I don't suppose reinstatement of capital punishment would effect the operational mode of the Posse leadership as the youth offenders act did?

The death penalty would eliminate by deterrence the manipulative, calculating "system workers" from the murder game...then all you have to deal with are the psychopaths....and many of these will end up as target practice for police or their peers.....or some citizen pushed too far.

This is going to interfere with the correct ratio of natives:whites in our jails. We'd better let these three guys go.

Yes, because we all know what an effective job the death penalty has done in curbing murder in places like the United States.

I know it's been said countless times before......but name ONE murderer who's gone on to re-offend after receiving the death penalty.

Capital Punisment/ no Capital Punishment is a red herring. It deflects rightous criticism of the whole Justice system, ESPECIALLY of bleeding heart juries and Judges. The Federal Gov't. is deaf to the complaints of you and I regarding the whole issue of sentencing and incarceration.
Focus here folks; hanging is a non-issue when you can't even get convictions. I hold up the Air India fiasco as a shining example of what's wrong here.

There is so much wrong with the justice system in Canada isn't there? It is a total farce from top to bottom. I know a couple Mounties who work the streets of the Lower Mainland. They tell me that they are very discouraged because they regularly see the same pushers standing on the same corners selling the same drugs to the same addicts the day after they risked their lives arresting them and putting them in jail. The very next day a judge lets them out again. Many of these addicts are the same people who break into homes and businesses looking for money or something they can sell to buy more drugs.

Many of the streets of the Lower Mainland are also run by gangs and no longer safe even in the middle of the day. When I walk around with my camera equipment I keep it all in an old army rucksack hung over my shoulder so it's out of site.

The people of Toronto are complaining about all the shootings and gang violence. Well gee, they are getting what they voted for without understanding it. The problem in this country is the Liberal Party of Canada who are, in my opinion, a criminal organization who are not in the least concerned about the safety or well-being of the average Canadian. They are responsible for virtually eliminating our armed forces, emaciating our justice system and stripping our police of the powers and resources to deal with this problem. And in the process they have taken away the ability of every Canadian to defend ourselves by disarming us. Criminals are no longer afraid to break into homes in the middle of the night. Why should they be? They know will find people unable to defend themselves and, if they do get caught, they know that they will serve little if any time in jail.

Personally I am about as far right as you can go on social issues, however I cannot support a retun to capital punishment. With all of the things that the government screws up should we allow them control over weather someone lives or dies? Granted some of these people are bugs and desreve the worst. This is for a higher power to decide. Our goal must be to see these people are put away for good with no chance of parole. Youth crime is out of control and we need to address that. Adult crimes need adult punishment. That said I also believe that you have an obligation to protect yourself and those in your care. With deadly force if necessary. If Nicole Simpson owned a 12 guage shotgun maybe she would be a weathy widow today.

"Yes, because we all know what an effective job the death penalty has done in curbing murder in places like the United States."

You have to admit that the death penalty does wonders for the recidivism rate.

Gang Member = Coward. Neighbourhood Patrols help, I'm involved in one in Saskatoon. Oops. Does that make me a "gang" member? LOL

John Crittendin -WELL SAID. The Liberal Party of Canada are KNOWN criminals -they collected ransom money in brown paper bags! Some people die when they 'cross' the LPC elitests, some just get ruined economically. How could our government punish criminals for doing what they advocate via their own example?

John C, as Jema54 says - WELL SAID. I would only suggest a solution.

Since Capital punishment is not an option, [ now, I'm not Russian but], an isolated facility in the far North would indeed be a deterrant.

When some of the boys come back from time there and word gets around, there may well be some gradual decrease in crime.

The reason sentences are non-existant is due to the stingy bookeeper streak in Paul Martin. Keeping felons behind bars for a while does cost money.

Upper Canadian politicians enjoy security. They don't have to worry about junkies crawling in the basement window. Not since they all woke up after the cat burgler got into Chretien's bedroom. Eh? 73s TG

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/lott200508190817.asp

The above is an extremely interesting article on crime rates - which outlines how, for example, the Canadian violent crime rate is double that of the US (2003); how the UK rate is double that of the US. Both these countries set up gun control systems, taking the guns from the private citizens, leaving them, of course, with the criminals.

There also a pdf link in the article to a comparative chart of such things as robberies, assualts..and frankly, Canada doesn't come out too good.

I don't think capital punishment is the answer, for our judges and juries too often make serious errors. But, I do think that longer sentences are vital.

The socialist liberal attitude that prison should function as a hotel of 'check in today and check out tomorrow'..along with a handbag of welfare and social assistance - is The Problem.

The socialist liberal ideology is that basically, people are good; the only reason they 'do bad' is because they've been mistreated In the Past - by their Abusive Father, by a Mean Teacher, by an Unfeeling Government, and their race, gender, disability, colour of hair, religion etc..have all been 'discriminated against' by not having a Special HolyDay set aside for ..and this is the reason these inidividuals are 'acting out'.

The socialist liberal refuses to recognize that some people are just plain criminal, and have learned that it's far easier and far more lucrative to obtain things by both criminal acts AND sponging off the gov't - than by working at MacDonald's.

OK, I'll weigh in on this one...
I don't see capital punishment as a deterrent, but the fact remains they won't be able to do it again.
Every nation in the world agrees that a sovereign state has a right to defend itself using deadly force. If I go to sea and our ship destroys an enemy ship, we all come home heroes. Smokey Smith got his VC for killing enemy soldiers, many times. Neither of us are viewed as murderers. Furthermore, the opposite side are just normal people like us- an enemy soldier or sailor is usually a law-abiding citizen of his country, too.
So, when our society is attacked, we are allowed and expected to kill people to defend it. We spend billions of dollars ensuring this. So, when a proven threat to the lives of Canadians appears, why should not the same premise apply? Whether someone can be killed or not, based only on a piece of paper identifying citizenship, seems a little weak. Can't have your cake and eat it too...
I didn't have an opinion until I worked at the RPC in Saskatoon years ago. They would regularly send inmates ("patients") down to work with us. When you work closely with these people for a long time, you get to know them really well! Most were just general screw-ups, and as long as watched were a managable threat. A couple of these guys were serial killers. I got to know them quite well.If one walked itno my kitchen this afternoon I'd be tempted to shoot him on the spot, and throw myself on the mercy of the courts.

Capital punishment is like socialism. Socialism doen't work because people are flawed and selfish. The justice system doesn't work because lawyers are the most flawed and selfish of us all. Capital punishment doesn't work for the same reasons. Justice will always be for sale to the highest bidder. It's why O. J. got off. Therefore capital punishment will invariably kill the poor and free the rich. Jail the bastards for life with hard labor and bread and water. That's the way to go. Capital punishment has no place in a society run by lawyers for lawyers.

You have to remember that a huge number of gangs that commit crimes have to pay a street tax.

Gagliano's friend and professional colleague (both Bonannos), don Vito Ruzzio, was at last count, among his many activities, running street crime in Toronto, Montreal, and various assorted other places.

If gangs or individuals want to commit crimes in the don's territory, they have to kick up whatever percentage that the venerable Ruzzio wants.

So your gang wants to sell dope or do extortion in a number of neighborhoods? The boss has to get his end. If you're a good earner you might even get to pay respect to the great man himself someday. It's a high honor that isn't bestowed lightly.

Simply because most of the time there are a number of buffers of plausible deniability between don Ruzzio and the street guys.

The gang members kick up to someone in a soldier's crew, who kicks up to the soldier, who kicks up to his capo, who kicks up to the underboss, all the way to the holy of holies itself.

So what happens if the gang doesn't want to pay? That's where enforcers like Tony Mignacca come in. Except the enforcers that "interface" with the gang won't be people who know how to order a gourmet Italian meal in Milan. They'll be guys who specialize in dropping the bodies in the street.

See? It's all one beautiful, synergetic system. Very much like Louisiana. And like Louisiana, the guys at the top find it very desirable to create a "loose moral atmosphere" in the legal system.

IMP; So - Do you agree with Mad Mike that people should have the right to defend themselves? I KNOW that your bread and water and HARD WORK idea would deter 75% of all young offenders but the hard core gangster, elitist, crooks would never land in jail if they are running the show. The only way these BIG crooks can stay in contol of the people they govern is to make some element of society 'scarier' to the average citizen than they, themselves. A competant, self assured citizen willing to defend himself, his property and his family is a THREAT to big crime. Stop the two bit crook and you leave an undefended flank open on the big crooks' contol panel. Any Tyrant knows that in order to FORCE people into the serf mode you MUST make them servile - I see the deck being stacked...so what do you think about self defense? BTW - you do not take a knife to a gun fight.

ET. Thanks for that link. Very interesting article.

Mad Mike. When I travel up the coast on a reference or photography trip I'm usually alone. I prefer it that way. But I'm really a sitting duck anchored in some cove out of the wind dropping a line for my dinner. If a couple guys pulled along side with bad intent I'd have to take care of myself. No time to call the cops 60 miles up coast.

Same with hiking. It seems to me that people who do wilderness hiking should be able to take a firearm along with them.

But today, unless you write two exams, pay $160, take a hands on training course, be prepared to wait a year, and put yourself at the mercy of some pencil pusher who doesn't know half what I know about firearms, you had better not be caught with a gun. At least that's what the law says. I personally know at least half a dozen Mounties who just look the other way once they've done a check on you and understand what your needs are.

And yes, some people are indeed born criminals. I could care less if it's in their genes. They're still criminals and, in Canada, they can all have a gun while while the law says can't.

Times will change though. A lot of things are going to change.

"A competant, self assured citizen willing to defend himself, his property and his family is a THREAT to big crime." I like that. You might also add "big government" like the kind, you know, that passes stupid gun laws and are in cahoots with the mob.

Everybody is leaping from zero to infinity here. Murder is seldom a career criminal's first offence. Likely, he/she has been in the eyes of the law for months or years, on a variety of lesser crimes. There used to be something called corporal punishment which applied to idiots who failed to take a hint. A couple of passes of the "paddle" often straitened out young offenders, and they never got into real trouble again. I have spoken to people who were given five or ten strokes, and they were very adamant that they were not going to intentially put themselves in harm's way ever again.

So instead of clamoring for the return of capital punishment, perhaps we should start with the reinstatement of corporal punishment, setting the bar fairly low, as see if someon who has had five licks of the paddle manages to come back for ten. The super squeamish might object, but perhaps the majority might agree.

Yes, indeed, any debate over capital punishment is a red herring.

The problem is that there is currently no respect shown for human life in the - oxymoron alert - Canadian justice system.

Examples abound. Read this column by Tom Brodbeck in today's Winnipeg Sun for just one more example, a man sentenced effectively to 27 months (not years - months!) in prison for deliberately killing another man with a baseball bat:

http://www.winnipegsun.com/News/Columnists/Brodbeck_Tom/2005/09/03/1200399.html

The lead sentence is a good summary of what's being discussed here: "Canada's justice system -- or "legal" system as many call it today -- has arrived at a very dangerous point."

There is a website whose name is ..sort of...
.....DIAL 911...and DIE! The inference being: if you wait for the "AUTHORITIES to come to your aid "...it'll only be too late!!

IF the witness, 19-year-old Elizabeth Halkett were MY SISTER, or relative, Twenty-two-year-old James Slippery, Elwood Poorman and Gerald Littlecrow would have a real concern...

..Well lets just say THEIR kookum or other significant relative would not have a nights peace...at least not untill these three accidentally killed themselves or " some other ACCIDENT visited them!!

Not fair? Vigilante?
I don't care. I just don't give a fuck for those and their families who make up their own rules. WE can do that too!
If the system doesen't work, we'll change the rules!
Academics, legal pretenders, ignore the common person playing by all te rules, who is the one actually damaged in all these incidents, and we're supposed to just TAKE IT?

fuck 'em.....
Give a little back..so THEY feel what we FEEL!

Anything else just compounds the insult and THE INJURY....

Eastern Paul - I've been reading and waiting for the vigilante word to come up. Sooner or later, if the feds don't smarten up, that's what it's going to come to. I've thought about this a lot and I have to agree with some of the sentiments here that it is only right and proper that we are allowed to defend ourselves within reason and without persecution.

If that isn't going to happen - and I don't see it happenening any time soon - then it is very probable that some of us (not necessarily me - Official Disclaimer) - are going to organize a posse or two and start, ahem, dealing with those who don't seem to play by the rules. In other words, we'll join those who don't play the rules. After all, that's what the bad guys (or the mouthy kid) relies on, right?

As far as capital punishment being a deterrent - for some, I'm sure it would be - so that's a positive. For those who refuse to be intimidated, well, current DNA technology that exonerates innocents can also be used to convict the guilty. (If only O.J.'s jury could have figured out what all that DNA fuss was about)

Alas, we live in Canada so there won't likely be the death penalty (legally) during my lifetime.

It's up to us, the public, to protect ourselves.

I don't believe in capital punishment for the first offence either,but for the second or multiple like Picton and Olson,well thats another matter because even they know that they are guilty.It would also take care of the reoffenders.

Given the circumstances Kate mentions, and if I was the so called "witness", hunting season would have been opened. They wouldn't have to worry about showing up Oct 7. I have no reservations about protecting myself, or others such as family, if threatened, and would not hesitsate to make it fatal. If someone was to break into my property, my private space, no mercy would be shown. Sorry, but that's the way I am given the current injustice system. If I had to go to jail in a case of self defense, so be it, but no one else would have to worry about the SOB doing it again.

As for capital punishment, an open air compond in Alert Bay for 25 years, problem solved.

Why oh why are right wingers anti-abortion but after they grow up in the hellish pain of unlove can't wait to dispatch them?

"If I had to go to jail in a case of self defense, so be it, but no one else would have to worry about the SOB doing it again."

As they say, "better tried by twelve than carried by six."

Speaking as one of those "flawed and selfish" people I work with the object of your collective wrath every day. There is hope for some of them and then there are others who should not be allowed back on the street.

However, in most cases then problem started a long time before they reach me. Most of the young offenders I see have grown up with no rules, morals or other structure. I often hear how this young person came from a "dysfunctional" family. Hell, in many cases there is no family, and never was. This may help explain why this person is now in the system but it certainly doesn't excuse the behaviour.

I cannot support a return to capital punishment simply because not every case is open and shut and for my money that margin of error is too great when you are talking about taking someone's life. Cases like that abound in the U.S. but we have had our share up here: Marshall, Milgaard, Sophonow to name a few.

I know this will sound blasphemous but cops and prosecutors play games too.

You can talk all you want about reforming the system but I believe the solution lies with the individual and instilling a sense of morals in your kids. We should not blame the schools, the judicial system etc. What was it that Pogo once said: "We have seen the enemy and it is us"!

Rob, An open air compound in Alert Bay or a compound near Alert, Elsmere Island NWT. No fence required. White snake eyed Artic wolves are always starving. 3s TG

>An open air compound in Alert Bay or a compound >near Alert, Elsmere Island NWT.

A similar idea was floated a few years ago by Robert Kaplan, a Liberal cabinet minister. It was buried in an avalanche of complaints about keeping prisoners too far away from their families, lawyers, social workers, the John Howard and Elizabeth Fry Societies, and other community enablers.

Canadians are generally pretty compassionate people, but they rightly resent paying taxes so that criminals can enjoy amenities that they cannot afford themselves.

In that vein, I think that all labour negotiations should, by order of law, take place on picnic tables at Lac La Ronge.

someone please correct me if i am wrong but didn't we (as in our pussy parole board) just parole a man who had murdered a cop put on death row .(yes people even liberal canada had the death penalty at one time)have his death sentence commuted when they abolished the death penalty and now this convicted murderer is on our streets when he should have been put down.

My view is that when your country has no death penalty, you are being an "enabler" to all sorts of rationalizations and justifications in the system for appeasement. This meanst that the victim's family of say, a brutal murder, will not receive the satisfaction they deserve. Frankly, the punishment can't really fit the crime in cases of serial killers, for example, or serial pedophile rapist/murderers. We would have to be Nazi Germany to figure out a punishment that would fit the crime. Still, the possibility of a mistaken verdict is an argument against capital punishment.

It seems to me that self-defense is another subject altogether. I think self-defense is over-intellectualized by society. Self-defense is its own justification. If your country puts obstacles in the way of saving yourself and your family, you don't have a country, you have a death cult.

The murder rate in DC is 45.8 per 100,000.
The murder rate in PEI is .73 per 100,000.
Tell me again how having a lot of guns around is safer and capital punishment is a deterrent.

If we're flogging around the gun control debate, and want to argue about whether a personal weapon is a net gain for the individuals, or a net loss(danger), I would like to point out that criminals take many forms.
Statistically, the greatest cause of violent death all through the last 2000 years, and especially the last century, has been peoples OWN GOVERNMENTS. Furthermore, once a politician has consolidated power over the system for himself or his party (sound familiar?) what does he really have left to fear? An enraged citizen(s) with a gun!
In Canada the most frightening piece of legislation to ever appear in our history has been C68. For all intents and purposes, the government has ALREADY legally confiscated every privately owned firearm in the country. They will let you keep it or use it occasionally only if you ask "Pretty Please" and lease it back from them (registration fees). The only solace I can take from the whole nightmare is the fact that the legislation is being ignored to one extent or another by the vast majority of gun owners. So far. "An armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man is a serf" Or a victim-by-definition.
Of course, I'm just paranoid. This is Canada, of course. Such things could never happen here...

Mad Mike

Tell us again how selective statistics (PEI vs. DC!?!) make Canadians complacent about their moral superiority to the cowboys next door:

http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/murder.html#guns

"Two thirds of all 1992 US murders were accomplished with firearms. Handguns were used in about half of all murders. Sharp instruments were used in 17% of murders and blunt instruments in about 6%.

"Gun control laws are stiffer in Canada, and many claim this accounts for the murder rate being lower in Canada than in the United States. 65% of US homicides were committed with firearms, versus 32% in Canada. However, a large American study indicated that liberalized laws for carrying concealed weapons reduced murder rates in the US by 8.5%. US homicide rates in the year 1900 were an estimated 1 per 100,000 -- at a time when anyone of any age could buy a gun. Statistics-gathering may have been less thorough at that time -- and few people had the money or interest to buy guns. But American gun supply (including handguns) doubled from the 1973-1992 period, during which homicide rates remained unchanged (WALL STREET JOURNAL, 4-Aug-2000, p.A10).

"Politicians in Massachusetts have cited the State's tough gun control laws as the reason for its low murder rates. However, the adjacent states of Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont have some of the least stringent gun control laws in the US, yet the first two have lower murder rates than Massachusetts and the murder rates in Vermont are comparable to those in Massachusetts. Murder rates in Boston increased 50% in 2004 over the previous year, while murder rates in Los Angeles, Miami, Washington and many other major cites saw murder rates decline."

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_cap&int=-1

Map & Graph: Crime: Murders (per capita)
1. Colombia 0.61 per 1000 people
24. United States 0.04 per 1000 people
44. Canada 0.01 per 1000 people

It's kinda like the SAT scores in that you can't analyze the stats properly unless you investigate the demographic sub-groups.

Of course, that's verboten in safe Toronto right now, isn't it?

Oh, and by the way, the murder and violent crime rate in the northern states- Montana, N. Dakota, etc., are half the rate of Saskatchewan. Guns and all.

Mad Mike

yeah, my dc to pei comparison is a comparison of extremes but any way you slice it or dice it the murder rate in US is much much higher than in Canada. There's a lot of guns in Saskatchewan and guns kill people.

An old saying once went like this - for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Our youth today are receiving a tap on the fingers for any and all crimes they commit. They are taught at a young age to blame someone else for all their problems and except no responsability. If they can't blame the local bully, there is always their parents to fall back on for society already blames the parents for everything anyway. Our youth need strict laws enforced on them for their criminal actions and not being able to hide behind age restictions. Let their names be known to the public and let them be humiliated and shamed for their crimes not wearing them around their belts as trophies. We need comunity service for first offences and boot camps for all second offenses and up. The most serious and violent crimes adult court. Our children need a reaction not just a strict talking to by social workers who are just tring to validate their jobs.

Moonbat,
Your DC to PEI comparison is a little extreme (not to mention, a little "off topic"), given that DC is one of the jurisdictions in the US with gun control laws.
Have a look here for an interactive view of the various US states' gun control laws (a area of state, not national, legislation it would appear):

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1998/schools/gun.control/

This fellow has a discussion on how these statistics are gathered.
http://www.tincher.to/deaths.htm

I'm not sure where you get your figures from, but the rate for DC is 28.20:100000 according to the CDC.
The rate for gun-related homicide in the US for 2002 (the most recent year for which figures are available from the CDC) is 4.06:100,000

In Canada, the latest figures show the rate is 0.50:100000, and PEI is 0, not .73.

http://www.statcan.ca/english/ads/82-003-XPE/pdf/16-4-04.pdf

And since you don't provide any citations, I guess that we can ASSume that, like most moonbats, you are making these facts up as you go along.

>"And since you don't provide any citations, I guess that we can ASSume that, like most moonbats, you are making these facts up as you go along."

He is also not reading the statistics provided. The stats I provided are for "murder rates," not gun-related homicide rates. If you believe that "guns kill people," you need to also understand that knives, ropes, poisons,and hands do also in those countries where guns are highly restricted.

Since some folks aren't reading the stats, let's not bother with the comparable country-to-country rates of violent crime.

Pathetic moonbats.