30, 2011 by cybercoma Quote
bloodyminded Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 Castration and death penalty are not on the table at this point, but the $1B is. Should we talk about what's really at issue today or should we poke at Saipan's medieval beliefs ? Granted, the latter is more fun. I grant you a fair point. But the little side discussion began only becaue I objected to some remarks (not Saipan's) about how we don't treat prisoners in a sufficiently cruel manner. In other words, while I'm glad there are serious posters about who endeavour to keep topics on track, I think thread drifts are not only inevitable, but are at times defensible. (If I were to start a new thread ever time I disagreed with something, i'd be forced to quit my real job. ) Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
eyeball Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 I think that law is in legal limbo right now, but that's for another thread. Are you saying you doubt Statscan ? Not per se, but I do doubt the interpretation of their statistics by the people pushing this tough on crime agenda. I also doubt the law against passing a joint will remain in limbo should they ever get their majority. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Michael Hardner Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 Agreed. Also, they are fun but the howling gnomes of the forum should always be a sideshow to the good discussions that are to be had here. I'm hoping that we can really learn something on MLW over this election. I certainly have, and it's only the first week ! Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Michael Hardner Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 Not per se, but I do doubt the interpretation of their statistics by the people pushing this tough on crime agenda. I also doubt the law against passing a joint will remain in limbo should they ever get their majority. What interpretation do you doubt ? I think what you actually doubt is the equation: "threat of longer prison sentence" = "lower crime". My advice: go find a study. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
bloodyminded Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 (edited) Agreed. Also, they are fun but the howling gnomes of the forum should always be a sideshow to the good discussions that are to be had here. I'm hoping that we can really learn something on MLW over this election. I certainly have, and it's only the first week ! Yes. And to be fair, there can be thread drift that practically kills an interesting and serious topic, which is frustrating. My "liberal interventionist" thread has already been derailed...and I've been helpng the derailment along! Ye gods. Edited March 30, 2011 by bloodyminded Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
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.