I am Groot Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 3 hours ago, impartialobserver said: So first question.. its a big one. Would being taken to this "work camp" be voluntary? Could they leave at any time? If not, it is prison. Therefore you would need to prove that they violated the law and did so in such a way as to merit forced imprisonment. I know that you differ but the vast majority of citizens would not put vagrancy in the same class as rape, murder, or robbery. I'm not sure where you came up with the idea of a work camp as I never mentioned one. They'd be taken to jail for sorting. Those with mental issues would be sent to a hospital. Those with addiction issues would be sent to rehab. The rest, if they had warrants, would be sent to jail. For those few that remained would see social workers about just where they were going to live from now on because it would no longer be on the streets. And by the way, this envisions spending on temporary emergency shelters for the homeless that would be something like the rooms at the YMCA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impartialobserver Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 2 minutes ago, I am Groot said: I'm not sure where you came up with the idea of a work camp as I never mentioned one. They'd be taken to jail for sorting. Those with mental issues would be sent to a hospital. Those with addiction issues would be sent to rehab. The rest, if they had warrants, would be sent to jail. For those few that remained would see social workers about just where they were going to live from now on because it would no longer be on the streets. And by the way, this envisions spending on temporary emergency shelters for the homeless that would be something like the rooms at the YMCA. would gong to these temporary homeless shelters be a matter of choice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted March 31 Report Share Posted March 31 On 3/30/2023 at 8:23 AM, CdnFox said: This is truly disgusting. The parents of the dead teen don't blame the killer. Noooo - not his fault. He didn't get enough cuddles. The system let him down. He wasn't properly breast fed as a child. I'm not sure why the parent's comment doesn't make sense. The mother is distraught and she is lashing out, but she still correctly identified the only rational, responsible party in the murder of her son: the system. The murderer doesn't know any better. He offends, re-offends, takes chances with people's lives and health over and over again, and goes in and out of jail like it's no big deal, but at some point that should have stopped before it got this far. IMO the parents correctly identified the actual problem here, and imo that's what people should do when something bad happens. If you fail to identify the actual problem then you have almost no chance of fixing it. This is a problem which will keep on resulting in more women being raped, more children being molested, more drug dealers getting out to sell more dangerous drugs than ever.... Honest to God (I said that unironically, but then I thought of the different churches around the world and their love of children), how many people have been accused of pedophilia more than 20 times before the were stopped? That's a lot of lives ruined for a lack of intelligence, wisdom, compassion and morality. It honestly takes a laundry list of serious character flaws from the people in charge in order for us to end up in the situation we're in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted April 1 Author Report Share Posted April 1 46 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: The mother is distraught and she is lashing out, but she still correctly identified the only rational, responsible party in the murder of her son: the system. That is not the responsible party in the murder of her son. 46 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: The murderer doesn't know any better. The only reason for that is because nobody considers him to be the responsible party. 47 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: MO the parents correctly identified the actual problem here Well i hope you're ok with more murdered children then. Our system has a duty. It is NOT responsible for the actions of others. Letting this murderer walk from his responsibility is why he keeps killing. It would be nice if the state and parents and so on recognized the duty we have to hold people responsible for their actions. Otherwise - they're not apparently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 (edited) Mentally ill people who have given evidence that they are a danger to society, after careful examination of all facts, should be committed to a mental institution. I will leave the details of how that would work to be decided. It doesn't matter what a person's past is or how the system failed them. What matters is society is protected from future harm. Government and the system are not protecting society. Edited April 1 by blackbird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 Yesterday, there was an event, just imagine you start your day by going to the subway and this element comes out from the bushes and: Police say they were called to Kennedy, A Toronto subway station around 10 a.m for reports of a man armed chasing several people around with a sharp object. Investigators say the suspect allegedly yelled racial slurs to the people he was chasing. He fled the scene before police arrived, like a coward that he is. Now, looking forward to see if this fine one of society is also released on things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nationalist Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 I was just reading this article to my high-strung Euro-wife. She made an excellent point. She's a bartender. If she serves a person and that person goes out and drives and causes an accident, she can be charged. Question: Can the judges who let this POS out in public, get charged too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 On 3/31/2023 at 8:59 AM, I am Groot said: They need to be gotten off the streets by whatever means works. That's right! I wrote to our (NDP) MP the other day and told him about the stabbing at Starbucks that killed a 37 year old father in front of his wife and toddler. I told him government and the system are not protecting society. Dangerous people with mental issues should be in mental institutions. Just telling them to go get counseling is not working. They don't pay attention because they are mentally ill to begin with. They are a threat to everyone. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcsapper Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 1 minute ago, blackbird said: That's right! I wrote to our (NDP) MP the other day and told him about the stabbing at Starbucks that killed a 37 year old father in front of his wife and toddler. I told him government and the system are not protecting society. Dangerous people with mental issues should be in mental institutions. Just telling them to go get counseling is not working. They don't pay attention because they are mentally ill to begin with. They are a threat to everyone. I'd be interested to know what kind of response you get. Would you agree to post it on here if and when you get one? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 2 minutes ago, bcsapper said: I'd be interested to know what kind of response you get. Would you agree to post it on here if and when you get one? I may do that. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 11 minutes ago, Nationalist said: I was just reading this article to my high-strung Euro-wife. She made an excellent point. She's a bartender. If she serves a person and that person goes out and drives and causes an accident, she can be charged. Question: Can the judges who let this POS out in public, get charged too? Judicial immunity -> From a legal point of view, judges are generally granted immunity from being sued or charged for actions taken in the course of their official duties. From what I have been reading, it is very rare, when they violated legal and ethical standards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nationalist Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 1 minute ago, Contrarian said: Judicial immunity -> From a legal point of view, judges are generally granted immunity from being sued or charged for actions taken in the course of their official duties. From what I have been reading, it is very rare, when they violated legal and ethical standards. It looks pretty obvious a few of them have already violated legal and ethical standards. If the law is unwilling to remove those proven unfit for life in the public, should such a person be... Sent back out in public? Jailed...perhaps indefinitely? Put to death? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted April 1 Author Report Share Posted April 1 1 hour ago, Nationalist said: I was just reading this article to my high-strung Euro-wife. She made an excellent point. She's a bartender. If she serves a person and that person goes out and drives and causes an accident, she can be charged. Question: Can the judges who let this POS out in public, get charged too? No. There are specific laws regarding that which protect the justices, police and other such agents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted April 1 Author Report Share Posted April 1 1 hour ago, blackbird said: That's right! I wrote to our (NDP) MP the other day and told him about the stabbing at Starbucks that killed a 37 year old father in front of his wife and toddler. I told him government and the system are not protecting society. Dangerous people with mental issues should be in mental institutions. Just telling them to go get counseling is not working. They don't pay attention because they are mentally ill to begin with. They are a threat to everyone. I can already guess - "Thank you for your letter. This matter is important to many Canadians. We will forward this to the appropriate minister/shadow cabinet/policy person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 (edited) 1 hour ago, Nationalist said: It looks pretty obvious a few of them have already violated legal and ethical standards. If the law is unwilling to remove those proven unfit for life in the public, should such a person be... Sent back out in public? Jailed...perhaps indefinitely? Put to death? I don't know, a few people said it, the laws seem to be the issue, and the moralists seem to not like tougher laws. I am a sympathetic man, know all I need to know about whisky, but once a human being can not take care of himself and is starting to affect society, then society needs to take him and offer him the help. So, it seems we need stronger laws and a stronger process at the Integration stage. JAIL - INTEGRATION - SOCIETY. Edited April 1 by Contrarian edit design Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I am Groot Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 (edited) 1 hour ago, bcsapper said: I'd be interested to know what kind of response you get. Would you agree to post it on here if and when you get one? He likely won't get a response. I've sent emails to my MP and MPP and city councilor in the past. The only one who ever replied was an angry Pierre Poilievre when I told him I was going to vote for the PPC that year instead of his party because at least they had conservative policy proposals. He basically said Bernier was a nutbar. Which turned out to be correct. Edited April 1 by I am Groot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 18 hours ago, blackbird said: Government and the system are not protecting society. it is the systemic breakdown of civil order at the strategic level civil society itself has started to unravel of its own accord the Government really can't protect us from that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nationalist Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 37 minutes ago, CdnFox said: No. There are specific laws regarding that which protect the justices, police and other such agents. And so they abuse the privilege...marvelous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted April 1 Author Report Share Posted April 1 1 hour ago, Nationalist said: And so they abuse the privilege...marvelous. Lets just say they don't lose sleep over it. Like many of our institutions the legal profession has been taken over by those on the left. Lawyers spend a lot of time in our left wing universities to get their credentials and judges are made from lawyers. And for whatever reason those on the left REALLY favor the criminal and don't care about the victim. So they don't spend one second thinking about 'what if this guy kills again, is this fair to that person'. Nor do they think "wow if this guy kills again will that reflect on me", because they're protected. Which is why there was no pushback when justin passed laws making it easier for criminals to get out on bail, and why justin's gov't didn't push back as the courts dismantled harper's criminal reforms. And this is the PREDICABLE result - but they don't care. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcsapper Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 2 hours ago, I am Groot said: He likely won't get a response. I've sent emails to my MP and MPP and city councilor in the past. The only one who ever replied was an angry Pierre Poilievre when I told him I was going to vote for the PPC that year instead of his party because at least they had conservative policy proposals. He basically said Bernier was a nutbar. Which turned out to be correct. That's really not acceptable. Anyone who is paid by a taxpayer should respond to a communication from a taxpayer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 (edited) 5 hours ago, Contrarian said: Yesterday, there was an event, just imagine you start your day by going to the subway and this element comes out from the bushes and: Police say they were called to Kennedy, A Toronto subway station around 10 a.m for reports of a man armed chasing several people around with a sharp object. Investigators say the suspect allegedly yelled racial slurs to the people he was chasing. He fled the scene before police arrived, like a coward that he is. Now, looking forward to see if this fine one of society is also released on things. So more on this event and my logic. This is what my logic tells me, it does not say in the article, in the article it says: "They say a 24-year-old man is now facing 7 charges, including one count each of uttering threats and assault with a weapon." I see, not really sure how this works, but if it's 7 charges, maybe they were some charges names not released? Like maybe, because the man was out on bail too, patrolling the streets? I will not go on because I have no evidence, but will be curious if more details will surface. Just imagine heading to work and instead you get chased around by any lunatic out there. Edited April 1 by Contrarian edit design Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nationalist Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 3 hours ago, CdnFox said: Lets just say they don't lose sleep over it. Like many of our institutions the legal profession has been taken over by those on the left. Lawyers spend a lot of time in our left wing universities to get their credentials and judges are made from lawyers. And for whatever reason those on the left REALLY favor the criminal and don't care about the victim. So they don't spend one second thinking about 'what if this guy kills again, is this fair to that person'. Nor do they think "wow if this guy kills again will that reflect on me", because they're protected. Which is why there was no pushback when justin passed laws making it easier for criminals to get out on bail, and why justin's gov't didn't push back as the courts dismantled harper's criminal reforms. And this is the PREDICABLE result - but they don't care. Which really sounds like social engineering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted April 2 Author Report Share Posted April 2 44 minutes ago, Nationalist said: Which really sounds like social engineering. Sure. Now - one might argue that locking people up to keep the public safe is also a form of social engineering. But - the problem is that the current social engineering is more like social experimentation and it's being done at the expense of the innocent and the victims and those they leave behind or who count on them. And that's the problem. Social experiments with mass murderers or those who are CHRONICALLY violent are highly questionable ethically. We SHOULD be weighing the safety of the public and the rights to the victims to justice as much as we do the rights of the victim - especially with sentancing. Fine if you want to make it hard to convict to protect the wrongfully accused, but once he's been found guilty then the victims and the people in the community SHOULD matter. But while judges occasionally pay a little cautious lip service to that to sound like they care.... the vast majority do not and don't apologize for that. If the public has to suffer in order to make sure the 'criminal victim' mass murderer has his rights then so be it and they'll sleep like a baby that night. I don't know what the answer is. Other than hope the CPC gets in and then cheats and stacks the judges benches with as many right leaning lawyers as they can find, which is what the liberals did on the left. "Electing" judges comes up once in a while - remember we elected trudeau. Three times. I doubt it would be much different with judges. This woman doesn't want to blame the killer and the killer killed her son for god's sake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nationalist Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 11 minutes ago, CdnFox said: Sure. Now - one might argue that locking people up to keep the public safe is also a form of social engineering. But - the problem is that the current social engineering is more like social experimentation and it's being done at the expense of the innocent and the victims and those they leave behind or who count on them. And that's the problem. Social experiments with mass murderers or those who are CHRONICALLY violent are highly questionable ethically. We SHOULD be weighing the safety of the public and the rights to the victims to justice as much as we do the rights of the victim - especially with sentancing. Fine if you want to make it hard to convict to protect the wrongfully accused, but once he's been found guilty then the victims and the people in the community SHOULD matter. But while judges occasionally pay a little cautious lip service to that to sound like they care.... the vast majority do not and don't apologize for that. If the public has to suffer in order to make sure the 'criminal victim' mass murderer has his rights then so be it and they'll sleep like a baby that night. I don't know what the answer is. Other than hope the CPC gets in and then cheats and stacks the judges benches with as many right leaning lawyers as they can find, which is what the liberals did on the left. "Electing" judges comes up once in a while - remember we elected trudeau. Three times. I doubt it would be much different with judges. This woman doesn't want to blame the killer and the killer killed her son for god's sake. I know what the answer is, but it's semi-abhorent. Find a person guilty of murder...March the person immediately out back to the firing squad...and end it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted April 2 Author Report Share Posted April 2 35 minutes ago, Nationalist said: I know what the answer is, but it's semi-abhorent. Find a person guilty of murder...March the person immediately out back to the firing squad...and end it. the problem is you won't get to make that decision - judges will. And judges would never do that to a 'poor misunderstood killer' like the defendant. It's not his fault you know - it's the system. Remember - these are the people who said locking him away for life was 'cruel and unusual' punishment 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.