Topaz Posted June 17, 2012 Report Posted June 17, 2012 Travis Baumgartner, was caught trying to leave Canada and go into the US but the US security border equipment ran his truck license plate through the computer and the alerts went. Now, what he went was terrible but being a S. guard I can't beleive he be so stupid to try to go through the border and then to have the 300 thousand plus in the truck with him thinking he wouldn't get caught or did he? http://www.citytv.com/toronto/citynews/news/national/article/210744--heist-suspect-arrested-at-the-border-with-334k Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 17, 2012 Report Posted June 17, 2012 Oh no....the American border agents had access to license plate data in Canada! Where is the outrage and disgust? What does Alex Jones have to say about this? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Wilber Posted June 18, 2012 Report Posted June 18, 2012 Ah, it only makes sense that we would ask US border agents to keep an eye out for him. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 18, 2012 Report Posted June 18, 2012 Ah, it only makes sense that we would ask US border agents to keep an eye out for him. But that violates Canada's sovereignty and the perps Charter Rights!! Evil Big Brother will use the information to spy and abuse on harmless and not so harmless Canadians. Just ask Alex Jones. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
guyser Posted June 18, 2012 Report Posted June 18, 2012 But that violates Canada's sovereignty and the perps Charter Rights!! . arrest at the Lynden, Wash., border crossing Neither of which apply. Quote
Wilber Posted June 18, 2012 Report Posted June 18, 2012 Neither of which apply. We call it the Aldergrove crossing. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Guest Peeves Posted June 20, 2012 Report Posted June 20, 2012 Another example in support of capital punishment for a cold blooded multiple murderer. Of what earthly good will be accomplished by a 'life term'? Especially a concurrent life term. Quote
bleeding heart Posted June 20, 2012 Report Posted June 20, 2012 Another example in support of capital punishment for a cold blooded multiple murderer. For Big Daddy Government Statists, yes. Of what earthly good will be accomplished by a 'life term'? Especially a concurrent life term. So..what good is it to imprison anyone? Put 'em all to death! Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
guyser Posted June 20, 2012 Report Posted June 20, 2012 Of what earthly good will be accomplished by a 'life term'? Maybe because he would get life? Just a thought. Quote
Topaz Posted June 20, 2012 Author Report Posted June 20, 2012 Oh no....the American border agents had access to license plate data in Canada! Where is the outrage and disgust? What does Alex Jones have to say about this? You are over reacting. I said nothing against the US border agents, it was the guy being a security guard and then heading across the border with over $300,000! He's either wanted to get caught or was very stupid, of course, he is only 21. Quote
Wilber Posted June 21, 2012 Report Posted June 21, 2012 Interesting. He had his mother's plates on the truck and the computer picked up the mismatch between the vehicle type and plate. He also tried to cross with a driver's license only for ID. Not your master criminal. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
bleeding heart Posted June 21, 2012 Report Posted June 21, 2012 Interesting. He had his mother's plates on the truck and the computer picked up the mismatch between the vehicle type and plate. He also tried to cross with a driver's license only for ID. Not your master criminal. The ID issue alone is enough to indict him as stupid, any criminal behaviour notwithstanding. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Guest Peeves Posted June 21, 2012 Report Posted June 21, 2012 Maybe because he would get life? Just a thought. That's a point, but, 'life' is not incarceration for a natural lifetime until death. Besides. He gets two murders for free. Quote
Canuckistani Posted June 21, 2012 Report Posted June 21, 2012 That's a point, but, 'life' is not incarceration for a natural lifetime until death. Besides. He gets two murders for free. No he doesn't. Those murders are taken into consideration when he's eligible for parole. Quote
Guest Peeves Posted June 21, 2012 Report Posted June 21, 2012 For Big Daddy Government Statists, yes. So..what good is it to imprison anyone? Put 'em all to death! Sort of silly for me to respond to a inane interrogatory but since you seem otherwise nice I will humor you. You imprison someone for a crime and to protect honest citizens from harm or threat. Personally your suggestion is repugnant, though there are indeed those that warrant execution, not many, but some certainly. Quote
Guest Peeves Posted June 21, 2012 Report Posted June 21, 2012 No he doesn't. Those murders are taken into consideration when he's eligible for parole. So, you suggest then that it's justice for two murdered people to only become meaningful in perhaps twenty five years or so. Two murders only then become factors! Become real murders to be considered perhaps, at the end of a "LIFE TERM". The other lives taken, the other two murders, are eventually (possibly) a factor but not initially since the murder sentences are concurrent. I maintain that deferring any sentence consideration for the additional murders, and sentencing based solely on the ONE murder is effectively devaluing the worth of the additional murders and rendering them meaningless and, that it makes a mockery of the taking of lives and of justice. Quote
Canuckistani Posted June 21, 2012 Report Posted June 21, 2012 So, you suggest then that it's justice for two murdered people to only become meaningful in perhaps twenty five years or so. Two murders only then become factors! Become real murders to be considered perhaps, at the end of a "LIFE TERM". The other lives taken, the other two murders, are eventually (possibly) a factor but not initially since the murder sentences are concurrent. I maintain that deferring any sentence consideration for the additional murders, and sentencing based solely on the ONE murder is effectively devaluing the worth of the additional murders and rendering them meaningless and, that it makes a mockery of the taking of lives and of justice. I don't see it as some equation as you do. He'll get a life sentence - he'll be accountable to the parole system for life. He will have a much harder time getting parole when he becomes eligible because he committed multiple murders. I think our sentencing system in this particular case is just fine. What needs improvement is the parole system that does a better job in handing out paroles only to deserving people in the first place, and a much, much better job in keeping track of people on parole in the second. To me, prison is not about revenge. It's about keeping society safe. Recidivism for murderers is very low, we're already doing OK there. I want prisoners to be given much more rehabilitation opportunities while in prison, and then given a chance on the outside. But I want a much more effective parole system that hauls those who blow it back inside. Quote
guyser Posted June 21, 2012 Report Posted June 21, 2012 That's a point, but, 'life' is not incarceration for a natural lifetime until death. True, but it is a life sentence as I said and you didnt think he did. Quote
bleeding heart Posted June 21, 2012 Report Posted June 21, 2012 (edited) Sort of silly for me to respond to a inane interrogatory but since you seem otherwise nice I will humor you. I kind of appreciate that, honestly. You imprison someone for a crime and to protect honest citizens from harm or threat. Sure, of course. Personally your suggestion is repugnant, though there are indeed those that warrant execution, not many, but some certainly. I disagree. (Not with the "repugnant" part, but of course I wasn't serious.) While I'm willing to entertain the idea that some people may well deserve to die, I'd err--conservatively, you might say--on the caution side of the street. That is, the very fact that we would like to see some people killed for their behaviour implies that part of us understands just how profound, how monumental, is the act of taking a life. More to the point, I don't believe in allowing the State the ultimate power--that of killing its citizens. Edited June 21, 2012 by bleeding heart Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Canuckistani Posted June 21, 2012 Report Posted June 21, 2012 More to the point, I don't believe in allowing the State the ultimate power--that of killing its citizens. Killing in retribution of killing just brutalizes the state. And, for the few cases where we have absolute certainty of guilt (you wouldn't want to kill without that, would you?) and the crime is sufficiently heinous to merit killing it's not worth it to have a whole killing mechanism in place. Quote
bleeding heart Posted June 21, 2012 Report Posted June 21, 2012 Killing in retribution of killing just brutalizes the state. And, for the few cases where we have absolute certainty of guilt (you wouldn't want to kill without that, would you?) and the crime is sufficiently heinous to merit killing it's not worth it to have a whole killing mechanism in place. A worthy addition to the argument. Contrary to what some people might think, there are serious costs involved in instituting a system of executions. Unless we do away with appeals, prisoners' rights, and use the old kneeling-convict-shot-in-the-head bit; and I don't think Canada wants to quite go down that road. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 22, 2012 Report Posted June 22, 2012 ...Unless we do away with appeals, prisoners' rights, and use the old kneeling-convict-shot-in-the-head bit; and I don't think Canada wants to quite go down that road. There is a third way that may be acceptable to Canadians. Simply place our Edmonton hero into a cell with Luka Magnotta and let nature take care of things. This would satisfy CanCon rules in every way. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bleeding heart Posted June 22, 2012 Report Posted June 22, 2012 There is a third way that may be acceptable to Canadians. Simply place our Edmonton hero into a cell with Luka Magnotta and let nature take care of things. This would satisfy CanCon rules in every way. CanCon only requires two-thirds Canadian, so it more than suffices. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
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.