drummindiver Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 (edited) Indeed Conservatives want criminals punished, and where there are insufficient criminals, they'll find some way to produce more of them. The Conservative motto over the last decade has been "We'll build the jails, and then we'll fill them." Meanwhile violent crime has been dropping for years, long before the Conservative Party of Canada came on the scene. "Tough on crime", like "Senate reform" and "long form census abolition", are just populist mumbo jumbo meant to convince the naive and dedicated partisans to vote for them. It's the equivalent of waving a steak in front of a dog. We are not the states. Our penal system is not a paid per prisoner . Your statement is pure rhetoric. So, I read all the time that people are being given soft sentences in Canada. While that may be true, it is not the norm. "Faint hope was introduced after Canada abolished the death penalty in 1976, providing those sentenced to 15 years or more to apply for early parole. McKnight shows that despite the existence of this clause, those convicted of murder in Canada spend an average of 28.4 years in prison before receiving parole, more than any other industrialized nation, including Australia, Scotland, and even the United States (18.5 years)." Another lesson learned due to MLW. Thanks Edited November 7, 2015 by drummindiver Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poochy Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 (edited) Indeed Conservatives want criminals punished, and where there are insufficient criminals, they'll find some way to produce more of them. The Conservative motto over the last decade has been "We'll build the jails, and then we'll fill them." Meanwhile violent crime has been dropping for years, long before the Conservative Party of Canada came on the scene. "Tough on crime", like "Senate reform" and "long form census abolition", are just populist mumbo jumbo meant to convince the naive and dedicated partisans to vote for them. It's the equivalent of waving a steak in front of a dog. Gosh I find your posts amusing, so the conservatives apparently invented entirely new laws to create new criminals, meanwhile the liberals bring back the ever so important long form census that asks a number of questions that should be no ones business along with the penalties for not completing it. Just like the liberal gun registry that didnt meet it's intended purpose and made instant criminals of people for not completing paperwork on time. Of course those evil, inventing criminals conservatives got rid of both, and then there is the, were building jails everywhere false narrative, meanwhile the same people complain about double bunking in old jails, exactly how many more jail cells do we have now vs how many we needed to make up for over crowding and to replace old jails? So how many 'new' criminals are there, how many completely new laws did they invent, how many new unnecessary prisons did they build? O and btw, your personal beliefs of how long certain people should spend in prison isn't the same as "inventing new criminals", i mean those evil conservative bastards wanted people who used a gun in the commission of a crime to spend more time in prison and the liberals wanted to make criminals of people who simply owned firearms legally and forgot to renew their license. Really, you should try harder, this is too easy. Edited November 7, 2015 by poochy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poochy Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 (edited) Your statement is pure rhetoric. As is almost everything this person posts, it's all liberal lies, the evil empire propaganda narrative, and boy is it boring. Edited November 7, 2015 by poochy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummindiver Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 Gosh I find your posts amusing, so the conservatives apparently invented entirely new laws to create new criminals, meanwhile the liberals bring back the ever so important long form census that asks a number of questions that should be no ones business along with the penalties for not completing it. Just like the liberal gun registry that didnt meet it's intended purpose and made instant criminals of people for not completing paperwork on time. Of course those evil, inventing criminals conservatives got rid of both, and then there is the, were building jails everywhere false narrative, meanwhile the same people complain about double bunking in old jails, exactly how many more jail cells do we have now vs how many we needed to make up for over crowding and to replace old jails? So how many 'new' criminals are there, how many completely new laws did they invent, how many new unnecessary prisons did they build? O and btw, your personal beliefs of how long certain people should spend in prison isn't the same as "inventing new criminals", i mean those evil conservative bastards wanted people who used a gun in the commission of a crime and the liberals wanted to make criminals of people who simply owned firearms legally and forgot to renew their license. Really, you should try harder, this is too easy. Their rhetoric doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 Indeed Conservatives want criminals punished, and where there are insufficient criminals, they'll find some way to produce more of them. The Conservative motto over the last decade has been "We'll build the jails, and then we'll fill them." No evidence presented, whatsoever, as per usual for you. Just a sullen resentment that conservatives don't sympathize with and want to hug violent criminals the way you do. Meanwhile violent crime has been dropping for years, long before the Conservative Party of Canada came on the scene. Police reported crime has been dropping. Statistics show, on the other hand, that the percentage of crime which actually gets reported to police has been falling heavily for quite some time, as Canadians lose confidence that anything will be done that is worth the agonizingly long bureaucratic process of the judicial system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 Police reported crime has been dropping. Statistics show, on the other hand, that the percentage of crime which actually gets reported to police has been falling heavily for quite some time, as Canadians lose confidence that anything will be done that is worth the agonizingly long bureaucratic process of the judicial system. I'm almost afraid to ask this.... but do you have a cite for this? I find it difficult to believe anything you say about stats about crime or the RCMP when you completely misrepresented what an RCMP report said about missing and murdered aboriginal women. It was the complete opposite of what you claimed it was... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 I'm almost afraid to ask this.... but do you have a cite for this? I find it difficult to believe anything you say about stats about crime or the RCMP when you completely misrepresented what an RCMP report said about missing and murdered aboriginal women. It was the complete opposite of what you claimed it was... It is fundamentally important to understand that Juristat’s Police-reported Crime Statistics in Canada 2011 report only reflects criminal incidents that are reported by Canadians to police or to which police are alerted, irrespective of a specific complaint. As such, it clearly does not measure the actual amount of crime in Canada. This is not simply speculation or conspiracy theory. Juristat recognizes this by conducting mass surveys of Canadians over 15 years old every five years, specifically to ask if they have been the victim of any of eight specified offences in the preceding year and whether they had reported that fact to the police. The most recent Juristat Crime Victimization Survey was completed in 2013 and, like others before it, it presents a disturbingly different picture of crime in Canada than does the Police-reported Crime Statistics in Canada. ...For reasons which are themselves a cause for concern, a growing number of Canadians are simply not reporting crime to the police. In its 2009 Crime Victimization Survey, Juristat reports that only 31 percent of the eight crimes it surveyed were actually reported to police, a decrease from 34 percent in 2004. http://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/Police-reported-Crime-Statistics-in-Canada-February-2013.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 It's ridiculous for someone to even argue that a person should get to keep their canadian citizenship no matter what they do. A huge part of the "contract" between a citizenship applicant and the Canadian Gov't/people is the written or implied understanding "I'm not here to massacre Canadians". I doubt that anyone would argue that. A question for the people who are in favour of keeping these guys around: Should we have a time limit for them to be here before they can commit acts of terrorism or murder without losing their citizenshiip? IE can they kill everyone present at their swearing-in ceremony the second they dot their last i and cross their last t, or do they have to wait a couple weeks to commit attrocities? I really need a better of understanding of just exactly what people want here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 ...For reasons which are themselves a cause for concern, a growing number of Canadians are simply not reporting crime to the police. I have to say there are times I haven't reported a crime...out of concern for the perp running afoul of cops-gone-wild. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 ...For reasons which are themselves a cause for concern, a growing number of Canadians are simply not reporting crime to the police. In its 2009 Crime Victimization Survey, Juristat reports that only 31 percent of the eight crimes it surveyed were actually reported to police, a decrease from 34 percent in 2004. http://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/Police-reported-Crime-Statistics-in-Canada-February-2013.pdf A 3% difference in unreported crime in 5 years? Isn't that within the standard error rate of most surveys? Not exactly "criminals gone wild" ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 (edited) A 3% difference in unreported crime in 5 years? Isn't that within the standard error rate of most surveys? Not exactly "criminals gone wild" ... I hate throwing down the small sample size argument but really, 8 crimes? lmao, that's as bad as "I know a guy...". only 31 percent of the eight crimes it surveyed were actually reported to police, a decrease from 34 percent in 2004. Edited November 7, 2015 by WestCanMan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 I hate throwing down the small sample size argument but really, 8 crimes? lmao, that's as bad as "I know a guy...". 8 types of crimes, I think.... not just 8 crimes in total. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 A 3% difference in unreported crime in 5 years? Isn't that within the standard error rate of most surveys? Not exactly "criminals gone wild" ... Uhm, no. Falling from 34 to 31 is almost 10% Further, it echoes a similar fall which occurred between the last study and the one before, that and a fall in the one before that. It's a consistent fall in the percentage of crime being reported to police. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 (edited) I hate throwing down the small sample size argument but really, 8 crimes? lmao, that's as bad as "I know a guy...". The sample size is usually around 20,000 people they interview from separate households. It is eight specific types of crime they document. Interestingly, the percentage of crime reported to police in Canada is considerably lower than in most other OECD countries. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2015001/article/14198-eng.htm Edited November 7, 2015 by Argus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 Uhm, no. Falling from 34 to 31 is almost 10% Further, it echoes a similar fall which occurred between the last study and the one before, that and a fall in the one before that. It's a consistent fall in the percentage of crime being reported to police. That's not how statistics work. +/- 3% That means an answer with 33% is not statistically different than an answer of 30%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 That's not how statistics work. +/- 3% That means an answer with 33% is not statistically different than an answer of 30%. You can argue about that all you want but it's a consistent fall. The rate was 37% in the previous survey GSS reveals that a large proportion of Canadians never reported criminal incidents to police. In all, only about 34% of criminal incidents came to the attention of police in 2004, down from 37% in 1999 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 8 types of crimes, I think.... not just 8 crimes in total. Oh, lol. my bad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 The sample size is usually around 20,000 people they interview from separate households. It is eight specific types of crime they document. Interestingly, the percentage of crime reported to police in Canada is considerably lower than in most other OECD countries. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2015001/article/14198-eng.htm I was wrong for the first time in my life again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 Argus, if you see someone smoking a joint do you call the cops? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 A 3% drop is within the margin of error, or very close to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 A 3% drop is within the margin of error, or very close to it. It's dropped from 37% to 31%, over three studies and the 2014 version is due out any day now (it takes a while to process this stuff) which could show a further drop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 I have to say there are times I haven't reported a crime...out of concern for the perp running afoul of cops-gone-wild. There are about 100,000 police working every minute of every day in north america (that's a straight up guess), the number of "incidents" is extremely rare when you consider the element of society that they spend the majority of their time dealing with. Just remember when you see CNN or Fox news reporting on an incident that they have a choice to make: 1) do they report the facts in a the most accurate manner possible 2) do they report the facts in the most profitable manner possible? The difference is worth about $100M to them. The first time I saw the Ferguson shooting on tv I was given the impression that a cop just started randomly shooting at some African Americans from his cruiser and killed an innocent "gentle giant" teenager. Then the violent robbery was shown on tv, and angry citizens dismissed it as "not relevant". If that incident was reported in a more responsible manner from the beginning it would have had an entirely different outcome and the american MSM would be out million$. You didn't save a future victim from police brutality, you just did your part to keep a real victim from getting justice and to help a criminal remain at large. GJ eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 Argus, if you see someone smoking a joint do you call the cops? Call the cops and say I saw some people in BC smoking weed. Bring 500,000 sets of handcuffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 Argus, if you see someone smoking a joint do you call the cops? Maybe you should look at the link he posted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 Why would you want to strip a terrorist of citizenship, and then deport them to a likely terrorist hotbed country? Where they can then commit more terrorist acts and plot against us again, or our allies? Why not just keep their citizenship but lock them up behind bars for a lifetime of hard labour with no chance of parole? Everybody's happy then...except the terrorist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.