Tougher punishment for career criminals

Signals.Cpl · May 26, 2012

Yes, and once again, you earned an F .

Contrary to what you feel , as if that has any bearing on your assertions, once given a life sentence, you have a life sentence and are under the control of the Justice system for life.

So if I am given a life sentence and get parole in 25 years Im still serving a life sentence? In my apartment?

guyser · May 27, 2012

So if I am given a life sentence and get parole in 25 years Im still serving a life sentence? In my apartment?

So , all this time, you never availed yourself of the facts, but instead how you feel about this?

To answer your question, yes! You are forever (as in Life? Get it) under the auspices of the Feds penal system.

Signals.Cpl · May 27, 2012

So , all this time, you never availed yourself of the facts, but instead how you feel about this?

To answer your question, yes! You are forever (as in Life? Get it) under the auspices of the Feds penal system.

Ok so in your argument is that 100% of all those who are handed a life in prison sentence die in prison because it means life? Is that what you mean? Because I sure would LOVE to see those statistics.

Canuckistani · May 27, 2012

They're under supervision the rest of their lives. Recidivism for murder is very low <3%.

Michael Hardner · May 27, 2012

This is one of many examples as to why we need a complete overhaul of our justice system.

Ok, you answered the first question but how many examples are there really ? Isn't this more emotionally-fuelled politics about something that is by all accounts supposed to be a dispassionate process ? We do call it a 'system' right ?

What do you want to do, have longer sentences ? How long will make you happy ? If somebody runs somebody over due to criminal negligence is 20 years enough ? Life ?

We saw the logical end of this types of politics with Harris' ridiculous boot camps and California's 3-strikes law. It's a salve to the political problem, IMO, not a social problem.

Signals.Cpl · May 27, 2012

They're under supervision the rest of their lives. Recidivism for murder is very low <3%.

I don't care if they are under supervision for the rest of eternity. Life IN prison means life inside of the walls of a prison, not life in prison for 25 years and we will make you check in every week.

Canuckistani · May 27, 2012

I don't care if they are under supervision for the rest of eternity. Life IN prison means life inside of the walls of a prison, not life in prison for 25 years and we will make you check in every week.

Irrefutable logic - life in prison means life in prison. But a life sentence doesn't necessarily mean life in prison, tho life in prison if necessary. Even in the US, if they mean life in prison they specify life w/o possibility of parole. That's a different sentence than just life.

Signals.Cpl · May 27, 2012

Ok, you answered the first question but how many examples are there really ? Isn't this more emotionally-fuelled politics about something that is by all accounts supposed to be a dispassionate process ? We do call it a 'system' right ?

What do you want to do, have longer sentences ? How long will make you happy ? If somebody runs somebody over due to criminal negligence is 20 years enough ? Life ?

We saw the logical end of this types of politics with Harris' ridiculous boot camps and California's 3-strikes law. It's a salve to the political problem, IMO, not a social problem.

I want the punishment that fits the crime. If you kidnap, rape and kill a little child then you get a punishment accordingly, meaning never see the light of day as a free person.

You embezzle money, you are punished accordingly, punishment should fit the crime. If someone is sentenced to life in prison then they should die in that prison when their life ends. We need to look out for the people of Canada, if this guy as an example was given a one year sentence because someone believes it was an "accident" would he do it again? Seeing as he has committed at least 193 crimes that we know of and has been involved in 6 high speed chases then we could safely assume that he is a danger to society. We need to lock up people who show that they are unable or unwilling to change rather then give them nearly unlimited supply of chances.

Signals.Cpl · May 27, 2012

Irrefutable logic - life in prison means life in prison. But a life sentence doesn't necessarily mean life in prison, tho life in prison if necessary. Even in the US, if they mean life in prison they specify life w/o possibility of parole. That's a different sentence than just life.

Life in prison without the possibility of parole. Thats what I initially said and Canada does not have that distinction, only way to have a life sentence is if you daclear the offender I think it was dangerous offender or something. And you still leave it at the hands of parole board or whatever its called.

Michael Hardner · May 27, 2012

I don't care if they are under supervision for the rest of eternity. Life IN prison means life inside of the walls of a prison, not life in prison for 25 years and we will make you check in every week.

Life in prison for heinous murder is reasonable, I would say. There is an aspect of the justice system that demands that the public invests their trust into it, and I must admit that we don't have that today.

What I can't abide by is pushing the monster button for political expediency, but there is something to the dissatisfaction we hear about.

Signals.Cpl · May 27, 2012

Life in prison for heinous murder is reasonable, I would say. There is an aspect of the justice system that demands that the public invests their trust into it, and I must admit that we don't have that today.

What I can't abide by is pushing the monster button for political expediency, but there is something to the dissatisfaction we hear about.

Its not a one size fits all. We should make sure that the crime is punished according to the impact. Violent crimes should be judged separately from non-violent crimes but ultimately stealing my POS car does not warrant a life in prison, stealing 20,30 or 70 of them does as the criminal has shown beyond a doubt they are unable or unwilling to observe the rules of society. Non violent crimes will progressively get tougher sentences based on the impact, steal my wallet and max out my debit and credit cards, one sentence. Steal my identity and add hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt, different story serious punishment. Stealing a lot of people's life savings earns you a life in prison. Simple as that, at some point we stop looking at rehabilitation and start looking at making you pay for your crimes and keep you away from society.

dre · May 27, 2012

I want the punishment that fits the crime.

No... you want a system that does not produce a single shocking outcome that you can emotionalize over like a 6 year old girl.

Your type of thinking should be kept about a billion miles away from our criminal justice system.

bleeding heart · May 27, 2012

Its not a one size fits all. We should make sure that the crime is punished according to the impact. Violent crimes should be judged separately from non-violent crimes but ultimately stealing my POS car does not warrant a life in prison, stealing 20,30 or 70 of them does as the criminal has shown beyond a doubt they are unable or unwilling to observe the rules of society. Non violent crimes will progressively get tougher sentences based on the impact, steal my wallet and max out my debit and credit cards, one sentence. Steal my identity and add hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt, different story serious punishment. Stealing a lot of people's life savings earns you a life in prison. Simple as that, at some point we stop looking at rehabilitation and start looking at making you pay for your crimes and keep you away from society.

I agree with some of this, but there are other injustices built into the system which don't bother you...that you even imply that you support.

For example, the "POS" car: well, the fact is, if I stole my cousin's two thousand dollar car, the impact on a person's life is far, far greater than if I stole a wealthy fellow's hundred thousand dollar "look at me!" accessory.

But the latter is a more serious crime...because the stolen good is worth more, not because of the impact upon the victim's life.

There are in fact plenty of top-down class-warrior, elitist issues with the justice system. If you can afford an expensive lawyer, your outcome will likely be better. So, ok, you can buy your justice, to a degree, and this comes from the premise that those with money deserve better everything...including how they are treated for their crimes.

Even exorbitant rates of bail are based explicitly on an elitist impulse in society.

Mind you, none of this undermines what you've been saying; if anything, it adds to it.

Edited May 27, 2012 by bleeding heart

Signals.Cpl · May 27, 2012

No... you want a system that does not produce a single shocking outcome that you can emotionalize over like a 6 year old girl.

Your type of thinking should be kept about a billion miles away from our criminal justice system.

And you were wrong, so now you are stomping your little feet and throwing a little tantrum... good job.

Signals.Cpl · May 27, 2012

I agree with some of this, but there are other injustices built into the system which don't bother you...that you even imply that you support.

For example, the "POS" car: well, the fact is, if I stole my cousin's two thousand dollar car, the impact on a person's life is far, far greater than if I stole a wealthy fellow's hundred thousand dollar "look at me!" accessory.

But the latter is a more serious crime...because the stolen good is worth more, not because of the impact upon the victim's life.

There are in fact plenty of top-down class-warrior, elitist issues with the justice system. If you can afford an expensive lawyer, your outcome will likely be better. So, ok, you can buy your justice, to a degree, and this comes from the premise that those with money deserve better everything...including how they are treated for their crimes.

Even exorbitant rates of bail are based explicitly on an elitist impulse in society.

Mind you, none of this undermines what you've been saying; if anything, it adds to it.

If you steal my POS car, it still does not does not have a life altering long term effect, while stealing your life savings along with hundreds of other people has a definite life altering aspect to it and should be punished accordingly.

bleeding heart · May 27, 2012

If you steal my POS car, it still does not does not have a life altering long term effect, while stealing your life savings along with hundreds of other people has a definite life altering aspect to it and should be punished accordingly.

Completely divorced from my point, which you don't address at all.

I wasn't comparing the POS car to life savings; I was comapring it to more expensive cars, notably status symbols people buy for the sake of bragging rights.

The fellow with the little, rusty beater is generally hurt more by theft than the fellow with the "look at me!" piece of conspicuous consumption.

But the law takes the latter's "loss" more seriously.

If you're genuinely concerned about the rot of the justice system, you'd be concerned about the classist, elitist forms which favour the middle, upper-middle and wealthy classes over everybody else.

Inherently. Built right in to the system.

Unless you agree that moneyed folks should have access to "justice" more amenable to their wants and desires.

Edited May 27, 2012 by bleeding heart

Signals.Cpl · May 27, 2012

Completely divorced from my point, which you don't address at all.

I wasn't comparing the POS car to life savings; I was comapring it to more expensive cars, notably status symbols people buy for the sake of bragging rights.

The fellow with the little, rusty beater is generally hurt more by theft than the fellow with the "look at me!" piece of conspicuous consumption.

But the law takes the latter's "loss" more seriously.

If you're genuinely concerned about the rot of the justice system, you'd be concerned about the classist, elitist forms which favour the middle, upper-middle and wealthy classes over everybody else.

Inherently. Built right in to the system.

Unless you agree that moneyed folks should have access to "justice" more amenable to their wants and desires.

So to you, strengthening the justice system also includes fixing the social class system?

Someone steals my POS car it has an effect on me, at the same time someone steals a car worth 100k, it has an effect on its owner, yet both if properly insured will be covered. A crime is a crime regardless of the class of the victim, you steal a car wether it costs 1k or 100k it is still is just a car ignoring any sentimental attachments the outcome of the crime is not life or death and both crimes should be taken seriously.

As for lawyers? I don't know what we could do about that.

I work all my life, and have savings of 500,000 dollars, and if you one way or another steal my savings you should be punished, but here is where we need somewhat of a double standard. If you steal my 500k that ruins my life as its my life savings and I have worked for decades to put that away and suddenly my retirement standard of living drops dramatically, while If you steal 500k from Bill Gates it would be theft, but its not life altering. We need to punish the crime, and the impact it has on its victims. If you steal a car and smash in to my car causing me serious injury the law should take that in to account, as well the impact of the injuries should be accounted. If I was paralyzed my career prospects suddenly disappear and thus I have a limited earning potential for the rest of my life, my standard of living drops and it affects me and my family for the rest of my life, while you smash in to me, break some bones that will be healed within 6 months the overall impact on my life would be lesser.

bleeding heart · May 27, 2012

So to you, strengthening the justice system also includes fixing the social class system?

Fixing it within the justice system, so that it's not a two-tiered system...and all it would involve is taking our stated principles of justice seriously.

Someone steals my POS car it has an effect on me, at the same time someone steals a car worth 100k, it has an effect on its owner, yet both if properly insured will be covered.

I'm saying we should stop pretending that a theft of something more valuable in dollar terms is automatically a more serious crime. It isn't.

A crime is a crime regardless of the class of the victim,

My point entirely. But that is not the way things work.

you steal a car wether it costs 1k or 100k it is still is just a car ignoring any sentimental attachments the outcome of the crime is not life or death

Of course not. But one of them affects the victim's life more profoundly than does the other. And the way that the seriousness of much property crime is assessed, thanks to institutional factors (and a general worship of wealthy people and hatred of the poor), is to determine that the more the victim has, the more serious the crime.

and both crimes should be taken seriously.

Of course.

As for lawyers? I don't know what we could do about that.

I'm not talking about lawyers, but about the unquestioning obedience to unjust aspects of the system within which the lawyers must operate. A huge bail amount means a wealthy person stays home before his trial, and a poor person sits in jail. We could say "life is unfair," but that's about free people who get a bum deal...not about our actual system of justice, in which different rules apply, supposedly.

And an expensive lawyer is going to give you a better chance of acquittal, or a better chance at a milder sentence, than is a court-appointed lawyer. (There are exceptions, obviously, but this is generally the case.)

That is not "justice." It really, really isn't. It's the opposite.

Edited May 27, 2012 by bleeding heart

Argus · May 27, 2012

Punishment doesn't work - it doesn't prevent crime.

Sure it does. This clown will not be out stealing and racing down the street next year. Or for some years to come. Thus the punishment worked just fine.

Better would be to focus on rehabilitation, giving guys like this support to find a better way to live

.

And if he has no interest in being rehabilitated?

Argus · May 27, 2012

This is one area of justice in Canada that I think we fail at.

But that is not the Justice system at fault, it is Parliament not advocating and passing harsher laws to deal with it.

Under the Criminal Code of Canada, Section cc. 380.(1), every one who is found guilty of Fraud Over $5000 is guilty of an indictable offense that is punishable by a term of imprisonment up to fourteen years.

No jail time for woman who stole from seniors

Argus · May 27, 2012

I kind of figured you would post again without learning.

You are not only wrong, but dead wrong. Want to try a third time?

You can give it up. Nobody's buying your technocrat insistence that it's life in prison even when you're sitting by the pool in the Bahamas with a blonde under each arm.

Argus · May 27, 2012

The best and cheapest prevention is rehabilitation. As I said, long periods of closely monitored parole with support. If he fails, he goes back to prison. Prisons should not be punitive but rehabilitative.

Really, so someone rapes and murders a teenage girl should not be subjected to any punitive treatment?

Argus · May 27, 2012

Ok, you answered the first question but how many examples are there really ? Isn't this more emotionally-fuelled politics about something that is by all accounts supposed to be a dispassionate process ? We do call it a 'system' right ?

What do you want to do, have longer sentences ? How long will make you happy ? If somebody runs somebody over due to criminal negligence is 20 years enough ? Life ?

Yes, life, as in forever, as in never getting out, as in kept away from society for the entire remainder of his life.

How many are there? Entirely too many. A large proportion of crimes in Canada is committed by repeat offenders who have long records of convictions going back many, many years. Sweep them all off the street and into a permanent prison and crime would fall.

Canuckistani · May 27, 2012

Canuckistani, on 26 May 2012 - 07:46 PM, said:
The best and cheapest prevention is rehabilitation. As I said, long periods of closely monitored parole with support. If he fails, he goes back to prison. Prisons should not be punitive but rehabilitative.

Really, so someone rapes and murders a teenage girl should not be subjected to any punitive treatment?

If you want revenge for the crime, that's one thing. If you actually want to change behavior punishment won't do it.

Signals.Cpl · May 27, 2012

If you want revenge for the crime, that's one thing. If you actually want to change behavior punishment won't do it.

At some point rehabilitation looses out. How much time has this guy spent in jail I would assume quite some time, and he still was not rehabilitated. At some point it stops being about changing or fixing the person and it becomes a means of prevention.