Lax sentencing for criminals

[Army Guy]

Yes, sleeping in an overcrowded room with eight guys is awesome. And yes, violent crime has remained stable, but it hasn't increased, and overall crime has become less serious, so what were you saying again?

So it is stll beyond your comprehension. keep trying, "remaining stable" (Your link) does not mean decreasing as you quoted was beyond your comprehension....and increasing by 80 Murders over the previuos year (my Link) clearly is not decreasing....but then again i'm not the one with an axe to grind.

[noahbody]

Even as a deterrent harsher penalties don't work.

If castration was the penalty for speeding, would you speed?

You would think being put to death in certain states would stop murders from happening or at the very least reduce them. It doesn't.

Saying the death penalty isn't a deterrent is ridiculous. It might not deter everyone, but so what? People are different and are motivated in different ways.

[RNG]

If castration was the penalty for speeding, would you speed?

You and I wouldn't because we are rational and not totally drunk (right now) or under the influence of drugs(right now). But most in jail are either irrational, did stupid things when totally hammered, or higher than a kite. The deterrent factor only works for sober, straight, rational people, which are a grand minority of criminals. So no, deterrence isn't a factor here. Either we want punitive or we want rehabilitation. I choose the latter.

[dre]

The main purpose of punishment is to punish, Deterence although part of that should not be the main factor,making sure the punishment fits the crime should be...

And no it should not be the main goal of the justice system to reduce crime, but to ensure everyone recieves a fair trial and sentence if convicted..that should be the main goal....if crime gets reduced then it would be a bonus...reducing crime is the job of the police,and other depts...

And no one said anything about harsh punishments, what i said was punishments that fit the crimes, IE 25 years for murder means 25 years served, and not entiled to all the rights and pivilages they have now....in fact i'm all for making them earn and pay for there own way while in prison...

The main purpose of punishment is to punish, Deterence although part of that should not be the main factor,making sure the punishment fits the crime should be...

The purpose of the criminal justice system is to keep crime under control.

And no one said anything about harsh punishments, what i said was punishments that fit the crimes, IE 25 years for murder means 25 years served, and not entiled to all the rights and pivilages they have now....in fact i'm all for making them earn and pay for there own way while in prison...

Yeah! Thats what we need... Gulags.

[dre]

If castration was the penalty for speeding, would you speed?

Saying the death penalty isn't a deterrent is ridiculous. It might not deter everyone, but so what? People are different and are motivated in different ways.

Iv never seen any evidence at all that the death penalty is a detterent, and Iv looked for it pretty hard. The only effect capital punishment has is that it costs taxpayers more money.

[cybercoma]

If castration was the penalty for speeding, would you speed?

Saying the death penalty isn't a deterrent is ridiculous. It might not deter everyone, but so what? People are different and are motivated in different ways.

I don't speed because I don't live in the GTA and I wouldn't kill anyone, so I'm not worried about the death penalty. Anyone that would kill someone as a rule doesn't think they're going to get caught, doesn't think about getting caught when they murder or doesn't care if they're caught. So, no it's not ridiculous to say that the death penalty isn't much of a deterrent because it really isn't. Like I said, if it was a deterrent, you would think that those states with the death penalty would have a lower crime rate for those crimes that carry that sentence. They don't and in many cases it's actually higher.

[Scotty]

Nationmaster is a renowned stat site. . It aint 'some web site' but nice try.

Again, here is some idiot with an opinion when the facts are there to be disputed and cited, but doesnt.

Scotty, you are grasping at straws on these threads.Lame attempts to destroy these facts with innuendo, opinion and some convoluted mental gymnastics is both funny and embarassing. Please stop.

You realize most people reading this are just snickering at you, right? You can find whatever internet stats you want and no one with more than half a brain is going to accept that Russia and Mexico have less crime than Finland and New Zealand.

But go ahead. Keep making yourself look like an idiot.

[Scotty]

Just fo you.

The General Social Survey ;Victimization is the non reported stats. It has remained stable which means no real increase or decrease

However, crime rates have dropped.

You mean "police-reported" crime rates. Even Stats Canada is careful to call it that, to point out it merely means what is reported to police.

So if the same % of people dont report, yet the reported crime is dropping

Except the same number of people are not 'not reporting'. As both the recent and previous victimization survey show a drop in how many people are bothering to report crime to police.

But we need more criminal bills cuz ya knw....

And once again, my complaint was over the injustice of lax sentencing. So far the argument has been something like this.

"This guy beat a man nearly to death and got a really weak sentence, and this happens too often."

"Oh well, I think crime is dropping, so I don't care."

What the hell kind of argument is that anyway? It's the argument of someone who could not possibly care less about issues of justice or injustice, but is just trying to reflexively score some kind of arcane internet debating point, if only in his own mind.

[Scotty]

Also, everyone's opinion about what punishment fits the crime is going to be different. You say you want the justice system to do that, but I say the punishments do fit the crimes. How do we determine whose punishment is the most fitting? I believe the justice system is setup to do just that, particularly through judicial discretion when it comes to sentencing.

So if I beat you into a coma and you wind up institutionalized for the rest of your life, you think two years in jail would be a proper, just punishment?

[Scotty]

The stats clearly show that both crime and crime severity are decreasing.

They do nothing of the sort.

[Scotty]

Perhaps you should try reading the actual stats canada statistics. Crime severity has been decreasing, and it's been decreasing for a very long time.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/090421/dq090421b-eng.htm[

I know you didn't read those stats. You've been rather proud on many occasions of saying you don't ever bother to read reports or statistics. At best, you seem to prefer to have someone give you a summary of the summary.

In point of fact, according to the Stats Canada victimization survey, fewer and fewer people are bothering to report crime to police. And so, presto! The police say that there is less crime being reported! What a shocker!

That doesn't mean there is less crime, of course.

And even 'police reported' crime is many times higher than it was in the fifties and sixties. I've posted that information before, but of course, reading is so difficult for you, especially when it doesn't support your rock-solid preconceptions, that you never bother to look such things over.

Do you even know what goes on in Canadian jails? The whole experience is centred around rehabilitation, therapy, and behaviour modification. Does it always work? No. Is it intended to punish before anything else? No.

In fact, there's precious little evidence any of that EVER works. Prison is a very unpleasant experience - largely due to the company - and so serves as a deterrent. Still, the recidivism rate is at 37%.

Stronger punishment would serve as even more of a deterrent.

[cybercoma]

So if I beat you into a coma and you wind up institutionalized for the rest of your life, you think two years in jail would be a proper, just punishment?

It obviously depends on the circumstances particular to the incident, which is why judicial discretion is important. If the judge from a lower court makes a decision that seems inappropriate, the tools are in place to escalate the case to a higher court. My opinion about a just punishment is irrelevant. We have a history of jurisprudence that makes certain that decisions and sentencing are fair and consistent.

[Scotty]

I was talking about future crime, so yes. Then again, no, deter is not a good word. Rehabilitation is not realy designed as a deterrent, but rather a prevention of future crime.

And do you have the slightest evidence, or have you ever bothered to even look to see if there is any evidence that "rehabilitation" works? Ever? I'm betting... noooooooo.

[Scotty]

Even as a deterrent harsher penalties don't work. You would think being put to death in certain states would stop murders from happening or at the very least reduce them. It doesn't.

It stops the guy from killing again.

The problem with the whole capital punishment exercise is its uncertainty. You might be caught, and if so, you might be convicted, and if so you might be sentenced to death, and if so it might actually be carried out - some day - maybe in ten years or so. Criminologists say that effective deterrence is best achieved by swift, sure punishment. I.e., you're caught robbing a bank, you're sentenced the next day to ten years in prison. Instead, what tends to happen is you're released on bail, then over the following year or year and a half the lawyers dance and argue and negotiate, and then at some point in time you'll get some sort of sentence, and then decide how much of it you might actually have to carry out. "Hmm, three years, so I'll probably only serve about nine months or so."

[Scotty]

Yes, sleeping in an overcrowded room with eight guys is awesome.

Who is it who's got no idea what life in a prison is like again?

For an average middle class person, prison would be a horrible experience. If, on the other hand, you're a street punk, particularly a gang member, then it's no big deal. Instead of hanging around with your gang in some low-rent roach infested hovel downtown, you're hanging out with your gang in a nice clean prison. The violence is probably no better or worse. And you get to have your 'ho come and visit you for conjugal visits.

[guyser]

You realize most people reading this are just snickering at you, right?

Im betting not .

You can find whatever internet stats

And of course you dont bother to post anything to back your assertions up just an opinion.

you want and no one with more than half a brain is going to accept that Russia and Mexico have less crime than Finland and New Zealand.

But go ahead. Keep making yourself look like an idiot.

On a per capita basis the stats say that.

[Oleg Bach]

There are racist judges who release gang bangers who are carrying a pistol, because they know that they will go out and kill other blacks who might have been potential leaders. I know a guy that appoints judges and he does not like blacks...so I would assume that his personal policy might be refected in the rulings of those he assists to appoint.

[guyser]

There are racist judges who release gang bangers who are carrying a pistol, because they know that they will go out and kill other blacks who might have been potential leaders.

Yeah.....ok.

[noahbody]

The stats clearly show that both crime and crime severity are decreasing. How someone can take that to mean that violent crime is increasing is far beyond my comprehension .

Crime severity doesn't mean severe crime. It just means the number of reported crime occurrences.

There are some worrisome trends in the report, particularly in the area of youth violent crime, which jumped 30 per cent since 1991.

Nearly 80 per cent of youth involved in violent crime were accused of assault. Most of those charges were common assault – the least serious form. But the increases took place at the same time that overall crime was declining.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/426653

[Topaz]

Instead of building more prisons, lets get the high school kids and maybe the grade 8 kids, to visit a prisons and see what its like to live in one. Lets get the prisoners themselves to talk to these kids and tell them what its like, which could work for the prisoners towards their time in prisons. If society scares these kids enough they will always remember and may think twice before breaking the law. As for the guy who kick the other man, he should pay financially for the rest of his life to that man. When people who break the laws, start paying financially and do some time in prison ,then maybe the taxpayers won't have to pay so much taxes towards prisons. Thoughts?

[Molly]

Who is it who's got no idea what life in a prison is like again?

For an average middle class person, prison would be a horrible experience. If, on the other hand, you're a street punk, particularly a gang member, then it's no big deal. Instead of hanging around with your gang in some low-rent roach infested hovel downtown, you're hanging out with your gang in a nice clean prison. The violence is probably no better or worse. And you get to have your 'ho come and visit you for conjugal visits.

This comment is, among other things, unspeakably offensive.

[cybercoma]

It's quite obvious Scotty has never visited a prison, worked in the criminal justice system, or talked to any inmates in his entire life. All the prisoners that I have met were people deserving dignity and respect that found themselves there, more often than not, due to terrible circumstances in their lives. Contrary to the belief that prison is a walk in the park, it's miserable for everyone. If you think living your life, confined to the same building every single day, doing the same things day in and day out, is any sort of "life", you're sadly mistaken. Something as simple as going for a walk around the block becomes something you miss. Meanwhile, society has developed this myth that we need to worry about these "gang-bangers" and "thugs" because they threaten all of our safety. Truth be told, it's the white collar criminals that forge safety records in mines, killing dozens of their employees, and executives playing shell games with people's retirement savings, stealing millions upon millions from everyone, that are the true threat to our safety. But it doesn't make people afraid when criminals look just like them.

Edited June 28, 2011 by cybercoma

[Molly]

If society scares these kids enough they will always remember and may think twice before breaking the law.

Fear of retribution has little to do with behaviour.

[cybercoma]

Actually, there have been studies done that show a correlation between fearful children and behavioural disorders, which can lead to criminality as adults. In other words, scaring them actually does more damage. Truth is kids that grow up in a loving supportive environment do the best, not fearful and intimidating ones.

There are some websites around that give excellent critiques of the new A&E show Beyond Scared Straight, which sends "troubled" youth through prisons with inmates. The premise is that the inmates scare them into changing their behaviour. The results are highly inconsistent, given the half a dozen or so episodes that I have seen. In any case, a quick Google search should turn up some decent arguments on both sides about it.

Edited June 28, 2011 by cybercoma

[Tilter]

It obviously depends on the circumstances particular to the incident, which is why judicial discretion is important. If the judge from a lower court makes a decision that seems inappropriate, the tools are in place to escalate the case to a higher court. My opinion about a just punishment is irrelevant. We have a history of jurisprudence that makes certain that decisions and sentencing are fair and consistent.

What a crock of crap

We have a history of jurisprudence that makes certain that decisions and sentencing are fair and consistent

.

The only part of that sentence that rings true is "decisions and sentencing are fair and consistent." and only if the word "fair" is removed.

The consistency is that most sentences are far under what should be imposed especially for sex crimes In general & pedophilia in particular.

Time & time again the sentence for a blatantly "first degree" murder is reduced to second degree & a 3 or 4 year sentence is passed on someone who should stay in prison for the rest of his/her life which should be a life shortened by a rope, chair or injection.