Prisons, Harper buried own findngs?

[Topaz]

The Tories did their searches on prisons and when they found everything they thought was wrong, they buried the information. Some of the findings were longer sentences, won't necessarily reform prisoners but it will cost a lot more. None of the things that he Tories will bring in, correct any of the problems they seek. Stats Canada, proved that and that is one of the reasons that the Tories are downsizing the census, they don't want the TRUE info. to be available. The following link to a article about all of these points and it makes sense if you listen to the opposition party in QP saying the same thing. http://thetyee.ca/News/2011/04/29/HarperPushesPrisons/index.html

[Mr.Canada]

Guess what nothing you can do about anything for four years. Better get used to being at the back of the bus, it's going to last a while. Since the NDP have already begun destroying their credibility the Tories will hold majority power for at least 8 years.

Canadians deserve to be protected from vicious animals that would rather collect welfare and victimize our population then get a job and be productive. I understand that prison time is against the NDP platform that would rather let these animals be set free however it seems that millions of Canadians disagree with you and your parties stance.

We need more prisons and longer prison sentences to keep these animals off the streets and away from our children. People who rape and molest our children deserve to be in prison not under house arrest and other more lenient sentences as the Liberals and Socialist NDP would hand down. Our justice system is a joke and is regarded as weak world wide. No wonder so many criminals come to Canada. One we let them in and two we let go free from prison when they do break the law.

Canada needs to strengthen it's justice system. Our citizens are worth it to the eyes of the Conservative Party. It's too bad the other parties don't feel the same way and defeated the crime bills set before the HoC. NO wonder Canadians rejected their soft on crime stance.

[Sir Bandelot]

The Tories did their searches on prisons and when they found everything they thought was wrong, they buried the information. Some of the findings were longer sentences, won't necessarily reform prisoners but it will cost a lot more. None of the things that he Tories will bring in, correct any of the problems they seek. Stats Canada, proved that and that is one of the reasons that the Tories are downsizing the census, they don't want the TRUE info. to be available. The following link to a article about all of these points and it makes sense if you listen to the opposition party in QP saying the same thing. http://thetyee.ca/News/2011/04/29/HarperPushesPrisons/index.html

Topaz, couldn't agree more and at the time, some of us were trying to get people to realize it-

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=15175&view=findpost&p=472787

But, ehhh

[Scotty]

The Tories did their searches on prisons and when they found everything they thought was wrong, they buried the information. Some of the findings were longer sentences, won't necessarily reform prisoners but it will cost a lot more. None of the things that he Tories will bring in, correct any of the problems they seek. Stats Canada, proved that and that is one of the reasons that the Tories are downsizing the census, they don't want the TRUE info. to be available. The following link to a article about all of these points and it makes sense if you listen to the opposition party in QP saying the same thing. http://thetyee.ca/News/2011/04/29/HarperPushesPrisons/index.html

Longer sentences are not designed to 'reform' prisoners. They are designed to keep criminals off the street for longer periods of time, especially violent and repeat offenders. And yes, it will cost more, and I think everyone is aware of that. So?

As to the US. People need to stop using them as a comparison. The socioeconomic circumstances there which continue to push crime are not active here, or active to a far lesser extent.

Edited May 8, 2011 by Scotty

[Rick]

Guess what nothing you can do about anything for four years. Better get used to being at the back of the bus, it's going to last a while. Since the NDP have already begun destroying their credibility the Tories will hold majority power for at least 8 years.

Canadians deserve to be protected from vicious animals that would rather collect welfare and victimize our population then get a job and be productive. I understand that prison time is against the NDP platform that would rather let these animals be set free however it seems that millions of Canadians disagree with you and your parties stance.

We need more prisons and longer prison sentences to keep these animals off the streets and away from our children. People who rape and molest our children deserve to be in prison not under house arrest and other more lenient sentences as the Liberals and Socialist NDP would hand down. Our justice system is a joke and is regarded as weak world wide. No wonder so many criminals come to Canada. One we let them in and two we let go free from prison when they do break the law.

Canada needs to strengthen it's justice system. Our citizens are worth it to the eyes of the Conservative Party. It's too bad the other parties don't feel the same way and defeated the crime bills set before the HoC. NO wonder Canadians rejected their soft on crime stance.

You know after reading all of that I must admit that I am leaning towards supporting Harper's mandatory prison sentencing for those who are clearly under the influence of drugs or caught in possession of drugs.

[Topaz]

Most people are for people who hurt kids and rape women, kill other people get deserved time but what about the minor crime acts? People who have a drug, and drinking problems are not bad people they have a mental disease and should be treated as such, as was said by experts that were before the senate committee hearings.

[bush_cheney2004]

...As to the US. People need to stop using them as a comparison. The socioeconomic circumstances there which continue to push crime are not active here, or active to a far lesser extent.

LOL! Sorry, but they can't help themselves. Besides, the "US" actually has data....available on line.

[lukin]

Most people are for people who hurt kids and rape women, kill other people get deserved time but what about the minor crime acts? People who have a drug, and drinking problems are not bad people they have a mental disease and should be treated as such, as was said by experts that were before the senate committee hearings.

Drug abuse and alcoholism are not diseases...they are choices. I get tired of everyone who has a problem rationalize it by calling it a disease. I've never done heroin in my life. If I start I may become addicted. If I become addicted...is it a disease, or the result of a bad decision. I would say it isn't a disease, but it has become an acceptable excuse.

[Shwa]

Longer sentences are not designed to 'reform' prisoners. They are designed to keep criminals off the street for longer periods of time, especially violent and repeat offenders. And yes, it will cost more, and I think everyone is aware of that. So?

Because some of that money might be better spent on programs designed to divert and dissaude people away from a life of crime. Some more of it might be used to further the research into why some people give in to a life of crime in the first place. And some more still could be used for diversionary programs to keep the more naive criminals away from the hard core cons.

Although, the government could save a bundle if they microchipped every Canadian and had everyone on a GPS. This microchip could double as a paralyzing device when activated by special devices that are distributed to the police. Save on taser costs.

Ordinary Canadians wouldn't have to worry about being microchipped because it would all be a benign process. Right?

Edited May 8, 2011 by Shwa

[cybercoma]

Guess what nothing you can do about anything for four years.

Great argument. I love this kind of thinking. The research shows that their policies are at best ineffective, at worst destructive, but suck it up Canada, you can't do a damn thing for 4 years.

[Rick]

Because some of that money might be better spent on programs designed to divert and dissaude people away from a life of crime. Some more of it might be used to further the research into why some people give in to a life of crime in the first place. And some more still could be used for diversionary programs to keep the more naive criminals away from the hard core cons.

Although, the government could save a bundle if they microchipped every Canadian and had everyone on a GPS. This microchip could double as a paralyzing device when activated by special devices that are distributed to the police. Save on taser costs.

Ordinary Canadians wouldn't have to worry about being microchipped because it would all be a benign process. Right?

For the love of GOD shut up already. Please don't give the lunatics in power any more ideas...

[pegasus]

Stats Canada, proved that and that is one of the reasons that the Tories are downsizing the census, they don't want the TRUE info. to be available. The following link to a article about all of these points and it makes sense if you listen to the opposition party in QP saying the same thing. http://thetyee.ca/News/2011/04/29/HarperPushesPrisons/index.html

I got the short form the other day and I think it took only a few minutes to fill out. I once got the long form and that too didn't take me more than a half hour. I wish everyone got the long form. I check the statscan website often. Its a great tool to figure out demographics and such. I'm surprised that the political parties don't use it more often to target specific candidates for specific ridings.

[Topaz]

Drug abuse and alcoholism are not diseases...they are choices. I get tired of everyone who has a problem rationalize it by calling it a disease. I've never done heroin in my life. If I start I may become addicted. If I become addicted...is it a disease, or the result of a bad decision. I would say it isn't a disease, but it has become an acceptable excuse.

I strongly disagree with you. How many babies born from mothers that are suffer from alcoholism or drug abuse, its transferred to the baby. It's in the DNA of some people and it goes from one generation to another. Take the First Nation people, everyone knows they can't hold their booze and there are FN people in prisons because of it. This was pointed out the the Senate committee on the FN, and expert with data to backup what they were saying. Its more a health issue than a crime issue.

[TimG]

Drug abuse and alcoholism are not diseases...they are choices. I get tired of everyone who has a problem rationalize it by calling it a disease.

I think people are mixing up the cause with the willingness to accept the treatment. If someone gets diabetes it is generally not their fault (at least not directly). Yet if they refuse to follow the advice of doctors and the disease gets worse then that is their fault.

The same is true of addictions. Some people are genetically predisposed to becoming addicted. However, an addicted person can recover if they accept treatment. The fact that the affliction (the addiction) is not their fault does not absolve them of the responsibility to accept the recommended treatments.

Edited May 8, 2011 by TimG

[Scotty]

LOL! Sorry, but they can't help themselves. Besides, the "US" actually has data....available on line.

I realize you meant that in a jeering way but it's actually true. The vast majority of English language information available to the casual researcher - ie, on the internet - will be from the US. And that's a large part of why people use them. Canadian statistics, when available, are often unreliable. For example, the police reported crime rate is falling, but the victim reported crime rate is not. The recidivism rate cited by Canada Corrections is 10% (using a very narrow interpretation), but in reality is more like 37%. I've seen very little from the British or Irish or Australians on their experiences with judicial systems.

[Scotty]

Because some of that money might be better spent on programs designed to divert and dissaude people away from a life of crime. Some more of it might be used to further the research into why some people give in to a life of crime in the first place. And some more still could be used for diversionary programs to keep the more naive criminals away from the hard core cons.

I think much of crime is driven by drugs, and the need to feed the habit, but there exists and has always existed a certain personality type which simply finds it easier to profit off the work of others than to engage in work themselves. You are not going to persuade them to do something else just by lecturing them. These are often people who dropped out of school because they were too lazy or disinclined to attend, and have no job skills and little desire to learn any. They want to party and enjoy life and do drugs, and they want society to pay for it.

I posted government statistics last month regarding the cost of crime to Canadians, and I believe it was $57 billion per year excluding the costs of the judicial, police, and prison systems.

And as people are fond of saying about health care - there is only one pocket. If spending an extra few billion on prisons saves us billions more in crime then it's well worth it simply from an economic perspective.

[RNG]

But every study I have ever read or heard reference in fact says that mandatory sentences and harsher prison terms are counter-productive both socially and economically.

[TimG]

But every study I have ever read or heard reference in fact says that mandatory sentences and harsher prison terms are counter-productive both socially and economically.

Studies done by whom? If you don't know who had a stake in the outcome you can't know if the studies are worth the paper they are written on.

I tend to agree that aburd laws like the 3 strikes law in California are counter productive. But a system that lets rapists and murderers gets off with house arrest undermines public confidence in the system. There has to be a balance between the retribution and rehabilitation goals of the justice system. I think the Canadian system is current too concerned with the rehabilitation goal.

[RNG]

Studies done by whom? If you don't know who had a stake in the outcome you can't know if the studies are worth the paper they are written on.

I tend to agree that aburd laws like the 3 strikes law in California are counter productive. But a system that lets rapists and murderers gets off with house arrest undermines public confidence in the system. There has to be a balance between the retribution and rehabilitation goals of the justice system. I think the Canadian system is current too concerned with the rehabilitation goal.

Most of them were from criminologists working at universities. Admittedly, I fear that most of those tend to have a left-wing bias to some degree or other, but way too many facts and strong correlations. I'm very right wing economically, but this is one issue where the Cons are wrong.

[TimG]

I'm very right wing economically, but this is one issue where the Cons are wrong.

So you think that giving rapists and murders house arrests is acceptable?

[cybercoma]

So you think that giving rapists and murders house arrests is acceptable?

wtf is wrong with you? Why are you setting up a false dichotomy? There is a broad range of options between longer, mandatory minimum sentencing and house arrest.

[TimG]

wtf is wrong with you? Why are you setting up a false dichotomy? There is a broad range of options between longer, mandatory minimum sentencing and house arrest.

You are missing the point. The issue is people have expectations that people who commit crimes will be punished. This is an important point that is independent of the desire to rehabilite criminals. For example, the minimum sentance for murder 1 is 25 years. This has minimum has nothing to do with rehabilitation and everything to do with retribution.

You may think that giving rapists and murderers house arrest is acceptable under some circumsatnce but many people do not share your opinion and that opinion is not going to change simply because some study shows it has no effect on crime rates.

Edited May 8, 2011 by TimG

[RNG]

So you think that giving rapists and murders house arrests is acceptable?

No one is advocating that. Violent crime is a subject on its own. I Would be OK with capital punishment for violent crimes. But some of the other non-violent crimes being discussed for mandatory sentencing is wrong.

[TimG]

But some of the other non-violent crimes being discussed for mandatory sentencing is wrong.

Really? Canada is base for tele fraudsters because its sentences are so light. I happen to think that people who bilk seniors out of their pensions deserve some serious jail time - don't you? Can you give me specific examples of non-violent crimes which you think will be affected by Harper's crime bills? Edited May 8, 2011 by TimG

[cybercoma]

You are missing the point. The issue is people have expectations that people who commit crimes will be punished. This is an important point that is independent of the desire to rehabilite criminals. For example, the minimum sentance for murder 1 is 25 years. This has minimum has nothing to do with rehabilitation and everything to do with retribution.

The point is that the judges hear the cases with all of their details and circumstances. You don't and more importantly Parliament doesn't. Yet, parliament wants to pretend that it is some psychic ability to predict the future and write a law that encompasses all possible circumstances. Even the simplest legislation has holes and problems. The last thing I want is parliament legislating away judicial discretion. The judges hear the cases, not Parliament. It's up to them to decide, based on their experience, the law, legal history, justice and fairness what the best sentence is for any particular set of circumstances in a case. It's not for Parliament to decide, based on nothing more than partisan political ideologies that ignore the entire history of criminological research that contradicts them.