Courts Must Consider History When Sentencing Aboriginal Offenders

[stopstaaron]

Well, they actually have some pretty nice houses, and some pretty bad ones...but I think you just made my point. You have to take into consideration their situations hen you are judging them, especially legally.

If a person of a different race did the exact same crime how come that person would get a much harsher sentence than if the native did it? Um, that doesn't make sense at all.

[Smallc]

This is all true, however it seems to me that our government has created this disparity.

I agree to a point, though it isn't all the government's fault. That said, the courts can't change that. All they can do is take it into consideration.

[Smallc]

If a person of a different race did the exact same crime how come that person would get a much harsher sentence than if the native did it? Um, that doesn't make sense at all.

It depends on the crime and the circumstance.

[stopstaaron]

It depends on the crime and the circumstance.

We'll have to agree to disagree but that is definitely racist.

[cybercoma]

I'm sure another thing people don't consider is that the youth unemployment rate is fully twice as high as the national average. Young people between the ages of 15-24 have a nearly 15% unemployment rate. The connection that many are not making is that the aboriginal communities have a much greater proportion of youth than the national demographics. We are failing our youth all across this country and it's especially evident in the aboriginal communities.

[stopstaaron]

The connection that many are not making is that the aboriginal communities have a much greater proportion of youth than the national demographics.

When you don't have to work and are home all day you're probably going to be having a lot of sex.

[cybercoma]

Your racist ignorance has been duly noted: natives that live on reserves sit at home all day having sex, drinking, and doing drugs. Got it.

Edited March 23, 2012 by cybercoma

[stopstaaron]

Your racist ignorance has been duly noted. Natives that live on reserves sit at home all day having sex, drinking, and doing drugs.

Maybe you have some personal experiences that you would like to share that contradicts mine?

Edited March 23, 2012 by stopstaaron

[Smallc]

Your racist ignorance has been duly noted: natives that live on reserves sit at home all day having sex, drinking, and doing drugs. Got it.

Well, unfortunately, that is somewhat of a reality on many reserves....but it isn't true of everyone on reserve, and it isn't something that comes from a result of race, I don't think.

[Smallc]

I agree. In fact, I would go so far as to say that this decision only reinforces and aggravates the problem.

In some ways I think you're right.

[stopstaaron]

it isn't something that comes from a result of race, I don't think.

I agree, there are a lot of white families in my town whom have little children running around, they don't look very well kept. They are living in houses paid for by the government. Don't really do much other than sit on their front porches and smoke and yell at their children I should add

Very miserable

Edited March 23, 2012 by stopstaaron

[DogOnPorch]

Perhaps if you lived and worked near Volga,Germany.

WWWTT

Really? Why? I'm not a victim or anything. Stalin didn't steal my Teddy-Bear as a kid, etc.

[Jack Weber]

Really? Why? I'm not a victim or anything. Stalin didn't steal my Teddy-Bear as a kid, etc.

Volga,Germany???

Someone is geographically challenged...

[Argus]

Of course the courts have always taken the individual circumstances of a defendant into consideration during sentencing. It's almost a cliche with the lawyer saying "But your honour, my client had such a poor upbringing!" etc. etc.

But this is rather different. This says, it doesn't matter if a native Canadian grew up wealthy, in a very nice neighborhood, to kind, gentle and caring parents, and went to a very nice school. He's a native, therefore, well, you just can't expect much of him. You have to treat him with kid gloves, have to be more tolerant when he commits acts of violence or otherwise breaks the law. You can't expect him to behave like, you know, a civilized person would. After all, he's just a native. Therefore, because he's so inferior, all courts are mandated to take his inferiority into consideration when sentencing, much like they would a child who hadn't yet developed the mental facility to understand their poor decision making could lead to consequences.

It's liberal bigotry at in all its breathtaking ignorance.

[Topaz]

People of all races suffer from a difficult up bringing .. all you are doing is making a case to end the use of reservations because as long as they live on the reserve they don't have to pay taxes or work thus enabling them to sit around and do drugs.

Ok, look at their side, how many FN would be hired by non-natives? How many would be verbally abused by non-natives? Right now, there's not enough jobs to go around for non-natives,between 500,000 to 2 mil I bet are not working. How many non-natives are on welfare, just sitting around and drinking and doing drugs, as you say. I don't think you are being fair, there always bad apples in every ethnic group.

[WWWTT]

Really? Why? I'm not a victim or anything. Stalin didn't steal my Teddy-Bear as a kid, etc.

OK then,maybe I mis interpreted what you meant or something.

Either way I do not believe you are a criminal or have recently commited an offence so this issue would not effect you.So asking for sympathy from the court when you are not even in a position seems kind of hypocritical or odd or something not right?

WWWTT

[Bonam]

It's liberal bigotry at in all its breathtaking ignorance.

Indeed. It's totally unacceptable. Unfortunately, also totally unsurprising.

Anyway, one's race should have absolutely nothing to do with how one is sentenced.

[dre]

Uh, because the job of a judge is to judge? I'm not saying said judge should ignore all charges against anyone of aboriginal descent, I'm saying he should take any mitigating factors into account. If he does and decides it shouldn't affect the ruling, that's absolutely fine by me.

I agree but I worry about increasing the ammount of human judgement as opposed to predictable rules.

I mean... telling a judge he should "consider the history of colonialism etc" seems to set no real legal standard. Any judge could do anything based on that. If this is supposed to be a legal criteria, then there should be more direction than that. The law should document how it will be applied or at least give judges some more direction.

Also if someone was dealt a shitty hand in life and that is potentially a mitigating factor criminal trial... shouldnt judges consider that whether or not the person is native? The court should have given judges a more broad mandate to consider socio-economic circumstances because there all kinds of people born into hopelessness or at least disadvantage besides natives.

Edited March 24, 2012 by dre

[cybercoma]

Indeed. It's totally unacceptable. Unfortunately, also totally unsurprising.

Anyway, one's race should have absolutely nothing to do with how one is sentenced.

They didn't say race has anything to do with sentencing. They said their history needs to be considered. It just so happens that race was a consideration when the aboriginal community was being raped by a paternalistic and oppressive government for generations. Edited March 24, 2012 by cybercoma

[DogOnPorch]

They didn't say race has anything to do with sentencing. They said their history needs to be considered. It just so happens that race was a consideration when the aboriginal community was being raped by a paternalistic and oppressive government for generations.

Ummmm...so? Many Canadians born in Canada have various similar sob stories. Why is the 'aboriginal community' to be treated any different? I was born here, too. My family did its bit building this place. Perpetual victimhood isn't a very good plan for the future.

[-TSS-]

It is a complicated matter and therefore it is easy to understand how this issue feeds many people's prejudices. The fact is that both sides of the argument are right and wrong. The justice-system indeed has an in-built bias against the indigenous people and I'm not talking about Canada alone but many other countries including my own.

On the other hand, wallowing in victim-mentality and justifying everything with the victim-card is also not the right way to go forward.

[Tilter]

They didn't say race has anything to do with sentencing. They said their history needs to be considered. It just so happens that race was a consideration when the aboriginal community was being raped by a paternalistic and oppressive government for generations.

They didn't say race has anything to do with sentencing

I think that the word "aboriginal" was included in the statement. Is this an indication of the race or is it perhaps some type of tree or rock?

[g_bambino]

They said their history needs to be considered.

And considered means just that: considered, which leaves the option to take what's being considered into account or disregard it.

[T]he aboriginal community was being raped by a paternalistic and oppressive government for generations.

Let's not overdo it.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

And considered means just that: considered, which leaves the option to take what's being considered into account or disregard it.

Let's not overdo it.

Too late, the entire concept is overdone. Both sides acting in a manner non conducive to settlement, we are doomed to continue the farce.

You cannot a mandate settlement, the best that can functionally be sought at this point is to begin a true dialogue. That would take more courage and fortitude than many of our political representatives have available for public use. Even so there really is no time like the present to begin. I think this is something that needs to get done, and to delay means to impede resolution. In my mind getting in the way of resolving outstanding issues with the First Nations peoples of Canada, is tantamount to criminal neglect. If we understand that the Government of Canada is mandated as custodian of indigenous people, then we can understand the urgent need to act within that purpose. This really means delegating the necessary authority to NEGOTIATE as equals. The Canadian nation needs to do no more than invite any First Nations representatives to a conference and establish protocols for discussion. Once procedures are established then true discussions begin within an open format. Everything must must available to be put on the table with the intent of resolution. If Canada can pull this off it will create an international stir, and set a new bar of conduct in terms of governmental behaviour and act as a model for international dispute resolution.

The key is simple, place the items of dispute in front of the negotiators, with an impartial referee between the two parties. Discussions then become more serious very quickly.

[g_bambino]

You cannot a mandate settlement, the best that can functionally be sought at this point is to begin a true dialogue.

Sure. But engaging in a dialogue will necessitate consideration of the other party's points and issues.

The Canadian nation needs to do no more than invite any First Nations representatives to a conference...

Aboriginals are subjects of the Canaidan Crown, just like the rest of us, and, as such, are part of the Canadian nation.

[+]

Edited March 24, 2012 by g_bambino