How would you reform our prison system?

nimiru · August 5, 2012

I think what I would do to reform our prison system is to start all over. What we have now does nothing but puke out criminals that are probably worse than they were than before they went in. I would institute a humanizing approach that would offer men and women a good chance of rehabilitation. I know that sounds unlikely but I think if done properly anyone can be helped, given a chance. Well almost anyone. A good staff of psychologists to properly diagnose people with real mental trouble could be recognized and given the help they need rather than left to progress into the depths of despair and destitution that the present prison system relegates them to. Prison should not only be for punishment but also for rehabilitation as is claimed. We can't expect to treat them like animals while they are in the system and then expect them to be model citizens when they are released. It's time for us to wake up and realize that as a society that there are certain responsibilities that are inherit and and that includes caring for those that don't meet the expectations of society. We can't keep on shitting on those that don't and hope for the best as this won't work. There will always be people that will be on the wrong side of the law and it will be for any number of reasons and it could happen to anyone. No one is immune as you never know what life can deal you. It's easy to think otherwise but that's not the way life is. Just because life is good for you right now doesn't mean it can't turn around and bite you in the butt. I'm open for any suggestions.

login · August 9, 2012

Manny, punishment is SUPPOSED to rest with the State! It has to do with the concept of "consent to be governed".

No punishment rests with vengeful masochists and archaic minded individuals. Justice is about compassion not ruin.

If you ascribe to ruining society to heal society you are tainted with a false beleif system that is destructive rather than beneficial to society.

Once law and justice were individual matters. It didn't work that well. Those rich and powerful could run roughshod over the poor and weak. Eventually British law evolved to where justice lay with the King. The people consented to this because while the King might not be perfect he did have far more resources to nab and punish evil doers. Eventually even personal duels became outlawed.

I don't see how it is any different an individual has the empowerment to accept or not to accept a judgement and to be part of a society and thus bound to its law, or independent and their own state even if that means a breach of the peace, an individual has the defence of protection of their life as a fundamental of justice, the only question is honour in the way in which that is undertaken and rightfulness of actions as judged by their peers.

However, we now are at a point where the State is perceived as sometimes unwilling to punish those who have hurt us. We are not allowed to take things into our own hands but the State doesn't seem to do its job very well.

This only cheapens the injury to the citizen. It then breeds disrespect for the Law and the State.

It's all very well for the State to adopt what it considers "progressive" attitudes towards punishment but if it does so without the consent of the people then friction MUST occur!

I don't understand where you get your position from or why you support your position. Punishment does not correct it only instills fear or hate. Hardening individuals against govermental order is only setting up civil war or what would be deemed terrorism by a subnational person or a crime if not viewed correctly. It doesn't improve quality of life, on that principle if you expect eye for eye then you deserve an even greater 1000 fold response to your actions it is destructive until you or they are gone.

Many if not most of the attitudes in our justice system today have evolved from a relatively small group within the system. Changes are never done by referenda or a plebiscite. They are never even seen as campaign planks in an election platform!

I submit to you Manny that the present situation is already having its effect upon our culture and it doesn't seem to be a positive one!

The criminal code is changed all the time, most notably massively in 2001. Referenda are rare. Massive changes to the justice system were done by the Conservatives over the last few years unless you have been sleeping.

Frankly the system is corrupt and wrong in its practices, it instills hate and contempt of governmental authority and incites revolt.

Good government and the right to rule rests with benefits provided to society in that rule, rule by force alone with no benefit to society is occupation.

Edited August 9, 2012 by login

Argus · August 9, 2012

No punishment rests with vengeful masochists and archaic minded individuals. Justice is about compassion not ruin.

If you ascribe to ruining society to heal society you are tainted with a false beleif system that is destructive rather than beneficial to society.

You appear to reject the entire notion of punishment, which, on the face of it, is absurd. Would you treat Paul Bernardo with "compassion" and not imprison him? What about the many other hardened and vicious criminals in our prisons guilty of murder and sexual crimes?

cybercoma · August 9, 2012

You appear to reject the entire notion of punishment, which, on the face of it, is absurd. Would you treat Paul Bernardo with "compassion" and not imprison him? What about the many other hardened and vicious criminals in our prisons guilty of murder and sexual crimes?

You wrongfully equate compassion with not putting people in prison.

Argus · August 9, 2012

You wrongfully equate compassion with not putting people in prison.

No, I equate his 'no punishment' line with not wanting to put people in prison. If the notion of punishment is archaic and dreadful then why is Bernardo in prison for life? To teach him a lesson?

cybercoma · August 9, 2012

No, I equate his 'no punishment' line with not wanting to put people in prison. If the notion of punishment is archaic and dreadful then why is Bernardo in prison for life? To teach him a lesson?

He has been removed from society to keep it safe. Nowhere did anyone say that those convicted of crimes should not be put behind bars. I hate to throw strawman around because it's overused and often wrongly, but your response is the definition of that fallacy. You're making an argument against something nobody argued.

login · August 10, 2012

You appear to reject the entire notion of punishment, which, on the face of it, is absurd. Would you treat Paul Bernardo with "compassion" and not imprison him? What about the many other hardened and vicious criminals in our prisons guilty of murder and sexual crimes?

First off due to a publication banI don't know the specifics of Bernardo's crimes.

Second off I consider intentional aggravated rape to be on par with murder torture and maiming as some of the most serious capital offences.

As you want me to view Bernardo as what was sensationalized by the Media, if I were set to hand down a sentance it would be a prison work colony site for 10 years with good behaviour reduction to minimum security after 5, and 2 1/2 years later with good behaviour reduction to a coed low security work camp settlement with 6 months of good behaviour allowing release into the public. So a 8 year sentence minimum however without good behaviour it would be indefinate. On release he would be monitored for life as part of a security grid established, and he would have release conditions such as paying into the crime costs levy all convicts pay into for life, not reoffending, and being of good behaviour. The second option allowed would be the option of death which would be his allowance to take or not if he felt work camps or life in prison were not his palette. The other option was to serve a life sentence in prison which all prison sentences for capable people would be if they chose not to participate in the work camp system or prison works programs. Failure to be self sustaining such as holding employment would require him to return to a level 1 camp as a non convict labourer if he did not participate in other federal or provincial work programs which would insure stability in lifestyle provided he was not independently wealthy as a result of savings - over the previous 8 years of employment, which a portion would be stipended into a stability fund to pay his costs during his intial release period.

Prison is just taking up peoples time it is a waste of resources. People arn't different in prison, they are just basically on a ship. I've been in jail before and it is just a day camp. The only thing I learned (and all those times for non conviction based reasons) was that gaurds and the systems are prone to be abusive while inmates are generally friendly with one another. (however violence is very possible especially due to socialized forces that are survival mechanisms due to racial camping, which is actually destructive in creating rascists in prison and putting that back into society at large - the main factor is mixing non criminals with dangerous offenders who are psychologically programmed, and need to be brainwashed before they can be reintroduced to general population violent offenders are better being sent into the military so they can channel their violence into constructive actions)

People in jail are predominantly nice people that break the rules for various reasons but they arn't really bad if their life is managed, if you expect to release someone and expect them to manage themselves after being treated like a toddler for x period of time it is failure by design. A work camp settlement based system will better be effective at being productive building work experience and skills and reducing the costs. Take the 5 billion dollar mine set to open in remote Northern Ontario.. why not send prisoners as miners give them fair wages, and take part of that money to helpthem out after. Instead you have people sitting in cells eating and watching TV it is nonsense.

Being someone who has been falsely accused I have no trust in the justice system, as stated by a cop on the exit of one of my cases - the system ain't perfect.

Examples of camp settlements would be remote resource extraction sites, agroforestry management mining, northern fisheries and sustainable northern economic development, Northern Oil Rig work etc..

It is startling that in some northern communities sex abuse in native families is reported as being normative rather than exceptional.

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/rs/rep-rap/2008/rr08_1/p1.html

It is startling this chain of thought leads to the notion that government backed priests raped and abused more people than Bernardo with many dying as a result of the program, has Canada gotten life for the forced abduction, molestations, and abuses of their victims both living and dead?

If you talk about abuses to be corrected the government ought to start with its own abuses before claiming they are in right when they are instead the plight.

If you have ever been to jail, I know one of the first experiences I was faced with was having my wrists sliced for resisting being masked as I wasn't given the reason, that being risk of TB if there was no mask. The same illness that killed so many at the residential schools.

The first thing I don't want to face on being taken into custody is being told that my life is being endangered by being held there. How is that responsible governance for someone not even yet judged or sentenced?

Edited August 10, 2012 by login

cybercoma · August 10, 2012

What the hell, man? You would put one of the most dangerous offenders in Canadian history in MINIMUM SECURITY for "good" behaviour after 5 years? Kind of a middle finger to the victims' families, no? Moreover, it's kind of a middle finger to the society that you ought to be protecting from people like him.

login · August 10, 2012

What the hell, man? You would put one of the most dangerous offenders in Canadian history in MINIMUM SECURITY for "good" behaviour after 5 years? Kind of a middle finger to the victims' families, no? Moreover, it's kind of a middle finger to the society that you ought to be protecting from people like him.

No as I said after 7 1/2 years of good behaviour I would put them into a coed work camp otherwise the period would be longer based upon their period of good behaviour.

The first stretch is 5 years the second in medium for 2 1/2 (in remote Northern Canada). Minimum security camps would still be secured and my minimum does not mean they can walk away, since I would implement security nets and deploy CF for external security minimum only refers to the characteristics of the settlment being more or less a town with check points and sensor perimiter composed of a/v feeds and microwave barriers etc..

In all honesty I think that only a few months should be sufficient to determine if someone is a real threat. I strangely don't think Bernardo is, I think based upon the media he is a sexual predator. I'd also hope that "brother sites" would see some convicts stay and continue to work in the North to reduce their chance of harmful recidivism.

There are lots of sexual predators out there, we need to arm and track people. The fact that there would be enhanced monitoring of all convicts on graduation of their prior security placement would reduce the oppourtunity of reoffence dramatically due to superior use of tracking technologies.

I really don't know the specifics of Bernardo's case though but he is someone I would have monitored by the grid on release as all sexual predators would be.

The gird is a novel low cost computer ai assisted tracking system that would track things like speeding movement of foreigners, movement of convicts through a novel system of biometric ID's a/v technologies and other sensor systems.

The system itself would be maintained financially by foreigners visiting canada due to a security fee /desposit, foreing residencey fees and part of the crime costs levy. It would be backed up by onsite human auditing by national security partners such as police and other professionals who have levels of access to the data.

"Normal people" would not be as heavily monitored in their movements and activities and not on priority awareness. You would be suprised what a grid deployed tracking system can do these days. Being permanently under monitoring and surveillance on release dramatically reduces the chance of recidivism, bear in mind

I'm not saying interfere with their lives but I am saying that prudent security would be undertaken on their release. The knowledge of being monitored for life would likely reduce many psychological tendencies, especially when for lesser offenders recommiting means a higher level placment next time basically due to peoples life spans it is more or less a three strikes system.

But it aims to move people over to work camps where they have income and priveleges, the only real difference is it puts them where other people don't want to go but they have many percs. I don't think punishment should be part of human behaviour, constructive actions should be undertaken, God will punish, but if you are going to ruin the social fabric it would require massively inhumaine torture that is a violation of human rights, cruel and unusual punishment can only be reserved for after they die, humans should care for one another in life, but this does not mean trusting one another.

Sheeps in wolves dens best be prudent.

The grid would also monitor for specific data such as HELP,signs of fire, or other flags such as riot formation movements, gunshots. While it won't stop all crime it should increase awareness for first responders in public places and participating private properties that opt to link into the grid, or private security firms who opt to link into the grid.

People die all the time, families need to cope, its not like we are throwing soldiers or cops in jail who kill people. That pain will not end whether they are in jail or out anyway. Life is short, you may think it is not but it ain't. It is here and gone. If they can't leave it to god to punish or kill the person for their acts then they are conflicted anyway. It is not healthy to seek vengeance and deprivation of personal liberty of other humans.It doesn't benefit society to do that. Vengeance is not a good emotional state to hold, it will destroy humanity to do so. I think the bombing of a civilian apartment complex leading to the maiming of people is a far worse crime than murdering two rape victims and copious acts of sexual assault and rape. Frankly Bernardo wasn't particularly sadistic in his self commited rapes, it only went to murder under the presence of his wife apparently and it was her as far as the media reports that illicited him to commit acts against her sister and encourage the Ontario rapes and murders.

I am not someone who has never been outraged but I know that simply killing people that upset you is not healthy mentally. Likewise for me to go out and forcibly confine others is not very healthy either, the state doing the same thing needs to be done under the auspice of benefit through protecting criminals from vigilantism and improving their lives so if they choose to reintegrate with society as beneficial members of society.

There are lots of people I would torture and kill if I let my darker side prevail. I think that compassion is the key whether that compassion be giving them the option of death or by protecting them from the general population. The fact is if they are so dangerous why the hell are they put in with other humans that are under the governments custody and care?

Being libertarian I think the people should have the power and equal rights to government, but that government should be reasonable and act for the benefit of the people. I don't support the idea of unwarrantably endangering the public whether convict or not, the key is making the best life possible for everyone. We are all human. Just killing everyone you don't like is not a healthy action, and really is only something that should be considered in the most extreme cases, it is martial law and war if you are in that state. We should have dialogue for constructing society not removing humanism from it.

If you havn't been in jail your opinion is not valid for how people should be treated and being put in jails. Or at the very least much less valid. Jails really arn't effective at doing anything but jacking up taxes. Secure confinement should only be a last resort where a clear and present danger exists. I don't think many of the criminals in jail are clear and present dangers so their imprisonment is contrary to the principles of humane behaviour and treatment that has been so fundamental since the first law codes.

I know my experiences only took a very pacifistic and loving person and turned them to someone instilled with hate, outrage and fury at the abuses of the system. My minimal experiences filled me with a seed of hate, and destroyed the underlying sense of humanity that grounded me prior to those experiences, I am disgusted you would suggest that as a norm for people who are in the justice system processes. I support killing other people as a result of my experiences out of compassion to free them from victimization. I think the families issues are psychological, I'm not saying have tea with them, but Dane law put blood for money, there have been worse systems that treated things differently. The parents should realize they will die soon too and then if they have faith they will be with their children again. They can kill the guy if they want if he is in public and that should be enough if there pain is so great.

We value life to highly, just let people kill off the bad people if they feel so strongly about it, let them do the time if so. Life, murder, rape and maiming cannot be balanced with jailtime, crimes do not equal time.

The key I need to stress that seeking to destroy people is not healthy and we should not embrace it. We should be guided by compassion and seeking the best outcome for all, for some that may be remote work placement. Jail doesn't help, except clear and present dangers.

Elements of crime are more than the person, but the opportunity is a very important element to consider.

Edited August 10, 2012 by login

eyeball · August 10, 2012

No, I equate his 'no punishment' line with not wanting to put people in prison. If the notion of punishment is archaic and dreadful then why is Bernardo in prison for life? To teach him a lesson?

No where near as much as it's to simply keep society safe. Most people, I hope, get that Argus. What I don't get is the sheer vindictiveness verging on cruelty that you and a disturbingly high number of other Canadians seem to expect the state to administer in the process. That won't do anything at all to keep us safe.

What's truly disgusting about this attitude is that virtually all of it is a cultivated product of partisan electoral campaigning on the basis of appearing tougher than the other parties. Because its so effective at paralyzing opposition not to mention a more rational approach to criminal justice, there will be no end to this process and you will one day have the injustice system you're wishing on us. Such is the way our police-state and authoritarian dictatorship will be born I suppose - creeping ever closer on little cat's feet with each and every election cycle.

Wild Bill · August 10, 2012

No as I said after 7 1/2 years of good behaviour I would put them into a coed work camp otherwise the period would be longer based upon their period of good behaviour.

I think you really have no idea of Paul Bernardo's crimes. You really should do a google. It was never just sexual assault.

It was a number of out and out murders! With torture! Including drilling into a poor girl's head!

The man is a whack job! His crimes were horrendous. Even if you argue that he was crazy, if any treatment made him sane again you would have to wipe his memory of what he had done or those memories would drive him whacko again out of guilt!

You need a better model for your point.

login · August 10, 2012

I think you really have no idea of Paul Bernardo's crimes. You really should do a google. It was never just sexual assault.

It was a number of out and out murders! With torture! Including drilling into a poor girl's head!

The man is a whack job! His crimes were horrendous. Even if you argue that he was crazy, if any treatment made him sane again you would have to wipe his memory of what he had done or those memories would drive him whacko again out of guilt!

You need a better model for your point.

It is all hearsay. I don't trust the media or courts to tell the truth, and I have little interest in researching rape and murder. I've read about torture in the past and wars, Bernardo likely pales in comparison.

Lots of women get violated the way Bernardo is affilliated, they wern't outrageous or sensationalized when it was just knife point rapes. That goes on probably every day with less fanfare, just another rape victim. He is demonized even if the crimes ascribe to him are inhumane acts.

It is all hearsay. I havn't spoken to him nor do I know him personally so I can make a statement on my impression of him, nor have I been in contact with him for an extended period of time so likewise I cannot offer informed comment.

Prejudgement and acting on preindoctrinated cultural bias is not how I undertake my opinions.

There are lots of pervs out there unreported date rape has been prevalent, likewise rape among and by minors is also prevalent in some areas.

The murder was rational although valuing life lower than ones own personal liberty, the government has the same position.

The government also rapes the public of their tax dollars. It is not the same and I'm not condoning the acts, but guys are indoctrinated to view women as sex objects, it is the mainstream medias fault for teasing peoples minds with that. He is Canadian made, and rape is

not unheard of with other names put next to it.

In this case you just get to watch it because it was recorded. I would say thats no different than taking court records, its evidence. Why kill the victim and keep the evidence if you are trying to hide the evidence, it wasn't about that I am geussing.

Like I said though it is all hearsay and I won't form my actual opinion of someone based upon the media and courts as they are subject to falsehood. That information can be used but it is not a trusted source.

There are people out there that watch hardcore porn and worse sexual predators than Bernardo he just has a Canadian hashtag next to him as a poster boy for sexual predator. He ain't the only one and using his name is a misnomer, especially bearing a publication ban on his case.

People who are shooting up people in toronto street wars get media attention for a few days and you never hear of them again. What is purported is unfortunate but you won't effect my view with your mainstream banter, it is an unsound and irrational position. Families can grieve but I didn't know those people and ruining another persons life should not be an outlet to remove their grief that is a wrong psychology unhealthy and socially damaging. Bernardo didn't have his citizenship stripped so he should still be treated equally and enjoy the same fundamental rights and priveleges as the constitution entails even bearing that he is still in Canadian jurisdiction if so and should enjoy the same benefits granted by the jurisdiction otherwise it is corruption.

Here is a far more interesting read

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2010/02/11/12845766-qmi.html

If you havn't read it yet give Herodotus the Histories a read.

Edited August 10, 2012 by login

Argus · August 10, 2012

No where near as much as it's to simply keep society safe. Most people, I hope, get that Argus. What I don't get is the sheer vindictiveness verging on cruelty that you and a disturbingly high number of other Canadians seem to expect the state to administer in the process. That won't do anything at all to keep us safe.

Maybe it'll just make us feel better.

Do I feel vindictive towards the likes of Bernardo? Yup. Would I kill him without a second thought? Yup. Would I feel any sorrow or sympathy if someone beat him to death or some such thing? Nope. I freely admit to being human, and to feeling 'vindictive' towards those who are especially cruel and deliberately harm innocent people (death being the most permanent and damaging of all injuries. And that vindictiveness is redoubled when the victim is a child. Honestly, I can see no reason why we spend money keeping this waste of skin tissue alive at all. Killing him would certainly keep us safer than keeping him, and would be infinitely cheaper.

What's truly disgusting about this attitude is that virtually all of it is a cultivated product of partisan electoral campaigning on the basis of appearing tougher than the other parties

.

Drivel. The feeling of extreme anger the general population feels towards violent criminals isn't the result of political 'tough on crime' efforts, but the cause of them. You have everything (as usual) Bass ackwards.

Edited August 10, 2012 by Argus

Argus · August 10, 2012

It is all hearsay. I don't trust the media or courts to tell the truth, and I have little interest in researching rape and murder. I've read about torture in the past and wars, Bernardo likely pales in comparison.

As you have little interest in research perhaps you might consider an old proverb about the wisdom of remaining silent lest you prove your foolishness.

Bernardo was convicted by his own hand at video taping his crimes.

login · August 10, 2012

As you have little interest in research perhaps you might consider an old proverb about the wisdom of remaining silent lest you prove your foolishness.

Bernardo was convicted by his own hand at video taping his crimes.

Once again you are refering to information that is under a publication ban and as such we don't know. Perhaps you should be silent since it is under a publication ban.

ex. "Through their counsel, the families maintained that their constitutional rights would be violated if the tapes were shown to the public."

" I am satisfied that the harm that flows from the public display of this videotape far exceeds any benefit that will flow from the exposure of sexual assault and child pornography. When I refer to harm , I am not suggesting that individual members of the public need to be protected from the harm that may flow from viewing these videotapes.... By harm , I am referring to the injury that most likely will be occasioned upon the surviving members of these three young girls if the videos are played in open Court. The families will suffer tremendous psychological, emotional and mental injury if the evidence, as the Crowndescribed it ... is publicly displayed "

"In any case, the appellate court did not disturb the trial judge's destruction order. Accordingly, the final stage in the videotape saga occurred when the families of the victims witnessed the incineration of the videotapes late in December 2001."

"Sparing the families further and undue suffering was compassionate in the circumstances. The video order also spared public suffering, and avoided implicating the criminal justice system in the unwilling distribution of child pornography"

Edited August 10, 2012 by login

guyser · August 10, 2012

Once again you are refering to information that is under a publication ban and as such we don't know. Perhaps you should be silent since it is under a publication ban.

What are you squawking about? Perhaps you dont want to know in order to fit some pre-concieved agenda?

The ban didt include the Buffalo Evening News, Washington Post,NY times, Detroit News and so on.

guyser · August 10, 2012

The video order also spared public suffering, and avoided implicating the criminal justice system in the unwilling distribution of child pornography"

:lol:

Where did the gem of nuttiness come from?

Edited August 10, 2012 by guyser

Moonbox · August 10, 2012

In all honesty I think that only a few months should be sufficient to determine if someone is a real threat. I strangely don't think Bernardo is, I think based upon the media he is a sexual predator.

Oh good. It's alright guys login doesn't 'think' Bernardo is dangerous. Nevermind the serial killing and the fact that he's diabolically smart. login 'thinks' he's actually an alright and misunderstood guy... :rolleyes:

I really don't know the specifics of Bernardo's case though but he is someone I would have monitored by the grid on release as all sexual predators would be.

For someone guilty of Bernardo's crime, he'd have to be monitored 24/7. If ever released (he shouldn't be), a re-offense would mean the person who let him out would be fried by the judicial system, the media and the public. It isn't going to happen and it shouldn't.

As you have little interest in research perhaps you might consider an old proverb about the wisdom of remaining silent lest you prove your foolishness.

Bernardo was convicted by his own hand at video taping his crimes.

I think this guy falls into 'tinfoil hat' category. We didn't see the video ourselves so we can't be sure. We weren't there with Neil Armstrong so we can't know if the lunar landings were real. The Sun isn't actually the centre of the solar system...

Edited August 10, 2012 by Moonbox

Wild Bill · August 10, 2012

Once again you are refering to information that is under a publication ban and as such we don't know. Perhaps you should be silent since it is under a publication ban.

ex. "Through their counsel, the families maintained that their constitutional rights would be violated if the tapes were shown to the public."

" I am satisfied that the harm that flows from the public display of this videotape far exceeds any benefit that will flow from the exposure of sexual assault and child pornography. When I refer to harm , I am not suggesting that individual members of the public need to be protected from the harm that may flow from viewing these videotapes.... By harm , I am referring to the injury that most likely will be occasioned upon the surviving members of these three young girls if the videos are played in open Court. The families will suffer tremendous psychological, emotional and mental injury if the evidence, as the Crowndescribed it ... is publicly displayed "

"In any case, the appellate court did not disturb the trial judge's destruction order. Accordingly, the final stage in the videotape saga occurred when the families of the victims witnessed the incineration of the videotapes late in December 2001."

"Sparing the families further and undue suffering was compassionate in the circumstances. The video order also spared public suffering, and avoided implicating the criminal justice system in the unwilling distribution of child pornography"

Login, your entire argument boils down to "If I wasn't with Bernardo at the time and witnessed it with my own eyes then I won't accept it as true. What's more, even if I DID witness it myself then someone else or society in general MADE him do it so he should be excused."

My friend, you are raising more snakes under your hat than Bernardo. In just a few posts you have wiped out the use of all courts and a legal system. You have erased the concept of individual responsibility.

You can forgive and ignore whatever you want. I suspect you have very few people who share your POV.

If I were Mr. Mahafy and I met you I might go postal if I knew what you believe. I sincerely hope that something so terrible never happens to anyone in your family or circle of friends. I also think that people in general would show you more sympathy in that event than you seem to offer yourself.

login · August 11, 2012

Oh good. It's alright guys login doesn't 'think' Bernardo is dangerous. Nevermind the serial killing and the fact that he's diabolically smart. login 'thinks' he's actually an alright and misunderstood guy...

Its not like he was raping people on the street in view of other people or shooting women so they couldn't get away. He also didn't kill his victims - as far as we know - until the circumspect issue arrises with the death of Karla's sister. Although I think that the murders would have occured under the influence of Karla, I also think perhaps that the "beyond rape" issues may have been influenced by her also. I am suprised that he would admit to other rapes, but deny the murders. Why deny one crime and admit to others if they both carry the maximum penalty? I havn't heard about him acting out or raping people in prison.

For someone guilty of Bernardo's crime, he'd have to be monitored 24/7. If ever released (he shouldn't be), a re-offense would mean the person who let him out would be fried by the judicial system, the media and the public. It isn't going to happen and it shouldn't.

I think all convicts should be monitored by a technological network that is roled out to assist policing and national security.

Sure it would cost but the convicts should pay the cost. I do think innocent people get caught but tracking data would also better help understand why criminals recommit etc.. Sensor networks are not as expensive as they once were. The cost of keeping someone in prison for a year vs. them being out would cover much of the cost of setting up the grid. Sensors cost dollars these days. Prison labour could even make them. They'd like the lower cost, it would cost them less in the long run.

I think this guy falls into 'tinfoil hat' category. We didn't see the video ourselves so we can't be sure. We weren't there with Neil Armstrong so we can't know if the lunar landings were real. The Sun isn't actually the centre of the solar system...

Exactly I'm a skeptic. I think there are two types of facts, Plausible, and Experential. Both can be true or false, but plausible facts are social facts or secondary personal facts as secondary source or beyond. Experential Facts are much more trusted because you experienced them yourself as a primary source experience.

Edited August 11, 2012 by login

login · August 11, 2012

What are you squawking about? Perhaps you dont want to know in order to fit some pre-concieved agenda?

The ban didt include the Buffalo Evening News, Washington Post,NY times, Detroit News and so on.

It does in Canada.

Edited August 11, 2012 by login

login · August 11, 2012

Where did the gem of nuttiness come from?

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/

login · August 11, 2012

Login, your entire argument boils down to "If I wasn't with Bernardo at the time and witnessed it with my own eyes then I won't accept it as true. What's more, even if I DID witness it myself then someone else or society in general MADE him do it so he should be excused."

My friend, you are raising more snakes under your hat than Bernardo. In just a few posts you have wiped out the use of all courts and a legal system. You have erased the concept of individual responsibility.

You can forgive and ignore whatever you want. I suspect you have very few people who share your POV.

If I were Mr. Mahafy and I met you I might go postal if I knew what you believe. I sincerely hope that something so terrible never happens to anyone in your family or circle of friends. I also think that people in general would show you more sympathy in that event than you seem to offer yourself.

Frames of reference do not boil down to TRUE or FALSE, there are multiple ways of looking at things - here is an introduction

http://www.maths.manchester.ac.uk/~mdc/old/1K1/DiscreteMaths.html

I think that the court situation is not a very highly trusted situation because it was closed to the public. I think all secret trials have less social validity than open public trials. There are facts in dispute. I beleive the crown often lies about facts. Oh, I'm not saying that he didn't do anything, as far as we are aware he admitted to serial rape, that is serious. Do I think he should be kept inside a prison building for the rest of his life at taxpayer expense. Most certainly not. Do I think he should be put into a life coaching female teen swim teams, definately not. Even with him becoming impotent in coming years due to aging, I think viagra and other sexual possibilities may still create plausible occurence, but I don't think he will ever have the oppourtunity to do what was done, also I think that with monitoring, of my type of monitoring, whihch is very involved and indepth, he would based upon his past admissions pose little threat. I think though that yes, his life could be endangered on release but freedom is worth that risk, if he wanted it. I don't think it will be possible in the near future to deploy the equipment, nor do I think past sentences should be effected by changes to the law, but I think he has already served 20 years, it seems unusual to hold someone to more than a life sentence, if that is the case, it essentially says reform in pirson is impossible and we have to question is this person mentally ill, or is the system just not able to correct people? I think that he wasn't deemed mentally unfit so I think that we need to really question the circumstances of his extended imprisonment. I think most is just senstationalization by the media, and the broad awareness of the case. Crimes happen every day, confinements and sexual abuse are not unheard of, they are actually relatively common occurences. If it wasn't murder then it probably would not have gotten as much attention, and I weigh his statements higher on the fact that he wasn't the source of the the murders based upon his confessions about other rapes. He is a shoein for rapist but I don't think he was really about murder, take forinstance the one would be rape that resisted, he didn't kill he, he fled.

"Patrick LeSage decided jurors would watch and hear, while those in the public gallery, including the press and families, need only hear the audio only."

Edited August 11, 2012 by login

Argus · August 11, 2012

Frames of reference do not boil down to TRUE or FALSE, there are multiple ways of looking at things - here is an introduction

http://www.maths.manchester.ac.uk/~mdc/old/1K1/DiscreteMaths.html

it seems unusual to hold someone to more than a life sentence, if that is the case, it essentially says reform in pirson is impossible and we have to question is this person mentally ill, or is the system just not able to correct people?

Has it occurred to you that some people are simply incapable of reform, that they have no wish to reform?

I've spent my life behind these steel bars

I've paid my debt in time

But being brought to justice

That was my only crime

I don't regret a single action

I'd do the same again

These prison walls secure me

And I'm numb to pain

repeat chorus

Before you hand me over

Before you read my sentence

I'd like to say a few words

Here in my own defense...

Some people struggle daily

They struggle with their conscience

Till the end

I have no guilt to haunt me

I feel no wrong intent

A criminal mind

Is all I

All I've ever known

Dont' try to reform me

Cuz I'm made of cold stone

My criminal mind

Is all I've ever had

Ask one who's known me

If I'm really so bad...

I AM

I'm made of cold stone

Just like your prison walls

A criminal mind

I AM

Gowan - criminal mind

Rue · August 11, 2012

I don't think he will ever have the oppourtunity to do what was done, also I think that with monitoring, of my type of monitoring, whihch is very involved and indepth, he would based upon his past admissions pose little threat.

If it wasn't murder then it probably would not have gotten as much attention, and I weigh his statements higher on the fact that he wasn't the source of the the murders based upon his confessions about other rapes. He is a shoein for rapist but I don't think he was really about murder, take forinstance the one would be rape that resisted, he didn't kill he, he fled.

I appreciate you have opinions. The problem is they are only that and quite frankly why do I care what you think? do you really think I would base a decision as to whether this person should be released into the public on what you think?

Lol. If you had been the person raped or the relatives of the victims or were a woman or vulnerable person walking the streets I might be tempted to care a little bit more about your opinion.

As for you being a security expert whi has invented a bonafide sure proof method of monitoring people that's nice.

Your reasoning as to why you believe he was a rapist but not a murderer is absurd in fact not just absurd but so ridiculous it makes me have to question whether you are in the position to understand ANYTHING about the psyche of criminals.

Look its tempting to think you can be an expert. We all have opinions the fact is you do not understand nor will you ever understand forensic psychiatry so don't pose as a forensic psychiatrist. You have zero clue what fabric makes up the psyche of a rapist let alone a murderer.

I have two Master's one in psychology and one in law, and I have worked with such people and I make zero claim, zero of being able to say to anyone with sound psychiatry/psychology knowledge of the pathology of criminals can be as confident as you in throwing out your opinions.

Bottom line, its easy to talk abotu releasing violent criminals. How would you feel if they come live next door to you? Hmmm?