"We simply need to relocate every halfway house in the country to inside the security gated confines of luxury housing developments and high-end apartment buildings - and let the problem of lax sentences solve itself."

Heh.....perfect solution.I've always said that a judge and/or lawyer who lets scum off easy should automatically have them serving their "community time" at said judges/lawyers house.And how would you like your eggs this morning Judge? Wooopppssss.No frying pan.

cheap & effective. A perfect solution for the do-gooder ilk.

But on a brighter note- that pompus windbag Antonio Lamer is dead! (Good riddance to cretinite rubbish!)

Mind, in Calgary, needle park and whore central are in sight of police headquarters and city hall. By in sight, I mean next friggen door. Doesn't seem to motivate the cops or aldermen.

sheik - smarten up. Confine comments like that to the truly deserving.

If an offender is released by a judge early, or given a suspended sentence, or reduces the offender's sentence, and the offender re-offends, the judge should take the prisoner's place and serve out his sentence.

Because that is exactly the bet that the judge is making -- I can let this guy out and he won't re-offend.

Gomery should stick to conducting "Public Inquiries". NO doubt another Liberal in his previous life who got to where he is because he supported Canada's Natural Governing Party. We need minimum sentences because we have far too many judges sitting today who buy into this "restoratative justice" crap. It just should not apply to certain crimes and certain criminals. And, given the activism of our top court, it will be interesting to see if those judges will tow the line or write some "new law" for Canada.

Unfortunately, we have the same type of mentality here in the US -- poor judgment and lack of wisdom in our legal system.

Same problem in the States. The old saying is that "state judges think they're God; federal judges KNOW they're God." The problem is that judges, being human and of whatever political persuasion, need the restraints of checks and balances, just like the legislative and executive branches of government.

That judges say, "It's slap in the face!...WE don't need or want ANY guidance from Parliament!" merely reinforces the obvious, that they need it badly. Or more precisely, a free democratic society needs it, to ensure that the judges do their job strictly in accordance with the laws enacted by the legislative branch, and not consider themselves a "Super-Legislature".

Dave in Pa. and Orlin at least you have Bill O'Reilly on FOX in the US bringing some lenient judges to task and for the good.

You can see the reaction (Gomery) from the judiciary here in Canada to mandatory sentencing, as well as a bleeding heart sympathetic media to the mindset of the Gomery's of the judicial world.

Sadly, we do not have the likes of O'Reilly in Canada, except our lonely internet voice, SDA, at present.

i for one did not mourn lamers passing.

Dear Kate,
Funny and fitting! But R Ball's idea goes one better, but a bit over the top, how about a serious fine for parole boards and judges who grant early release only to see the convict re-offend?

Gomery Says: "I find it hard to understand how the richest country in the world has one of - if not the - highest prison population in the world. There's something wrong there, and the problem is mandatory sentences. I'm disappointed to see Canada drifting in that direction."

And yet crime is down in the U.S. and up in Europe... why is that?

A while ago I was working in a forensic unit. One thing I noticed was the large number of offenses on the rap sheets: multiple assaults, stabbings, rapes etc.

And I would ask myself: "Why was this person able to do all these things for so long without being removed from society to keep others and him safe?"

But then again, if it's not your wife or kid that gets raped or stabbed, who cares?

This is what I dont understand....judicial independence means they get to do whatever they want with no check on the results ever?

I think judicial independence means no interference in the current decision. If you consitently make bad decisions then there is a problem.

This is why only lawyers having input on who is a judge.....ridiculous. The decision is and always should be the ministers. And the judge should have all info laid bare...including his/her political donations.

Imagine if only the military could say who was put in charge of the military, AND that you could never have any effect on them once they were there. Civilian control, in all its dirty glory.

Judges....they should be appointed for a lengthy period of time, but not for life. I think a 15 year appointment, max, to the Supreme Court is quite enough. If you want a reappointment, you had better do a good job...maybe 10 years is enough with 15 being for the Chief Justice.

It's not just the judges. The provincial Attorneys General are, in effect, accessories after the fact to most crimes. Apart from the sentencing criteria in the Criminal Code, judges are required to follow sentencing guidelines from the Attorney General. For example, the maximum sentence for breaking and entering a dwelling-house is life imprisonment. Applying the Criminal Code criteria might suggest a sentence of 5 years, since most B-and-E artists and other malefactors don't stop at one incident. Guess what the actual sentence would likely be, thanks to the A.G.?

If we want longer sentences for criminals, more resources have to go for policing, prosecution and jails rather than being shovelled into the bottomless pit of socialised education and health care.

I arrested a youth criminal last year for destroying trees on city property. Predictably, the police knew it wasn't even worth their time to fill out the paperwork for a mischief charge against a young offender.

Examples of our justice, forget that, legal system in today's paper.

Adrian Roks sentenced to life today but will be paroled at 10 years for arson causing death. Crime took place in 2001, 6 years ago.

Woman charged with killing her autistic child. Mistrial declared, new trial expected to take 8 weeks!

Robert Pickton's trial now in its 11 month.

5 murders in Toronto over the weekend, all of them involving men on judicial release. In 2006 more than 70% of all people charged with murder were on some sort of judical release says Detective Briggs.

Most judges have little or no exposure to real life experiences. First they go to school/university, then become lawyers and finally judges; at most they may have had some summer employment. Consequently they have lived the good life and hardship is only something they have experienced thirdhand. Most have been exposed to the latest sociological theories at university so they have bought into the hype of determinism. So, criminals are victims too! And don't the courts employ counselors etc to rationalize bad criminal behaviour

What is the definition of the words dangerous offender. Surely murder is dangerous--at least to the one murdered?
I believe in minimum sentences. As stated--would these murderers and repeat offenders be considered dangerous if the Judge or parole board had these criminals released into their gated communities? If the bleeding heart Injustice System toadies were accountable for their decisions I think we would see a vast improvement in the sentences--perhaps they would suit the crime. Strange--I thought our parliamentarians were the lawmakers. Guess the Judges etc. think they can over-ride the wishes of the people?

"Judges find that it's an implied criticism when Parliament imposes mandatory sentences," Gomery says. "It leaves the impression that judges aren't using their discretion wisely or in accordance with the wishes of the legislature. And judges are resentful about that."

Gomery shows his true colors in this interview, critics of his infamous "inquiry" claimed that the inquiry WAS the cover up for Liberal crimes, maybe they were right.

As for "implied criticism", if Gomery came down from his ivory tower, and talked to the ordinary taxpayer that supported him for his entire life, he'd find the criticism was not just implied, but plainly stated, "we Canadians no longer have any faith in our justice system, and most of the Judges in it".

Some of the ridiculous sentences handed out for horrendous crimes, often involving child molestation, clearly indicate some Judges have severe psychiatric problems, and have NO business sitting in judgement of a Court case.

No one should be in a position where there is absolutely no accountability. I wouldn't dream of suggesting a solution to the current system, I'll leave that to the geniuses in government who are paid by us to solve these problems.

"If an offender is released by a judge early, or given a suspended sentence, or reduces the offender's sentence, and the offender re-offends, the judge should take the prisoner's place and serve out his sentence." Richard Ball

This suggestion is not "over the top." The number of offenders commiting a violent crime while out on bail or release, as well as offenders commiting a violent crime after serving an overly lenient sentence is a disgusting statistic in this country. It's also a result of Liberal judges being overly politically correct towards minorities and espousing the 'root causes lessen the offenders culpability' b.s.

Justice for the victim and their family is secondary to the rehabilitation and early release of the criminal. Especially if the criminal is 'youth' from a minority background.

I would go one further than David Hand. If the judge grants a lenient sentence, or bail/release, and the criminal quickly reoffends, the judge should also be charged as an accomplice, or an enabler.

They must be held accountable for their actions. Especially if others are harmed or killed directly as a result of their judgements, or lack thereof.

Gomery is right judges are not using their discretion wisely.

One of the people who killed my brother in law got 6 months the other a mere 400 dollar fine.

According to that judge it would be beneficial for Free Dominion to take out Richard Warman, in like fashion because killing isn't as severe sentencing wise as hurting someone's feelings.

If you made a list of bad Canadian sentencing where heinous crimes lead to light sentences it would make the income tax act look like Coles notes.

Is Karla Homulka raping someone right now, after taking part in 3 murders? The Judges don't care as long as they get their billible hours.

I'm sure most judges houses have enough space to be a halfway house for one murderer roaming the streets.

Gated community is right! How did these judges become so isolated from the realties of the country that they live in?

"In the last couple of decades, the U.S. has gone the way of mandatory sentencing for a whole bunch of crimes and the result is their prisons are jammed.”

Well well, we could build a few building with bars to keep the criminals in or we could continue as we do now and have the residences and businesses of millions of law abiding citizens covered with bars and alarms to keep the criminals out.

Yeah baby! You just walloped Gomery upside the head with a frying pan!

"But in Const. Garrett's case, the evidence could not be released before Troy Davey's month-long first-degree trial (and conviction) commenced in January this year, more than two years after the murder."

There was no question that Davey did not commit this horrendous crime in ambushing and slitting Constable Garrett's throat. This case should have taken 15 minutes to an hour at the outside done the next day. Why would it take a month to convict this POS? Lawyers!

Zoo-keepers have figured out that you put dangerous animals in cages because they are dangerous, not to deter dangerous behaviour in others. Why is this beyond the intellectual capacity of judges? I want to scream every time I hear that idiot Comartin dribble on about deterrence not working. I don't care about deterring unknown criminals, I have a dog and a big gun for that. I want to deter scumbags from re-offending by putting and keeping them in cages.

The legal community denies it but there is very strong political partisanship present in the appointment of judges. Most judges at the federal level were appointed by a Liberal government.

I would love to see elected judges but I doubt that it will ever happen.

I do think that there is room to do job performance evaluations in the legal system . Not just judges but prosecutors and parole board. If the lighter sentences, plea bargaining and parolees cause more crimes then it should be reflected in their rating. If their rating becomes really bad then they should be demoted or re-evaluated or removed.

These people are in charge of ensuring public safety. Their failure to consider that results in criminals being returned to the street to victimize innocent citizens. Maybe if their was direct consequences for our justice system employees then the courts would stop being a social service program for offenders.

Of course their success should also be rewarded in pay and promotion.

CRIME DOES PAY. Think of the spin-off from crime, increased policing/associated costs and the replacement of stolen and damaged goods alone, never mind Courts costs, support staff, trials and prison space.
If the drug problem were solved tomorrow the unions would suffer from a greatly reduced membership/dues. In the public sector alone crime is big business and responsible for a lot of jobs. I, quite frankly, do not think there is the political will to reduce crime and especially drug related crime. If their own statistics are to be believed, about 60% to 70% of all crime is drug related. Take that away and everyone involved in the crime business would feel the financial pinch, security firms, locksmiths, jewelry stores, car dealerships etc etc as well as the money colledted by government on these goods in various taxes, PST, GST would be lost.
CRIME IS A VERY BIG AND PROFITABLE BUSINESS.

In other news, Toronto has more murders than ever this year.

Connection?

I think that there's a lot of misinformation concerning our Canadian reform system. And NO, I'm not Liberal, I've held a Fed. Conservative (and Reform,) memberships since 1978.
People assume that jail cures all! Then think for a moment.
The USA has the largest (by far) prison population of the G-8 nations. Over 2.1 million people are incarcerated in the USA today.
As a rule, American judges will hand out anywhere from four to six times the jail time that a Canadian offender receives for the same crime. The "frying pan" incident is a classic example. Hubby comes home drunk, cutie starts lipping off, the whole thing turns into a disaster.
Well guess what guys? We also have the one of the highest "least likely to reoffend" stats of the G-8 nations. I would much rather have someone walking freely, abide by the law, than to have to pay to keep him (or her) locked up.
It's OK to want "legal reform." But there has to be a valid reason. Politicians tend to use "rising crime" as tool for reelection. Let's keep Canada the "Civil" nation it has been for many years. Incidentally, the UN now has us pegged at fouth best place to live in the entire world. USA is 12th. Think about that!!

Western Canadian--Crime is an industry--a very profitable one. Sadly, our Liberal governments understand that and quickly and completely ruled the country for the benefit of their brotherhood.
We have capital punishment in Canada but only for victims. Murderers are a special interest group, as are any other criminal. Honest citizens are expendable and even after death their family has to pay the taxes to the governments that their dead loved ones owe--you know, the same governments who are charged with protecting society, not the criminal.

Ever lived in the USA Johnny? The UN is full of it dude.

As a physician I have to answer to lawyers and judges for any screw ups I might be involved in. I know engineers, pollicemen and nurses are in the same boat. Maybe it's time judges started answering to a panel of engineers, policemen, physicians and nurses for their screw ups. Since any of the aforementioned professionals can be sued for negligence, is it really beyond the realm of possibility that judges and parole boards could be negligent as well? Could there not be such a thing as judicial negligence? Could there not be periodic audit of judges decisions to find out who is getting a disproportionate number of decisions wrong i.e. overturned, or parole boards that are batting particularly poorly regarding recidivism and its consequences? Every other professional has to carry malpractice insurance, why not judges? Maybe they would smartern up if a few of them were sued, dragged in front of a panel of lay professionals and the patent idiocy of their decisions and lack of diligence laid bare in front of the public with a big cash outlay and award to drive home the point. It takes years of study and practice to become an engineer or physician, how long to become a judge? Maybe it's time it became a profession rather than a sinecure.

The single biggest problem we have with our justice system is the fact that we don't have enough jails. I believe that all the other issues stem from that. Why are convicts serving their sentences "in the community"? Its partly ideological, but the fact is there isn't a prison space available to put them in even if we wanted to. This came about because prisons are expensive and there isn't a politician alive who is going to vote for a billion dollar increase in the attorney generals budget( I think that's who prisons come under), if they can buy our votes more cheaply with promises of more money for schools and hospitals.

This is what happens when the primary focus of government changes from running the country to income redistribution. Get rid of socialism and everything else will fix itself.

Remember when a drunken Russian diplomat mowed down a lawyer in ottawa,he's serving time in a gulag right now,despite claiming diplomatic immunity.Imagine if that was joe blow who was killed.The judiciary only seems to work as it should when one of their own is affected.

Another problem we have with prisons in Canada (my dad worked in them for 30 years) is that an awful lot of the inmates are mentally ill people who are off their meds. There was a time in Canada when
there were as many hospital beds for the mentally ill as for the physically ill. In less enlightened times we appear to have understood mental illness better than we do now, because in the past many of the people who are now living on the streets of Toronto or in prison would have been in hospital receiving treatment. In Ontario a certain socialist premier decided it was against their human rights to make sure that the mentally ill took their meds, now they send them to prison instead.

So the judges consider this a slap in the face. Too bad. Every time a judge puts a criminal's rights above a victim's, I consider that a slap in the face.

Posted by: Johnny Jesus at November 28, 2007 11:16 AM

"Incidentally, the UN now has us pegged.....Think about that!!"

I do think about that. I consider the source.

Cheers!

The "frying pan" incident is a classic example. Hubby comes home drunk, cutie starts lipping off, the whole thing turns into a disaster.

Is it still a "classic example" when it happens (with variations) four times, to different victims, Johnny?
Do yourself a favour: try to stop being such a vacuous twit. It would be a good start if you actually read the material you were commenting on.

"Well guess what guys? We also have the one of the highest "least likely to reoffend" stats of the G-8 nations. "

Ummmm....got a link for that?

" I would much rather have someone walking freely, abide by the law, than to have to pay to keep him (or her) locked up."

Talk about convulted logic.If he/she were abiding by the law,they wouldn't be in front of a judge.Guess what Johnny? We are abiding by the law and walking freely.What part of criminal/lawbreaker don't you understand?

Every year there is a report on the ratings of universities in Canada.
Why can't this be done with judges. When someone reoffends, or commits an offence while on bail or after a light sentencem, the lawyer and judge responsible for this guys freedom to commit crime should be made public. Same goes for the parole board. Who is responsible for these people being on our streets. There are very good judges and they are tainted with the actions of the bad ones.
I would like to know who the judges are that continue to release criminals.
Who releases the most, female or male judges.
Too bad we don't have the same criteria for appointing judges as they do in the US.
Those in the US are vetted by special interst groups, the Senate, and others.

MaryT, what you suggest would be reasonable, constructive, useful, and fair. Therefore obviously it cannot be done. I mean, really!

You can't expect the justice bureaucracy to live up to the same standards the rest of us lowly peons do. That would be a slap in the face!

Gomery couldn't figure out which Liberal stole $40 million dollars from us, he has zero credibility.

"the UN now has us pegged at fouth best place to live in the entire world. USA is 12th"

Pretty funny, Johnny. That bastion of all that is good and noble, the UN.... must be correct!

People thoughout the world vote with their feet. And which is the 'country of choice' to which the vast majority of 'feet' choose to immigrate?

Cuba? North Korea? Denmark? Canada? Any more guesses?

I believe it was SOC justice Beverly McLaughlin who said that judges should not be bound by either laws or public opinion. In fact I believe she also suggested that they should be free to create law as they see fit.

There is no better evidence that there is a deep rot in the very core of our justice system.
Gommery - just one of THEM.

We should have an exchange program with Iran,

We send them our violent criminals

and they send us people guilty of being too much like westerners.

It's a win-win solution.

no guff - you're absolutely right. Heck, even the UN refuses to leave the USA. Never mind all the illegal (and legal) immigrants pouring over its borders. The US is the country where everyone wants to go.

By the way, where did you get your statistics, Johnny? The USA is listed as the 'sixth best place to live; with Norway as first, then Sweden, Canada, Belgium, Australia, and USA. Here's Norway's today announcement:

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article369611.ece

As for judges, disregarding Beverly McLaughlin and her arrogant insistence that judges and judges alone 'make the law' - it's the people who make the law. The legislature makes the law, and judges ought to apply it.

I don't want judges to use their discretion. It wasn't too long back when a Canadian judge stated that a two year wanted it - meaning wanted sex with the man charged. Mandatory sentences are necessary for crimes. I'm sick of judges and defendants making excuses for criminals. First degree murder: Life. How bloody hard is that!

DrD - I agree!

There were several choice quotes in the article but one of the best came near the end making reference to the fact that the U.S. is one of the richest countries in the world and also has one of the largest prison populations. The implication is that being a rich country should mitigate the need to jail the offenders. Maybe the judge should consider the other implication namely, crime causes poverty. Thomas Sowell, among other economists, has covered this issue in his writing i.e. that crime imposes a huge economic cost upon a community. Therefore jailing the offenders, far from representing the results of economic failure is in fact a contributing factor in the economic success of a community. Gomery obviously doesn't understand this, but that in itself reflects a big piece of what is wrong with Canada's judiciary.

@ DrD, Its also interesting to note the inconvenient fact that crime stats have been going down in the USA. Why is it these so called experts never mention this every time they complain about prison?

I agree with you about the judicial responsibility, if it were anything like our profession perhaps there would be a different tune.

"Up until late October, officials at the Department of Foreign Affairs had been lobbying for more than a decade for Smith's life to be spared – in keeping with longstanding government policy.

Smith was convicted in 1983 of murdering two cousins who picked him up while he was hitchhiking.

Today, a team of high-profile Canadian lawyers is to file an application on Smith's behalf at the Federal Court of Canada for a judicial review of the new policy."

Can you imagine how much money has been spent on this POS in 24 years. If you figure $100K a year as he is on death row, there's 2.4m. All his appeals in the States, Canadian Foreign Affairs, now more slimey lawyers feeding at the trough for a judical review. The total cost has to be in the $5 million range and counting. All this for a vicious murderer who should have been executed 24 long years ago.

DrD and so many excellent posters on SDA are physicians, engineers, teachers, scientists and so on that all perform vital functions in our society. What function do lawyers have that has any real value in so many cases like Smiths'? They are part of a treadmill called the legal system that consumes staggering amounts of money but provides little justice.

What did we get for $50 million for Gomery or $400 million for the softwood lumber lawyers?

Speaking personally and for my organization that consists of thousands of people who work internationally in my business, I must proclaim that the Canadian judicial system is one of the finest in the world.

My family has spent generations running business enterprises responsibly and profitably with very little interference from the Canadian judicial system.

And simply because I assisted others from my tradition in dealing with an in-house problem, I now find myself unfairly incarcerated, in complete violation of my civil rights, in a Colorado penetentiary.

It is hard for me to believe that any reasonable or fair-minded person could compare the judicial system of the United States with our precious Canadian judicial system and not find the Canadian system completely superior in every way.

-- Vito Rizzuto

Kate at November 28, 2007 8:52 AM:
Not that I would express themy sentiments in the same manner as the sheik, but do you not find Lamer to be among the truly "deserving"? Among the modern architects of Moonbat Canada (tm) Lamer may have been second only to the main man himself, Peter Elliot Waterhole.

Pakistan- with a population of 166 million people- has ten thousand lawyers. Canada- with 33 million- has around 70,000 of them!
(I'll bet money- that no 'immigration lawyer' in Pakistan, would dare to set up a booth at an international HIV conference, and then offer assistance to HIV positive wetbacks, to sneak into that country, and then defend their right to remain there- at taxpayers' expense.) This country is out of it's cotton-picking mind!

johnny jeezus

why do people like you compare USA and Kanada crime rates/ jail population and use one to judge the other, thet aren't comarable, period!!

they may (and do ) have different crime reporting systems

they have different population densities

they have different demographics

and as people have pointed out, USA is the destination of choice , this inclues criminals, so this factor plays a part

so if you must COMPARE, do your home work and compare apples to apples, not to a peanutbutter sandwitch

The "progressives" condemn anyone who suggests that criminals should be punished for their crimes (or talk with Mr Smith & Mr Wessen). I'm sure that there could be quite a list of examples where judges aren't using their discretion wisely. Maybe electing them will at least make them responsible (or act like it ) every time an election rolls around.

Yes, there are some mentally ill in the system but saying that most of the inmates just neeed a pill or couch is just a pipe dream. Besides, the progressives were the first to complain about putting mentally ill people in institutions. That "rights" thing, remember?

I would also love to see a Canadian version of the Tent Prison that a sheriff in Arizona has. The return rate is pretty low. Or how about life being life and not a couple of years, or consecutive sentencing not concurrent. Lots need fixing.

I also prefer Kate's solution rather than mandatory minimum sentences. The proposed mandatory minimums that the Conservative government has proposed have done more to make me consider voting libertarian in the next election than anything else they have done. Get rid of C-68 and maybe I can support mandatory minimum sentences for firearms crimes. With C-68 in place, one runs the risk of spending years in jail because one doesn't have the proper piece of paper beside ones guns. Most gun owners I know have registered only a few of their guns and are probably asking themselves now why they should vote for a party that is planning on enforcing the totalitarian legislation passed by the liebrals. The solution to drug crimes is to decriminalize most drugs. Severely punish people for crimes committed to obtain money for drugs or while they're using drugs, but the simplest act the government could do to cripple organized crime is to decriminalize marijuana.

The US has over a million people in jail for minor drug crimes and for Canada to follow this dead-end road is the height of folly. All that would happen if mandatory minimums for cultivation of cannabis were introduced would be:
(1) the price would go up making cannabis cultivation even a more lucrative business to be in
(2) people who were simply minding their own business growing a bit of pot for their own use would be jailed for long periods of time
(3) the increased amounts of money in the drug trade would lead to even more corruption among police and politicians
(4) respect for the law (already rather low here in BC) would sink dramatically.

Then there is the small matter of whether mandatory minimum sentences are constitutional. The 7 year mandatory minimum sentence for importing cannabis was found to be unconstitutional and I suspect that some of the proposed new mandatory minimums will also be found to be unconstitutional. When I first heard of the proposed Conservative legislation I wondered if there was a liebral mole who had infiltrated the highest levels of the Conservative party. There may be a better way to decrease the Conservative vote in BC, but the mandatory minimums for drug sentences are getting the most universally negative reaction I've seen for anything the Conservative government has done.

A drug user's brain is just a little off kilter. Sometimes a lot. And they, to a person, will fanatically argue for legalization of their favorite security blanket. Just what we need, more mentally damaged people who will fall for leftist propaganda.

Put them in jail and take away their vote.

Here is how the system should work for Canadians:

1. Provincial Court Judge gives a sentence of say "two years" for a crime because the law "mandates" that as the minimum sentence.

2. Queens Bench Judge reduces it by any amount. The consequence to the judge "fire his/her a$$".

3. Court of Appeal reduces sentence by any amount. Consequence: "fire the judges that voted in favor of the reduction".

4. Supreme Court reduces sentence by any amount. "Fire the judges that voted in favor or the reduction"

We need laws that say that ONLY the elected citizens of this country get to make and enact laws. The moment judges start making laws - fire their a$$. I suppose we would have to suspend the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in certain cases to accomplish this but so what? The government has the "not withstanding" clause - USE IT!!

When the judiciary makes laws to circumvent the supreme authority of Parliament it is time to get out the big stick and start firing their a$$es!

Come on Bob, you're no better than Mary T. Canadians are too stoopid to be able to decide complicated things like laws. No less a giant than Pierre Elliot Trudeau said so! Hell, we are too dumb to be trusted with firearms! Yeah sure they let us drive, but they are working fixing on that.

Lets be reasonable Bob, Mary. Only a highly trained super duper guy like a judge is able to make the hard choices for us. Like, two years for murdering your girlfriend might be enough. Y'know? I mean, imagine the damage to the poor guy's self esteem if he had to stay in the halfway house another six months! So he kills another chick two weeks after they let him out on early release, that's just the way it goes sometimes.

You win some, you lose some.

/[sarc. off]/

To compare the crime rate in Canada to that of the USA is to be competely out of touch with reality.
I'm not a Liberal, and no I don't codnone hitting anyone over the head with a frying pan. But on the other hand, I don't beleive in using an isolated incident to change the entire justice and/or prison system in Canada. Not anymore than we should do away with the RCMP and Tazers over one or two incidents that turned sour.
When judging a reform system, you need to look at the success stories as well as the failures. Yes, we're too soft on some crimes. But on the other hand, we have an excellent recovery rate for the same offences that Americans have failed to control.
Just look at the state of Texas who have executed 24 murderers in the last year. They also have one the highest murder rates of the G-8. And please Mr. or Mrs. "Justhinkin," If you want to argue with the US Dept. of Statistics, and Statistics Canada, please leave me out of it. It's all there in front you.

And by the way guys, if you plan on forming the next Federal Government, you better get away from the idea that all Conservatives are rednecks who want to see people hanging on the end of a rope for having shoplifted a Lufkin measuring tape.
Most of the voters in this country are in Ontario in Quebec. They're not in Texas or Wyoming! And I do beleive that my Conservative membership is about winning the next election!! And last but not least, I don't know Kate personally, however I don't believe that her intentions were (or are) to use this site for what is often raving and ranting without logic, rhyme or reason, that is costing the Conservative Party losses in popular ratings.

Love

JJ

Dear JJ, the Conservatives will win if they adopt a Conservative platform. That being tax cuts, less regulation through a smaller government, letting the punishment fit the crime, and tax cuts.

The appropriate punishment for killing somebody on purpose, aka murder, is not parole after a couple years. Sorry to rain on your parade.

If they do as you suggest and run as Liberal Lite, they will lose. Why go for the pony pee when you can have stout?

I think that judge Gomery should be charged with contempt of parliament.For an appointed former civil servant to have such disregard for our parliamentary system is despicable and echo's the contempt that he holds for our members of parliament.

To DCardno, Re: Frying Pan incidence. My apologies to you!! That was not a gooooood example, considering the topic. My point was however, that every crime has a different set of circumstances.

To "Gym." Every criminial in the world has a great excuse as to why he or she offends. Demographics, social status, economics, family back ground, etc etc.
Why are we always making excuses for the American crime stats? They're a violent society! Is that so hard to understand. Just look at the movies they make.
They've had 200 years and access to the largest treasury in world history, yet they can't get a handle on crime and violence. My Brother lived in Baton Rouge Louisana for a spell. Things are really bad when you need a gun in your pickup to go pick up a coke at the local convenience store that's two blocks away, and because of fear of getting mugged on the lot. God Bless Canada.

Give it a few years Johnny Jesus and you will carry a gun to get something from the 7-11 or Tim Hortons,the lawyers and justice system will make sure of it.Where do you think our lawyers get their final education but in the USA.The doctors got rich with medicare,the lawyers with Trudeus constution and the accountants with the tax system..