bush_cheney2004 Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 ...Many states in the US have prisons populated with people that have been caught in with a bit of MJ. What's to stop those people from moving to Canada as we are very close to having de-criminalization of pot. What's to stop them ? Probably the much faster pace of decriminalization and legalization in several states compared to Canada. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Boges Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 What's to stop them ? Probably the much faster pace of decriminalization and legalization in several states compared to Canada. In the south? Can someone claim refugee status from drug charges in Colorado? I'm just highlighting the folly in allowing people to claim refugee status because the US has much more severe punishment for certain crimes. Slippery Slope. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 In the south? Can someone claim refugee status from drug charges in Colorado? Yes....Colorado and Washington are south of Canada. Drug users can move to these states. I'm just highlighting the folly in allowing people to claim refugee status because the US has much more severe punishment for certain crimes. Slippery Slope. I agree, but Canada would shut the asylum door very quickly if a sex offender or druggie stampede ensued. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
cybercoma Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 The sentence had a huge impact on the boards decision.The sentence was the only reason for granting her asylum. If they had sentenced her to 5 or 6 years in prison, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Quote
cybercoma Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 Now what of people seeking asylum claims in Canada because of more lax sentencing on possession of drug charges? Many states in the US have prisons populated with people that have been caught in with a bit of MJ. What's to stop those people from moving to Canada as we are very close to having de-criminalization of pot. Nothing is stopping anyone from trying for any reason. I'd like to see a case be made of this. You're right that this potentially sets a precedent for their asylum as well. Quote
cybercoma Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 I'm just highlighting the folly in allowing people to claim refugee status because the US has much more severe punishment for certain crimes.It's not just "much more severe punishment." That's not what the court said in their ruling. The said "[a punishment] so excessive as to outrage standards of decency and surpass all rational bounds of punishment." That's a lot different than simply "much more severe." Quote
Argus Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 Great...you think child porn penalties are also too severe. That will get you lots of support from moms, dads, and kids everywhere. I don't care what hysterics think. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 China doesn't keep prisoners. People go "missing" or are executed. China keeps lots of prisoners. What the hell are you talking about? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 The "board" would have us believe that the statutory rape of even younger children by adults should be "punished" by far shorter sentences upon conviction, regardless of counts and multiple victims. This would not be acceptable in many jurisdictions in the U.S. and around the world. The problem with puritans is they don't ever engage their brains. They work on knee-jerk reflex alone. Thus your repeated use of the word 'rape' despite their being no coercion involved. Another problem with puritans is they have a huge issue with anything related to sex and nudity. Thus anyone who goes outside the proprieties of sex has to be absolutely hammered. Sex between an adult and, say, a 14 year old is wrong, sure. But how wrong? Well, that depends on circumstances. Not all teenagers are the same. Some are quite mature and into exploration. I know women who started having sex around 12-13 and very happily, too. I think the real issue is not age or sex but degree of abuse and injury. There have been several female adult film stars who have claimed they wanted to be porn stars since they were adolescents. Would you put someone away for 30 years for having sex with them when no one was harmed? Again, not saying sex between adults and 14 year olds should be legal. In fact, I was vocal in my support here of the Tories' move to raise the age of consent. But thirty years is just plain nuts. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 (edited) The sentence was the only reason for granting her asylum. If they had sentenced her to 5 or 6 years in prison, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Probably true, though that would still be a ridiculous sentence. Six months suspended and community service would be more appropriate. Edited May 20, 2014 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
overthere Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 Once again, he's not a child in Canada. Do you conclude the "humping" was not consensual 5 times. He must be a gluten for "punishment". Under the law in Florida, Canada and in much of the planet, a minor cannot give consent to sex with an adult, because they are minors. I'm sure you've heard of this concept, it's similar to the one where a minor cannot e party to a contract. It does not matter if the sex occurred once or a thousand times, she is guilty of stautory rape in Florida. If the kid had been 14 years old instead of 16, she'd have been guilty of statutory rape in Canada too. His tolerance for wheat products is not clear from any of the media coverage. What is egregious is not the crime she committed, but the ridiculous sentence. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
Wilber Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 The sentence was the only reason for granting her asylum. If they had sentenced her to 5 or 6 years in prison, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. I agree. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
overthere Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 If the sentence is unjust, doesn't she have access to an exhaustive appeal process in USA? Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
On Guard for Thee Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 Under the law in Florida, Canada and in much of the planet, a minor cannot give consent to sex with an adult, because they are minors. I'm sure you've heard of this concept, it's similar to the one where a minor cannot e party to a contract. It does not matter if the sex occurred once or a thousand times, she is guilty of stautory rape in Florida. If the kid had been 14 years old instead of 16, she'd have been guilty of statutory rape in Canada too. His tolerance for wheat products is not clear from any of the media coverage. What is egregious is not the crime she committed, but the ridiculous sentence. And the reason she has been granted asylum is because in Canada, she did not commit a crime. Quote
overthere Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 There are million upon millions of people in jails worldwide who are in prisons for reasons that are not crimes in Canada. Anybody convicted under Sharia law for example. Would you support them as refugees too? I'm not trying to be provocative, just gauging the extent of your outrage.. And you are wrong wrong wrong in your reasoning. Statutory rape is a crime in Canada, It is a crime in Florida too. She is guilty of committing that crime. Them's the facts. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 The problem with puritans is they don't ever engage their brains. They work on knee-jerk reflex alone. Thus your repeated use of the word 'rape' despite their being no coercion involved. Statutory rape does not require coercion last time I checked. Even in Canada. It's a legal concept that even "non-puritans" can understand. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
overthere Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 coercion and concept are irrelevant in 'sexual assault on a minor' cases. The deed itself is what matters. It's not called statutory rape in the courts any more. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
Wilber Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 And the reason she has been granted asylum is because in Canada, she did not commit a crime. Are you saying that Canada will only respect other country's laws if they are identical to ours? That is a very dangerous position to take and will end up going both ways. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
cybercoma Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 China keeps lots of prisoners. What the hell are you talking about?I'm talking about the numbers not being comparable due to China's off-the-books justice. Quote
cybercoma Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 Are you saying that Canada will only respect other country's laws if they are identical to ours?That is not what's been said at all. Where do you get the idea that the laws need to be identical? The issue was that the punishment was "so excessive as to outrage standards of decency and surpass all rational bounds of punishment." Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 Are you saying that Canada will only respect other country's laws if they are identical to ours? That is a very dangerous position to take and will end up going both ways. I don't think the slight difference in the laws is the big issue here but the sentence offends our charter. Quote
Wilber Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 That is not what's been said at all. Where do you get the idea that the laws need to be identical? The issue was that the punishment was "so excessive as to outrage standards of decency and surpass all rational bounds of punishment." Then what was being said in the quote I responded to? Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
cybercoma Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 That point was being made to explain why she was not turned away at the border. The primary point is that the punishment is ridiculous. Second to that, she has been accepted as a refugee since what she did would not even constitute a crime here. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 coercion and concept are irrelevant in 'sexual assault on a minor' cases. The deed itself is what matters. It's not called statutory rape in the courts any more. A few states in the U.S. still use the term, but it has developed into more complex laws with terms that describe circumstances and relationships of the perp and victim. I prefer to use "statutory rape" in the general sense instead of parsing every element of the laws for each state. people my age in the U.S. are damn well aware of why Chuck Berry disappeared for a spell, and that "15 will get you 20". Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Wilber Posted May 20, 2014 Report Posted May 20, 2014 That point was being made to explain why she was not turned away at the border. The primary point is that the punishment is ridiculous. Second to that, she has been accepted as a refugee since what she did would not even constitute a crime here. It is a crime here, the age of consent is just different. So we do accept anyone who has broken a law that isn't exactly the same as ours. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
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.