Sir Bandelot Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 No, let's not get "tough" on crime, as our criminal system is stuffed with men who can't make absurd child support payments, those in violation of some sort of paper regulation, and so on -- not madmen bent on assaulting innocent people. The reason why the madmen don't get put away for longer is because our prisons have to make room for deadbeat dads, tax evaders and pot heads. The solution is to STOP MAKING GOOD PEOPLE INTO CRIMINALS. But we can't talk about that; let's just talk about being tough on crime. Deadbeat Dads are not good people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 Deadbeat Dads are not good people. Seriously, are deadbeat dads really jailed? That strikes me as being counterproductive in at least two ways. How the hell can he make money to pay support when he is in jail, and what does it cost us to keep him in jail? Garnisheeing wages or confiscating property would be the way to go. Alberta has a system that is surprisingly effective. Deadbeat dads have their driver's license revoked. A very effective tool. (And for the picky among you, I know it's prison, but jail is shorter.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gutb Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 Deadbeat Dads are not good people. They are typically men with little means being taken to the cleaners by absurdly unjust laws and a bureaucracy that couldn't care less if Frank Forklift Driver gets laid off and he can't make a few payments to his ex who is making more than he does from tips and under the table work while going out clubbing every other day. Even though I wouldn't necessarily be friends with Frank, I have no problem pointing out that he's being victimized. Why do you have a problem with that? Does it make you feel good about yourself to see someone being victimized by a bureaucratic police state? If Frank has a lapse in judgement after having his driver's license suspended by the bureaucracy for late payments and he attempts to flee his child support obligation is that a crime that must be punished to the utmost extent of the law? Should Frank be put away with the violent criminals? The only leniency a victim like Frank enjoys now is the fact that Canada's justice system is so overburdened that they will get off relatively lightly along with the real criminals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 They are typically men with little means being taken to the cleaners by absurdly unjust laws and a bureaucracy that couldn't care less if Frank Forklift Driver gets laid off and he can't make a few payments to his ex who is making more than he does from tips and under the table work while going out clubbing every other day. Even though I wouldn't necessarily be friends with Frank, I have no problem pointing out that he's being victimized. Why do you have a problem with that? Does it make you feel good about yourself to see someone being victimized by a bureaucratic police state? If Frank has a lapse in judgement after having his driver's license suspended by the bureaucracy for late payments and he attempts to flee his child support obligation is that a crime that must be punished to the utmost extent of the law? Should Frank be put away with the violent criminals? The only leniency a victim like Frank enjoys now is the fact that Canada's justice system is so overburdened that they will get off relatively lightly along with the real criminals. I think you have a fact wrong, at least as the laws are applied in Alberta. My kid is divorced with a son and is making support payments. The formula used in Alberta is based on current salary. You get a raise, the kid gets more. You lose your job, the kid gets zero. The laws aren't always that stupid. (Yes, sometimes but not always.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 Should Frank be put away with the violent criminals? I never said that, but I feel Frank is not a good person, if he leaves his family and doesn't support them. Real deadbeat Dads should be put away, after other options have been explored. Maybe Frank needs mental help, or just needs help in getting a job. A better system gives Frank many warnings and opportunities to get work, before the last resort is taken. Otherwise I have no problem with him being briefly incarcerated. Not amongst violent criminals, but in a minimum security facility. Enough with this simpering "help me, I'm the victim!" attitude. I say, let each case be judged on its merits by a real judge. Not by some politician who uses every situation to score political points with their supporters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 I can when it's fairly representative. Hell, the reporter even called it "lengthy" as if he was impressed by the unusual severity. No. I don't need to do any such thing. If I shoot you in the face, and a judge gives me one day in jail, are the statistics about how often people get shot in the face really relevant? The act stands on its own and injustice is not related to statistics. That's because you're ignorant. You're paying money because of the high level of crime. Canada pays tens of billions of dollars every year because of the high rate of crime. And I'm not talking about the costs of cops and courts and prisons. I'm talking about the cost of insurance, of locks, and steel bars, and alarm systems, the cost added to your bill when you buy groceries because of shoplifters, the cost added to your car repairs by crooked garages, the cost to, if not you, then your neighbor, when his house is burglarized or his car is stolen. . That's because we're stupid. We've got thousands of people sitting in boxes when we should have them working on assembly lines. Prisons should be profitable, given they don't have to pay any wages, not money sinkholes. Youve done nothing at all to demonstrate these high levels of crime youre talking about. Once you demonstrate that, and show me that the idea of longer prison times comes out on the right end of a cost/benefit analysis then well be ready to have a discussion about it. Right now all you have is an emotional kneejerk reaction to an anecdote. Understandable perhaps but not something you want to go and make major policy changes around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 Deadbeat Dads are not good people. Hell, some of them are even dead. Yes, from research a long time ago, dead fathers are counted in the 'ded beat dad' category since it pads the numbers for those that used them. Ive never understood jailing a guy for lack of payments. We only ensure he cant make any when thrown in jail. Kinda like throwing a meth head in a meth lab to prevent him from buying on the street. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 We've seen that the American 'lock em up and throw away the key' system has failed utterly. Why do you Scotty, and other Cons keep preaching on about how we ought to emulate their system here in Canada? Seriously, outside of a few exceptional cases I'd say the justice system is working much better that some 1st world nations. New York City is a perfect example how a city cleans it self up by getting tough on crime.I have to wonder if people just say what ever is opposite of what harper does. It is getting quite pathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 New York City is a perfect example how a city cleans it self up by getting tough on crime. Really, because a lot of that is a myth perpetrated by Guiliani himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 Ive never understood jailing a guy for lack of payments. We only ensure he cant make any when thrown in jail. What would you rather do, give them a christmas present? If he's a real deadbeat, he's not going to pay anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 New York City is a perfect example how a city cleans it self up by getting tough on crime.I have to wonder if people just say what ever is opposite of what harper does. It is getting quite pathetic. I tried to Google it but couldn't find the original. I read an article probably 10 year ago which claimed that the NYC crime rate drop was the result of community based neighborhood watch type things and cleaning up neighborhoods and similar civic measures and had nothing to do with "tough on crime crap". I'm a strong righty, but tough on crime sucks brontosaurus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 (edited) I tried to Google it but couldn't find the original. I read an article probably 10 year ago which claimed that the NYC crime rate drop was the result of community based neighborhood watch type things and cleaning up neighborhoods and similar civic measures and had nothing to do with "tough on crime crap". I'm a strong righty, but tough on crime sucks brontosaurus. That is not the case....Mayor Giuliani's very aggressive "broken windows" bottoms up law enforcement has been credited with a substantial (but also disputed) role in NYC's lower crime rate. Other cities used a similar "Code 4" policy of strict enforcement of minor infractions to keep the pressure on the criminal element. The "cockroaches" just get tired of the constant heat. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudy_Giuliani#Law_enforcement New Yorkers were fed up with the crap, going back to support for the famous Bernie Goetz vigilante shooting. Edited June 21, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noahbody Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 I tried to Google it but couldn't find the original. I read an article probably 10 year ago which claimed that the NYC crime rate drop was the result of community based neighborhood watch type things and cleaning up neighborhoods and similar civic measures and had nothing to do with "tough on crime crap". I'm a strong righty, but tough on crime sucks brontosaurus. The issue in Canada isn't really being "tough on crime" it's "not being lax on crime." Big difference. If the article you read said "nothing to do with tough on crime" then it was obviously full of bias. Of course it contributed. There were other factors like the ones you mentioned and some you didn't such as the abortion law of 1970 which meant less unwanted children and an aging demographic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 Youve done nothing at all to demonstrate these high levels of crime youre talking about. While the crime rate has dropped in Canada and has continued to drop it does not mean crime is under control or not a problem here in Canada in fact when looking at developed countries Canada rates number four, the first being USA,Spain, EU, then Canada so it's nothing to brag about. In fact it means that we still have a large problem with crime. Once you demonstrate that, and show me that the idea of longer prison times comes out on the right end of a cost/benefit analysis then well be ready to have a discussion about it. There is plenty of studies showing both the pros and cons of longer prison sentences and thier cost to the general tax payer. Lets just say for debate that we go with longer prison terms do not deter criminals from commiting crimes... Cdn Prisons. But i thought this whole justice system was based on a jail sentence was a punishment, that should reflect the seriousness of the crime commited...and an added bonus was during the convicts stay we could perhaps try and educate him not to commit crimes again....but the main reason of the sentence handed down was so that justice is served, and punishment was handed out to the criminal... Adding in cost/benifit analyis should not even compute into anything. i mean if it is all about money why punish anyone for crimes....While i will agree that the cost of housing criminals is something that needs to be taken seriously but at a different table, different time....and really has nothing to do with serving justice, or punishing criminals.... Right now all you have is an emotional kneejerk reaction to an anecdote. Understandable perhaps but not something you want to go and make major policy changes around. I don't think it is a knee jerk reaction our justice system has thousands of examples were justice has not been served correctly, in regards to length of sentences, letting prisoners out early because of over crowding,prisoners rights, current prison conditions, etc etc...just some of the reasons alot of Canadians are not happy with our current justice system.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 (edited) While the crime rate has dropped in Canada and has continued to drop it does not mean crime is under control or not a problem here in Canada in fact when looking at developed countries Canada rates number four, the first being USA,Spain, EU, then Canada so it's nothing to brag about. In fact it means that we still have a large problem with crime. Not sure since you post no links but this does not agree with you Rank Countries Amount # 1 Dominica: 113.822 per 1,000 people # 2 New Zealand: 105.881 per 1,000 people # 3 Finland: 101.526 per 1,000 people # 4 Denmark: 92.8277 per 1,000 people # 5 Chile: 88.226 per 1,000 people # 6 United Kingdom: 85.5517 per 1,000 people # 7 Montserrat: 80.3982 per 1,000 people # 8 United States: 80.0645 per 1,000 people # 9 Netherlands: 79.5779 per 1,000 people # 10 South Africa: 77.1862 per 1,000 people # 11 Germany: 75.9996 per 1,000 people # 12 Canada: 75.4921 per 1,000 people # 13 Norway: 71.8639 per 1,000 people # 14 France: 62.1843 per 1,000 people # 15 Seychelles: 52.9265 per 1,000 people # 16 Hungary: 44.9763 per 1,000 people # 17 Estonia: 43.3601 per 1,000 people # 18 Czech Republic: 38.2257 per 1,000 people # 19 Italy: 37.9633 per 1,000 people # 20 Switzerland: 36.1864 per 1,000 people # 21 Portugal: 34.3833 per 1,000 people # 22 Slovenia: 33.6236 per 1,000 people # 23 Poland: 32.8573 per 1,000 people # 24 Korea, South: 31.7267 per 1,000 people # 25 Mauritius: 29.1982 per 1,000 people # 26 Zimbabwe: 28.8753 per 1,000 people # 27 Lithuania: 22.8996 per 1,000 people # 28 Spain: 22.8867 per 1,000 people # 29 Latvia: 21.921 per 1,000 people # 30 Uruguay: 21.7017 per 1,000 people # 31 Russia: 20.5855 per 1,000 people # 32 Ireland: 20.2376 per 1,000 people # 33 Bulgaria: 19.9886 per 1,000 people # 34 Japan: 19.177 per 1,000 people # 35 Romania: 16.4812 per 1,000 people # 36 Slovakia: 16.3537 per 1,000 people # 37 Jamaica: 14.3231 per 1,000 people # 38 Belarus: 13.1592 per 1,000 people # 39 Mexico: 12.8406 per 1,000 people # 40 Tunisia: 12.5634 per 1,000 people # 41 Costa Rica: 11.9788 per 1,000 people # 42 Ukraine: 11.7793 per 1,000 people # 43 Hong Kong: http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph/cri_tot_cri_percap-crime-total-crimes-per-capita&b_map=1 Edited June 21, 2011 by guyser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 (edited) That list looks like BS if you ask me. Russia at 1/4 the crime rate of the Canada? Really? Edited June 21, 2011 by Bonam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 That list looks like BS if you ask me. Russia at 1/4 the crime rate of the Canada? Really? My thoughts exactly. My sister-in-law is from the Ukraine. What a load of crap. Unless it is "reported" crime they are talking about. When she got here, she was more afraid of cops than of robbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 (edited) So ask a judge on what they think of sentencing before you appoint them. The justice system is meant to be seperate from the executive or legislative branches. Its history lies with the courts. While there is a lot of intermingling due to partisanship in the justice system due to the appointments system being political rather than absolute. Didn't people already establish minimum sentences? Most of the laws putting people in jail are absolutely rubish, jail is counter productive. If you want to eliminate crime simply putting people on ice isn't an solution. Human rights really doesn't support the extinction of crime through execution (even though countries such as the US still have the death penalty.. Prison doesn't work, it has never worked. All it does it take resources away. Bottom line is people are going to get out, if they were where they were when they went in all it does is reduces the economic efficiency and makes "service dependent people" that increases poverty etc.. The longer people are in jail the longer that population is stagnating. Directing and controling criminals to provide them with a life without the need of petty crime is what the solution is. Of course non petty crime is a completely different issue. The seperation of the two needs to be established, and it may be in many ways for summary and indictable offences. The time bases is absolute nonsense. The death pentalty is a solution in as much as eliminating waste of peoples lives and the publics assets. Bottom line is that person is coming back or they arn't using them as a reminder of crime and reducing their living conditions is only going to increase the chance of recidivism. GIVE RESTITUTION TO VICTIMS and CORRECT CRIMINALS by improving their living conditions to remove the crime. The only difference between jail and the outside world is how heavily individuals selfishness is allowed to flourish. The conditions of punishment are by imposing authority and that is the opposite of freedom. You need to provide life and abilities to provide freedom. Anyone who tries to limit others freedom simply for that fact is wrong, and the bad guy. Imposing evil on people is not the answer it only increase the amount of evil in the world. If it doesn't deserve death the person is a victim. Unfortunately people may support abuse, but the statistics and general progression is that abuse only creates abuse, it doesn't change conditions. Either kill them or prepare them for life. Subjecting people to poverty and pain is the behaviour we should be attempting to eliminate not create. This likely won't resonate with the evil people out there. Bottom line here is that real crime needs to be addressed as a psychological condition, sadism and wrongness ain't going to help it will only increase the conflict not insure the peace. Looking at a crime rate isn't representative of the individual life circumstnaces of the "criminals" and victims. Criminals are often victims, and victims sometimes criminals. They are individual events not another statistic. Edited June 21, 2011 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 That list looks like BS if you ask me. Russia at 1/4 the crime rate of the Canada? Really? Nationmaster is supposed to be pretty fair from what I recall. It is a source that hs been relied on before in threads around here. Russia is 141 Million people, outside of the cities I imagine it is much like say rural Canada, very little crime at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 What a load of crap. Said with no back up or link.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted June 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 The links were in the last 'crime is dropping' thread. And did I not already say that whether crime is dropping or falling is immaterial to the justice of a sentence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted June 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 I think you have a fact wrong, at least as the laws are applied in Alberta. My kid is divorced with a son and is making support payments. The formula used in Alberta is based on current salary. You get a raise, the kid gets more. You lose your job, the kid gets zero. The laws aren't always that stupid. (Yes, sometimes but not always.) They went way over the top when they decided the man who has to pay that support can't write it off on his taxes, and instead let the woman who receives it have the tax break. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted June 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 I never said that, but I feel Frank is not a good person, if he leaves his family and doesn't support them. What if Frank's slatternly wife leaves him, and then sues him for massive child support, and gets it, and the house. So she is living in his $300k house and he is living in a cheap rooming house and unable to see his kids because she keeps finding excuses to send them somewhere else on his days? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted June 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 Youve done nothing at all to demonstrate these high levels of crime youre talking about. Maybe you could find where I talked about high levels of crime on this topic? Because it seems to me that what I've been talking about is the injustice of some sentencing. Once you demonstrate that, and show me that the idea of longer prison times comes out on the right end of a cost/benefit analysis then well be ready to have a discussion about it. You're on the wrong topic. Maybe you should start another one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted June 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 While the crime rate has dropped in Canada and has continued to drop it does not mean crime is under control or not a problem here in Canada Police-reported crime is dropping. However, it is still FAR higher than it was in the fifties and sixties. And whether the statistical drop in police-reported crime is true reflection of crime is in dispute. Stats Canada's victimization surveys show no such drop in crime. What they do show is a drop in reporting rates. That alone could account for a substantial amount of the so-called "drop" in crime rates. 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.