Scotty Posted June 21, 2011 Author 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? Clearly it's BS. Finland and New Zealand up on the top of the list as the most crime-ridden countries in the world? I don't think so! And so good to see that there's so little crime in Mexico! LOL Edited June 21, 2011 by Scotty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 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? Division of property does not mean she gets a 300k house free and clear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 (edited) Clearly it's BS. Finland and New Zealand up on the top of the list as the most crime-ridden countries in the world? I don't think so! And so good to see that there's so little crime in Mexico! LOL Another chirping in with an opinion and no facts. Developed nations was one of the parameters, checking online it seems that yup, by and large those figures are correct. Edited June 21, 2011 by guyser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 Stats Canada's victimization surveys show no such drop in crime. What they do show is a drop in reporting rates. Stats Can: The rate of violent victimization in Canada, based on information provided by Canadians themselves, was no higher in 2004 than it was five years earlier, according to a new survey that examined the extent and nature of criminal victimization. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/051124/dq051124b-eng.htm This proportion was unchanged from 2004, the last time the victimization survey was conducted. Rates of victimization resulting from violent crimes, namely sexual assault, physical assault and robbery, remained stable between 2004 and 2009. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/100928/dq100928a-eng.htm Hey maybe if you say it a third or fourth time it might come true? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 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. I don't see any other parents getting a tax break on the money they spend on their children. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 Not sure since you post no links but this does not agree with you Sorry, My linkwiki links. Your list does not paint a pretty picture either, which supports my claim that there is a problem within our justice system. I think Scotty has a piont that the sentencing portion or punishment does not fit the crime. which should be the main consideration when sentencing, not if the punishment is acting as a deterent, which it has already been proven that it does not in most cases, because frankly i don't care if it deters or not. This case we are looking at, a man has ruined anothers life and he recieves a very light sentence. thats BS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 ..., not if the punishment is acting as a deterent, which it has already been proven that it does not in most cases, because frankly i don't care if it deters or not. If crime is dropping.......and it is....what has been proven? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 Crime has dropped very little in the last 5 years, and by using my list or yours it does not say anything except perhaps staus quo....My piont is our country has spent to much time and effort into to seeking if our sentences deter crime...and to little to see if it's an effective punishment that fits the crime....Frankly i don't care if it deters anyone at all...i want it to fit the crime....I also don't want them living the life of riley while they are serving this punishment, and all rights suspended until they are released. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 (edited) Crime has dropped very little in the last 5 years, and by using my list or yours it does not say anything except perhaps staus quo Three (crime reported) and four point (severity index) drops since 2009 , 17% since 1999 and 22% since a999 respectively, 43,000 less crimes reported.....that aint the status quo. ....My piont is our country has spent to much time and effort into to seeking if our sentences deter crime...and to little to see if it's an effective punishment that fits the crime....Frankly i don't care if it deters anyone at all...i want it to fit the crime....I also don't want them living the life of riley while they are serving this punishment, and all rights suspended until they are released. Rights are not suspended and its unrealistic to even attempt or think that way, with an exception of freedom of movement (obvious) and some privacy. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/100720/dq100720a-eng.htm Edited June 22, 2011 by guyser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 Some judges understand if they lock up all the crimminals that the judical system for the most part would cease to exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 Three (crime reported) and four point (severity index) drops since 2009 , 17% since 1999 and 22% since a999 respectively, 43,000 less crimes reported.....that aint the status quo. I guess that would depend on what source document you used, my shows only a slight drop in the last 2 years, and very little overall difference since 2009. thats the wiki site which uses Auditor general report or so they say. Rights are not suspended and its unrealistic to even attempt or think that way, with an exception of freedom of movement (obvious) and some privacy. I'm thinking that is not enough, and it's BS to think it's unrealistic. I think we've been taken for a ride by convicts far to long, and have given back all their rights by trying to turn the other cheek and convert them back into regular citizens...There should be a punishment and thats it...do your punishment then get out... no be a good boy recieve 1/3 of your sentence off, get a 3 for 1 back awaiting for trail, etc etc... Studies have clearly shown that harsh or long sentences do not act as a deterent for crime....And that prisons act as huge learning instutions for criminal actitivies....however there are other studies that show that prisons with auster conditions and very few rights given out freely were the best deterent, those prisons that infact forced prisoners to work be it on farms or road gangs etc etc that paid they're own way, were also cost effective, and showed the best promise of repeat offenders not returning....No Sat TV , Movies, TV , Free education, week end passes, vists from girlfriends....Shit they have it better than our soldiers do in Afghan.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 Some judges understand if they lock up all the crimminals that the judical system for the most part would cease to exist. Do we really need to lock up all the criminals our courts send their way...busted for a couple Grams of pot, why can't this guy work it off doing community service, something like that, but you kill or mess someone life up forever there should be a heavy price to be paid...IE murder, a drunk driver that kills someone.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 There is a privledged kid I know - a friend of the family..His dad spent a lot of money on his defense. The brat is now in Kingston doing some fairly hard time. From what I heard this middle class young man now has a shaved head and is covered in tattoos. Really don`t want to see this guy when he gets out ...seeing our correctional system corrected him. This guy is now from what I gather about 200% worse. There is only one true draw back and discomfort to these institutions ...........no woman. Other than that it would be tolerable. Once you figure out how not to get stabbed or bludgeoned to death. Like those that like the idea of capital punishment....are usually those capable of killing....personally - I have never been sentenced by a judge to jail - but did do 16 days in the city slammer for an old unpaid fine ...that was about 30 years ago -The old Scottish guards would dress you in white and treat you as if you were at a boarding school - NOW from what I understand most prisoners are black and it is a hell hole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 (edited) I guess that would depend on what source document you used, The source document was posted < Statistics Canada and is reliable, my shows only a slight drop in the last 2 years, and very little overall difference since 2009. thats the wiki site which uses Auditor general report or so they say. Enough said I'm thinking that is not enough, and it's BS to think it's unrealistic. I think we've been taken for a ride by convicts far to long, If you assumption is the criminal sets the rules then the premise is wrong from the outset. and have given back all their rights by trying to turn the other cheek and convert them back into regular citizens If one doesnt take away, then there is nothing to give back. Right are not suspended nor should be...ever. (prior conciliation standing) We in this country are born with rights and they stay with you forever. ...There should be a punishment and thats it...do your punishment then get out... no be a good boy recieve 1/3 of your sentence off, get a 3 for 1 back awaiting for trail, etc etc... We cannot afford it. But in cases were bodily harm or aggravated assault occurs, then I can get behind that. Studies have clearly shown that harsh or long sentences do not act as a deterent for crime....And that prisons act as huge learning instutions for criminal actitivies....however there are other studies that show that prisons with auster conditions and very few rights given out freely were the best deterent, those prisons that infact forced prisoners to work be it on farms or road gangs etc etc that paid they're own way, were also cost effective, and showed the best promise of repeat offenders not returning....No Sat TV , Movies, TV , Free education, week end passes, vists from girlfriends Those studies are not from this country if what you say is true. 'Very few rights given out" is not from this country. Or are you talking about privileges that some prisoners can earn? ....Shit they have it better than our soldiers do in Afghan.... They signed up for the job. And get paid. Edited June 22, 2011 by guyser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 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. You're on the wrong topic. Maybe you should start another one. Maybe you could find where I talked about high levels of crime on this topic? ROFLMAO... Yeah sure no problem. Its in the post i was replying to for god sakes. Try to pay attention. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 Just my opinion but from what I see on a pretty regular basis it would appear that sentencing is pretty lax in many cases. My post about the big bust on the reserves in Quebec would appear to bear this point of view out. Maurizio said marijuana supplied up the chain of the network was grown by groups based in the Montreal region and north of Montreal, including some who could move as much as 50 pounds of pot in one shot. Maurizio said the marijuana would be sent to “lieutenants” who worked under the alleged ringleader, Tyron Canatonquin, 43, and were based in Kanesatake and Oka. Canatonquin, 43, has a long criminal record with 37 case files dating back to 1987. They include convictions for hash and marijuana possession, assault, illegal possession of a firearm, conspiracy, assaulting a police officer and possession of the proceeds of crime. He was arrested with several people in 2000 as part of a different large-scale drug trafficking investigation and received a two-year suspended prison sentence. As you can see this guy has a long and distinguished criminal career, yet the last time he was busted he recieved what amounts to a slap on the wrist. Hopefully this time his sentence will amount to more than just a sad joke at Canadians expense, such as his last one was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 Just my opinion but from what I see on a pretty regular basis it would appear that sentencing is pretty lax in many cases. And thats the crux.Most people do not see cases unless printed in local paper, There are thousand fold more cases that are dealt with and not an issue, yet one comes along and some want to throw the baby and the bathwater out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted June 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 Division of property does not mean she gets a 300k house free and clear. Don't pick nits. It still means that she gets all of her earnings, and a big chunk of his, and he is left with what's left while paying taxes on his entire earnings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 Crime has dropped very little in the last 5 years, and by using my list or yours it does not say anything except perhaps staus quo....My piont is our country has spent to much time and effort into to seeking if our sentences deter crime...and to little to see if it's an effective punishment that fits the crime....Frankly i don't care if it deters anyone at all...i want it to fit the crime....I also don't want them living the life of riley while they are serving this punishment, and all rights suspended until they are released. What is the purpose of punishment, if you don't care about deterrence? Should it not be the goal of the criminal justice system to reduce crime? If not, are you ok with a criminal justice system that has harsh punishments but increases crime? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted June 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 Another chirping in with an opinion and no facts. Developed nations was one of the parameters, checking online it seems that yup, by and large those figures are correct. I'm sorry. Was I using my brain? Is that not allowed? Apparently you find some web site somewhere which gives you a ludicrous figure, and for you, that's the end of the story. No thinking of any kind required. Case closed. End of story. So sure, Mexico, a crime free haven. Finland, a horrific den of violence and crime. Sure. I can believe that. I just need to turn off my brain. Like you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted June 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 Stats Can: The rate of violent victimization in Canada, based on information provided by Canadians themselves, was no higher in 2004 than it was five years earlier, according to a new survey that examined the extent and nature of criminal victimization. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/051124/dq051124b-eng.htm This proportion was unchanged from 2004, the last time the victimization survey was conducted. Rates of victimization resulting from violent crimes, namely sexual assault, physical assault and robbery, remained stable between 2004 and 2009. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/100928/dq100928a-eng.htm Hey maybe if you say it a third or fourth time it might come true? Would you like to explain to me how my saying that the survey does not show a drop in crime is somehow contradicted by your posting a quote which said that crime was stable? Are you under the misapprehension that "stable" means "dropping"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted June 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 (edited) If crime is dropping.......and it is....what has been proven? This from the guy who thinks posting a quote that crime rates are stable means they must be dropping. Edited June 22, 2011 by Scotty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 Don't pick nits. It still means that she gets all of her earnings, and a big chunk of his, and he is left with what's left while paying taxes on his entire earnings. Then dont post with emotions and untruths as you8r basis. Becasue you said.... So she is living in his $300k house and he is living in a cheap rooming house Which means if the house is free and clear he has $150,000. = not a cheap rooming house If the mortgage is 200,000, she gets same as he does, $50,000 = not a cheap rooming house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted June 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 Three (crime reported) and four point (severity index) drops since 2009 , 17% since 1999 and 22% since a999 respectively, 43,000 less crimes reported.....that aint the status quo. Less crime reported does not mean there is less crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted June 22, 2011 Report Share Posted June 22, 2011 I'm sorry. Was I using my brain? Is that not allowed? Using ones brain is allowed. Try it sometime. Apparently you find some web site somewhere which gives you a ludicrous figure, and for you, that's the end of the story. No thinking of any kind required. Case closed. End of story. Nationmaster is a renowned stat site. . It aint 'some web site' but nice try. So sure, Mexico, a crime free haven. Finland, a horrific den of violence and crime. Sure. I can believe that. I just need to turn off my brain. Like you do. 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. 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.