67 Replies to “Oh, Shiny Pony!”

  1. Opposing unreasonable rigidity in the law is a bad thing now? Oh wait, this is one of those “You’re either for X or with the pedophiles.” platitudes.

  2. The Shiny Pony is really being superbly vetted by Ezra and the Sun big time and probably for the first time in a sustained way – JT’s handlers should be thanking them.
    Ordinarily, I’d be worried that by election time these foolish eruptions would be exhausted and JT thus bullet proof for the campaign – but I know my concerns are ultimately unfounded.

  3. @K Strickler – The only people who seem to be against manditory minimums seem to be “progressives”. It is simple, don’t break the law, don’t go to jail. Even simpler now that potential law breakers know in advance how long the stay will be if (when) they break the law and are caught and convicted!
    And don’t give me the old story of how our justice system needs to rehabilitate criminals, there is a high recidivism rate because the criminals don’t give a crap about the system. In fact the system has been kind enough to play catch and release for years. At least on serious crimes judges will no longer be able to play social engineer and are forced to put away criminals!
    But don’t worry, send your address to JT and he will put you on the “hug brigade” because we all know that “progressives” are Hug a Thug proponents!

  4. It’s from the social democrat bible, treat the criminals with kid gloves,let their victims deal with the trauma they cause. We all know the Trudeau Charter tells us we all have rights,we are all equal before and under the law, however in practice it’s quite different, some are more equal than others when the Court hand down their interpretations.

  5. I’m far from a progressive, but think mandatory minimums are an unwieldy tool.
    A 19 year old and a 14 year old, in love, could and would be married over the past millennia.
    Nowadays, the 19 year old, (male or female) can be thrown into jail with pedophiles and the judge is powerless to ameliorate the sentence?
    That would be ridiculous.

  6. Of course the LIEberal view is that criminals should be treated like fish:
    “Catch and release”!
    90 days imprisonment for abuse/touching a child…
    “True-Dope-ia”‘s position is clear, defend child abusers … a sure vote getter.
    I’m sure we’ll be getting quotes from NAMBLA any moment now…on why it is legitimate for your child to be seduced and abused.
    The LIEberal idea of public policy formation is to stick their finger, among other things, into the wind.
    Cheers
    Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
    1st Saint Nicolaas Army
    Army Group “True North”

  7. Trudeau is of course right. Mandatory minimums have failed to produce any benefits and exist only for mouthbreathers (see above) to get off on. All the TUFFGAI ON KRIME stuff is people compensating for their shortfalls through government ‘toughness’. All emotion no logic.
    Mandatory mins are really a violation of due process rights. The judge’s power to sentence at his/her discretion is a component of due process.

  8. @LAS – typical ad homien attacks are your forte, eh?
    Manditory minimums are law. Judges are given a sentencing guidelines are part of the Criminal Code.
    http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/page-402.html
    Since there is all sorts of guidance in there, manditory minimums would just be another set of rules, or guidance. Seems pretty straigh forward to me.
    If you have a study, or credible source, to back up your “feelings” well then trot them out!

  9. Child molesters, pedophiles, should be sent to the firing squad instead of prison. Oh wait, I see LAS in the line up. Those who support such deviates should join their sentence.

  11. Mandatory minimums and maximums are part of the guidelines by which judges sentence offenders after they have been found guilty.
    Do trials for child molestation have mandatory juries now in Canada or can the accused have a judge sit in place of a jury as in a murder trial?
    For those who argue against mandatory minimums and want to leave sentencing up to the judge’s ‘discretion’, what do you say the about the maximums being left up to the judge’s discretion too, eh?
    How about just letting the judge hot-dog it on the maximums and invent his/her own maximum sentence as you seem to want them to free-style it on the minimums?
    I bet sauce for the gander doesn’t appeal so much to you geese does it?
    So some want appointed-for-life judges to make up law on the fly instead of elected politicians being held accountable for their legislative decisions, eh?
    Who wants a dictatorship of judges?

  12. Who wants a dictatorship of judges?
    Beats democratized populist ‘justice’.
    For those who argue against mandatory minimums and want to leave sentencing up to the judge’s ‘discretion’, what do you say the about the maximums being left up to the judge’s discretion too, eh?
    Ambiguous but it’s a false equivalence anyways so it doesn’t matter.

  13. There is only one cure for pedophilea, it’s fast acting and usually copper coated. One treatment is all that is required and there is no known case of a reoffending after treatment. As for mandatory minimums, it wouldn’t be necessary if the focus of sentencing was to protect the public instead of the rehabilitation of the convicted.

  16. Love the photo behind Ezra… a pedophile an idiot and a dyke… or, the Liberal dream team. Isn’t Trudopia grand?

  18. “it’s a false equivalence”
    You trust judge-made law to invent a minimum sentence but not to invent a maximum sentence.
    Remember, a judge can’t determine any sentence unless the defendant’s guilt has been decided.
    One potentially has a judge letting a guilty party serve no sentence while the victim sees no justice while the other has a judge invent a heavy sentence and the victim sees justice done.
    The problem, LAS, is that you identify entirely with the perpetrator and not at all with the victim.
    It’s a wonder, yup.

  19. I don’t ‘identify’ with anyone you twerp. It’s a false equivalence. A max is there for safety reasons, to protect us from a justice system’s errors. I don’t necessarily agree with it but I can see the point. Minimums exist to make TUFFGAI ON KRIME proponents feel really good about themselves.

  20. Minimums exist to ensue that convicts are assessed at least some penalty for the crime they have committed against a victim.

  21. “…..to protect us from a justice system’s errors.”
    Wow. So what about protecting society from those who would do us harm? When a pedophile or a murderer is in jail they can’t prey on us. You seem to want to protect the rights of criminals rather than protect the vulnerable from those who would rape and/or murder them.

  22. Perhaps we can surmise that LAS neither has, nor intends to have, any children or close family; which have or would suffer any negative consequences of said perpetrators.
    Liberal Abuse Supporter = LAS
    Cheers
    Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
    1st Saint Nicolaas Army
    Army Group “True North”

  23. The justice system has an obligation to protect the rights of everyone-accused, convicted, victim etc. Failure to do so results in a disaster like that seen in America.
    Minimums exist to ensue that convicts are assessed at least some penalty for the crime they have committed against a victim.
    And they fail to do that because they are completely arbitrary and brainless. That’s why the mandatmin for gun crimes was thrown out-every case is unique.

  24. Ezra makes an excellent point about the media ignoring the Ben Levine story.
    And when will we find out the names of all the creeps arrested in the sweep?
    A few weeks ago NME666 made the classic remark about priests being child abusers…my response clarified that ALL professions have the creeps in their ranks.
    Operation Spade proved my point.

  25. Yes, and every child abused is also UNIQUE; one which the perps have very little regard or concern for, they are merely tools for their selfish satisfaction.
    The minimum sentence in this regard, merely underlines the Criminal Code’s regard for the abuse victim’s dignity and self-worth; regardless of the perpetrators lack of conscience.
    Cheers
    Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
    1st Saint Nicolaas Army
    Army Group “True North”

  26. I like the idea where every crime is rated in a scale from 1 to 1000. 1 is jaywalking and 1000 is serial killing (to be a bit facetious), with brackets for various crimes. Break & Enter, – say, 100 to 150, bank robbery 750 – 900, for example. There would then be minima and maxima for each crime. Second or multiple offences in the same category would carry an automatic extra 50 points (for example). This would stop nonsense like cheating on income tax carrying a heavier penalty than bank robbery.
    In the case where the yahoo was charged with gun crimes for posing for a Facebook photo, the problem wasn’t the law, it was the police/prosecutors overcharging for the “offence” where an actual crime was not committed.
    That should stir the pot…

  27. This all started with a Liberal Justice Minister under Trudeau the elder.
    I remember him boasting that Reform was the idea of justice towards criminals. Not the protection of society or prevention of crime.He crowed the public has to live with it because they where the cause of crime.
    This is why today victims don’t matter , criminals have a third of their sentences revoked no matter how many felonies. We have race based sentencing. Perverts are routinely given a slap on the wrist no matter how their activities have destroyed children’s lives.
    Look how that all turned out in real life . As well as its effect on what used to be the Police, not political militias now.
    More socialist mythology becoming a nightmare for the citizen, in the name of a proven Ideology of mass murder called communism.
    In Russia they used the real Murders, rapists et all, for guards of the political ones.
    The left so loves its criminal class. Always has. Perhaps because they think alike.

  28. I like how your post is basically an admission that all you have on your side is emotion.
    There is this myth that ‘hug a thug’ sentencing is prevalent and aggravating crime in Canada. I’ll be damned if anyone’s ever presented evidence of it though.

  29. LAS said: “And they(minimum sentences) fail to do that(ensure that convicts are assessed at least some penalty for the crime they have committed against a victim) because they are completely arbitrary and brainless.”
    Present some evidence, LAS.
    Present some evidence that minimums fail to ensure at least some penalty.

  30. Well LAS maybe that’s because in light of the fact that we are having this discussion, promptly on the heels of a child porn ring being busted netting some 348 alleged perpetrators; maybe a little outrage is warranted!
    http://www.therecord.com/news-story/4218620-worldwide-child-porn-ring-busted-348-arrested-in-project-spade/
    ‘At least 348 people were arrested around the world as part of Project Spade, including 50 in Ontario and 58 from other parts of Canada.
    School teachers, doctors, nurses, pastors and foster parents are among those facing charges in the wide-ranging operation that can be traced back to a business operating out of Toronto’s west end, police said.
    “Its success has been extraordinary,” Beaven-Desjardins said of the investigation which spanned more than 50 countries.
    “When we work together regardless of the borders that divide us, we can successfully track down those who not only prey on our most vulnerable but also those who profit from it.”‘
    The 348 perps will all have a chance to prove their innocence per trial; but don’t try and pass this all off as small potatoes ‘nobody gets hurt rubbish’.
    I’m sure we will treated to a veritable mountain of evidence given the scope of the arrests…
    Cheers
    Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
    1st Saint Nicolaas Army
    Army Group “True North”

  31. I don’t agree with mandatory minimums either. We have cops who are over eager to charge people for minor infractions and a lot of really stupid laws, and crown prosecutors. Maybe we need a better class of judges who we feel comfortable using their judgement.
    Case in point,recently three of Toronto’s finest appealed the mandatory minimum on illegal gun possession to the supreme court and the judge sided with them that the minimum law was unconstitutional and proceeded to sentence them for longer than the minimum. One of these guy was arrested carrying a hand gun at a community center in Toronto and deserved every minute of the minimum plus some.
    Last year I applied for and got my firearms license renewed. If my new one had not showed up in the mail until after my old one expired I would be looking at three years in jail.
    I am sure everyone here can think of at least one example where someone could be charged, convicted and given the mandatory minimum sentence where it would be an injustice.

  32. LAS
    When I was a very young child in the early 1950’s my mother was one of the minority moms who went to work.
    Consequently my brother and I who were too young for school went to a baby sitters for about ten hours a day.
    I still remember it well. We were made to take off our pants and underwear and had to put our pants back on with the fly to the back. The rest is still to this day a bad memory. Before we were picked up in the evening, we were made to put our clothes back on properly.
    To this day it is still a bad memory, it pains me deeply to think about it.
    The fact is it won’t go away.
    I’ve had 4 great kids and they are all relatively high achievers in their respective careers. They know nothing about this, nor will they ever know.
    You see LAS, I’m ashamed and I always will be, its my and my brother’s little secret.
    He hasn’t done as well as I have in life. He can barely get around it and has been unfairly condemned to never having a proper relationship with a nice gal mostly because he can’t keep it together. In his mid sixties now he has given up on ever beating this thing.
    As for me: I don’t think I will ever totally beat it either but I refuse to let it define me.
    I’ve tried to keep it short and to the point and this is the first time I’ve ever publicly mentioned it as I know I have the luxury of posting anonymously.
    My point in the end LAS is that a mandatory minimum, (or maximum) sentence is still shorter than the one abused little children carry with them throughout life and to the grave. There’s a part of them that can’t move forward, they’re stuck, high-centred. They don’t understand why nobody familiar will save them from this horrible nightmare. They end up trusting no one: the scars are too deep.
    Think about that for a minute LAS, then maybe you’ll see puny mandatory minimums in a clearer light.

  34. Mr. Levant made an important point early in his presentation — namely that a first degree murder conviction in Canada carries a mandatory minimum sentence of life imprisonment, with parole available only after 25 years incarceration. If I am not mistaken, second degree murder carries a similar mandatory minimum sentence, but with a lower parole threshold.
    Is Mr. Trudeau, Jr. proposing that these examples of mandatory minimum sentences should be reviewed and possibly changed, as he said? They were, again if I am not mistaken, brought in by government(s) led by his father in the 1970s, as part of a hard-fought if solemn social bargain that would allow for the abolition of capital punishment. Is he aware of any of that history and its consequences, at all?
    I am curious to know how it is that it is perfectly acceptable for him, apparently unschooled in the subject as he apparently is, to answer a substantially unrelated question in the way he did, but it is not acceptable for other citizens with a similar level of knowledge to come to a different conclusion on the same subject?
    I disagree with Mr. Levant that there is no pandering going on here. On the contrary, while there may well not be a “child abuse lobby” in Canada, there is certainly an insidious suggestion in Mr. Trudeau, Jr.’s answer (shall we call it a “hidden agenda”?) that only certain types of people can make these types of decisions. And it ain’t us.

  35. I applaud you for your courage to tell your story. I, too, am a survivor of abuse (by my stepfather) from age 10 to 15, when I ran away from home. He was a pillar of the community (as are many abusers) and no one believed he was capable of such things. This was in the late 60’s, when it wasn’t mentioned, and I was on my own, trying to live with my secrets, guilt, shame, distrust and pain.
    At age 42, no longer able to run from the past, I finally spoke out, sought help and was placed on a 2-year waiting list for specialized therapy for survivors. Four years in that program saved my life, and I now work with others who share the same history.
    My point – are you listening, LAS??? – is that no one was there to defend me from a 30-year-plus sentence. No counselling was made available to me, no free education (as prisoners are ‘entitled’ to), in fact, in hindsight, 30 years in jail might well have been easier for me than the 30 years I spent in my own personal H*ll.
    My suggestion for LAS (and others who is to spend some time with survivors, listen to their stories, understand their anger and pain. Unless you’ve walked in our shoes, it’s difficult to understand that “NO” prison sentence is long enough for the perpetrators of these crimes against children.
    My only consolation is knowing that my stepfather had to answer for himself and his actions when he died.

  37. I wish Anonymous and Another Survivor well, and applaud you for the courage to speak about this and for dealing with it as best as you can. Don’t expect any empathy from a certain individual.

  38. Breitbart-associate James O’Keefe (project veritas) drops the videography hammer.
    “Project Veritas caught on tape agreeing to help obtain a private list of potential Obamacare enrollee data for election/political purposes. Tarango goes so far to say he’ll ‘Do whatever it f****** takes.’”
    http://www.projectveritas.com/enroll-america-director-conspires-to-release-private-health-care-data/
    The Obamacare website is telling site visitors how to circumvent the law, and using their data for political purposes that will benefit democrats. Obama will probably claim ignorance. Is broad scale ignorance exculpatory, or incriminating?

  39. Ken, thanks for your comment and well wishes. I wasn’t really expecting empathy from LAS, though. If I have made him close his mouth and open his mind, even if for only a little while, then my mission here is done.

  40. The entire legal system in Canada needs a re-haul. No activist judges (the government can carry some ethical weight and make proper laws that benefit everyone), no time served while waiting for the trial (do we presume guilt before the verdict, perchance?), and there should certainly be mandatory sentences for violent crimes as those who commit them must be kept off the streets.
    What else can be said has already been said more eloquently than I could ever muster.

  41. While some opinion may be expressed that suggests incarceration has failed to curb repeat crime by the same individuals, and that the system we have now is flawed, the fact is its the best one we got. Just what do the progressives intend to replace it with that will protect the law abiding.
    That of course is the point that the left fails to grasp in its campaign to impose mediocrity. Laws, specifically criminal law has developed over centuries to apprehend the outlaw, and protect the innocent, the intent of laws has never been to achieve moral equivalence. Liberal ideology depends on the assumption that the criminal was forced into a life of crime rather than having actually a desire to rob, cheat, murder, and generally terrorize the law abiding.
    The truth is that mankind is flawed, and evil does exist, and is perpetrated by people intent on evil.
    Our laws, our legal fictions, unlike natural law, is our feeble attempt at trying to maintain order. The understanding is that if you violate those laws, you surrender your freedom to enjoy and participate in civil society due to the criminal demonstrating their inability or unwillingness to obey same.
    If as is contended that manditory minimums don’t work, exactly what alternative is being suggested that will prevent the criminal element from doing harm to those that obey the law?

  42. “A 19 year old and a 14 year old, in love, could and would be married over the past millennia.”
    Hard/infrequent cases make bad law.

  43. Thank you, Anonymous and Another Survivor, for sharing such painful experiences. People need to hear about them from people who have suffered sexual abuse as children. As a mother, it breaks my heart to think of any child being ruthlessly and brutally sexually abused. It is the worst kind of exploitation. It is evil.
    And it sickens me that adults are shielded by the leniency of many of our laws: adults shielded while children suffer. Case in point, Trudeau and Wynne associate and OISE professor, Benjamin Levin. There appears to be a media blackout of him, ‘last heard of on July 10. His court date was set then at August 8 and there’s nothing in the media about what took place that day. Levin seems to have disappeared off the face of the earth. I wonder if his “disappearance” has anything to do with his lawyer Clayton Ruby’s comment after Levin’s arrest on seven counts of child exploitation: “I intend to work very hard to see that he shall be innocent” (my emphasis) because, of all things, “his status in the community.” It’s clear from the list of sexual predators rounded up last week that persons with “status in the community” are all too involved in these heinous crimes against innocent children.
    What does Ruby mean “that he shall be innocent”? What if he’s guilty? What then?

  44. Yes.minimum emtences are essential.
    Right now in Alberta,if I drive after having a couple of beers, I will receive a minimum sentence. This will be administered on the spot. No trial,no recourse,shut TFU, it is all to save lives. Won’t someone think of the children?
    Will Justin stand up for my rights? Hell no.
    The left run from one popular notion to another, stopping for a moment to think just slows them down and will keep them from grasping the brass ring that says “Yes,I am the best” before the more demented schizoid bests them.
    Basically,they mess their pants because their minds are messed up.
    From one of my favourite Lou Reed songs ” So the first thing they see,that allows them the right to be,why they follow it,
    you know,
    Its called bad luck.”

  45. bluetech….you really blue that one, yes priests aren’t the only profession with pedos in it, it is one that has a statistically hi number of them. Also it is that the “church” tends to cover it up until caught(and that is the MO of most churches) Now the real problem is that priests (and ministers) are held to a higher trust level than most “professional”, and doctors would probably be next in line on that list, so there is a greater breach of trust in such cases. And I shouldn’t have to point that out to you!!!!
    and now I think I’ll stick my foot in my mouth, but I tend to agree with L-ass and minute man, as there are too many shades of grey and too much emotionalism involved in this topic. I say this because of my personal experience in this area. I have no need to out what it is, but it is on both sides of the “coin”. What we need is “judges” and not social engineers on the bench.

  47. Actually, I can see things in a clear light. Your horrific experiences cloud your judgement and make you totally unfit to judge mandatory minimums. Any opinion based on anecdote, even a personal one, is invalid.
    it’s difficult to understand that “NO” prison sentence is long enough for the perpetrators of these crimes against children.
    So you admit the mandatory minimums are pointless? Good lets move on.
    Can I get some sob stories from the dozens of people falsely imprisoned for child molestation they never committed in the ’80s? Will mine have the same weighting as the ones above?
    @Hans: charged =/= convicted
    Right now in Alberta,if I drive after having a couple of beers, I will receive a minimum sentence. This will be administered on the spot. No trial,no recourse,shut TFU, it is all to save lives.
    Which is, of course, insane and just demonstrates the madness of mandatory minimums. Thank God for activist judges-they are the main reason we don’t live in a Kafka-tyranny.

  48. Thanks, Anonymous, for sharing, but don’t get your hopes up about convincing LAS of anything.
    LAS is kind of like SDA’s strange uncle, who everyone smirks about but no one really pays any attention to.
    Spend any amount of time here, and you’ll see that LAS is merely a sh!t disturber. He’ll take diametrically opposed viewpoints on different stories, the only common thread being that whatever view he currently espouses will be designed to stir the pot by being contrary and confrontational to whatever he senses is the SDA crowd’s consensus.
    That being said, I wonder if LAS actually agrees with most of SDA’s crowd, but just enjoys the attention he garners by seeming contrary. Otherwise I can’t get my head around why he would spend so much time here. It would be like me cruising the Huffington Post site – God, what an awful way to spend my time that would be!

  49. Every sentence should be open.
    The problem we have in Canada,is that the focus has been on the background of the criminal(upon conviction), instead of the crime.
    We strive for a blind system of justice and sentencing,yet many(Justin and all),insist that it is necessary to lift the blindfold and take a very close look at the criminal.
    That is wrong.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation