A distinguished member of the gated community community speaks power to truth;
“Judges view this kind of legislation as a slap in the face.” […] “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.”
So now he’s the subject of a dangerous offender hearing.
That, took, let’s see, one assault with a frying pan coupled with stabbing avec kitchen knives, one sexual assault coupled with attempted murder, and one aggravated assault which rendered the victim (a single mother of two) paralyzed from the neck down. Tally that all up, and now, finally, maybe, he’ll actually be put away for meaningful time. But only if a judge agrees with the application (of course, don’t worry, every seven years Dangerous Offenders get to argue that they should be paroled). Seeing how the judiciary has acted in the past in regards to this offender, would you be willing to bet the house on a successful DO application?
I’m actually on the side of Gomery in this argument. We don’t need mandatory minimum sentences.
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.
“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 ™ 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..