Genius
Posts: 953 
Location: Calgary, AB
Location: Calgary, AB
June 15th, 2006, 10:18 PM
OTTAWA (CP) - Street racers would face mandatory driving bans and, in cases where they kill someone, could spend life in prison under legislation introduced by the Conservative government.
"Street racing is not about kids having fun," Justice Minister Vic Toews said Thursday after tabling the bill.
"It's reckless, it's dangerous and too often it kills."
The legislation, promised by Prime Minister Stephen Harper as part of a get-tough-on-crime agenda, was dismissed by some opponents as political window dressing.
Joe Comartin, the NDP justice critic, pointed out that street racing is already illegal under Criminal Code provisions dealing with dangerous driving and criminal negligence.
If Toews wanted to fine-tune the penalties he could have done so by simply amending the current laws, said Comartin.
"Trying to create a full separate offence here really is a waste of time. It really is just politically motivated."
Toews contended that adding a specific new offence to the law books sends an important message to the public.
"Street racing on Canada's roads and highways will not be tolerated and offenders will be dealt with."
The minister won enthusiastic backing from police in British Columbia, where the issue has been a hot one for years.
"You can always find a current criminal statute to address certain behaviours," said Chief Const. Jamie Graham of the Vancouver police.
"(But when) Parliament creates a special section saying 'We're elected officials, we feel this is important,' then the courts will take notice."
read rest here:
http://start.shaw.ca/start/enCA/News...c=n061547A.xml
OTTAWA (CP) - Street racers would face mandatory driving bans and, in cases where they kill someone, could spend life in prison under legislation introduced by the Conservative government.
"Street racing is not about kids having fun," Justice Minister Vic Toews said Thursday after tabling the bill.
"It's reckless, it's dangerous and too often it kills."
The legislation, promised by Prime Minister Stephen Harper as part of a get-tough-on-crime agenda, was dismissed by some opponents as political window dressing.
Joe Comartin, the NDP justice critic, pointed out that street racing is already illegal under Criminal Code provisions dealing with dangerous driving and criminal negligence.
If Toews wanted to fine-tune the penalties he could have done so by simply amending the current laws, said Comartin.
"Trying to create a full separate offence here really is a waste of time. It really is just politically motivated."
Toews contended that adding a specific new offence to the law books sends an important message to the public.
"Street racing on Canada's roads and highways will not be tolerated and offenders will be dealt with."
The minister won enthusiastic backing from police in British Columbia, where the issue has been a hot one for years.
"You can always find a current criminal statute to address certain behaviours," said Chief Const. Jamie Graham of the Vancouver police.
"(But when) Parliament creates a special section saying 'We're elected officials, we feel this is important,' then the courts will take notice."
read rest here:
http://start.shaw.ca/start/enCA/News...c=n061547A.xml
Senate Member
Posts: 5,583 
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Location: Saint John, N.B.
June 15th, 2006, 11:55 PM
Actually, I like the Liberal bill better, but I'm a firm believer the less law the better.
The Conservatives, however, are NOT being hypocritical or duplicitous in this instance.......just a different view on solutions.
Quoting
I think the Conservatives voted against this bill because it did NOT create a new offense, just required that the fact of street racing be considered when a judge was passing sentence for certain other offenses.Actually, I like the Liberal bill better, but I'm a firm believer the less law the better.
The Conservatives, however, are NOT being hypocritical or duplicitous in this instance.......just a different view on solutions.
Electoral Member
Posts: 344
June 16th, 2006, 12:00 AM
I just read through the bill, it really didn't go far enough, but not voting for it was obviously just a political statement saying they want more.
Commentary on the bill: (conservative only)
Some Conservative Party MPs believe, rather, that Bill C-65 is a “watered down version” of the legislation proposed by Mr. Cadman.(92) They criticize the fact that there are no special rules for repeat offenders.(93) The bill should at least leave the door open to the possibility of police and Crown attorneys looking into the facts and seeking harsher sentences for repeat offenders. In addition, there should be express provisions making spectators and organizers of street races liable.(94) Amendments are therefore needed, in their view.
-----------
Obviously that is why they want to make a whole new offence - so they could properly punish racers and not have to follow the guidelines of "reckless driving"
I just read through the bill, it really didn't go far enough, but not voting for it was obviously just a political statement saying they want more.
Commentary on the bill: (conservative only)
Some Conservative Party MPs believe, rather, that Bill C-65 is a “watered down version” of the legislation proposed by Mr. Cadman.(92) They criticize the fact that there are no special rules for repeat offenders.(93) The bill should at least leave the door open to the possibility of police and Crown attorneys looking into the facts and seeking harsher sentences for repeat offenders. In addition, there should be express provisions making spectators and organizers of street races liable.(94) Amendments are therefore needed, in their view.
-----------
Obviously that is why they want to make a whole new offence - so they could properly punish racers and not have to follow the guidelines of "reckless driving"
Genius
Posts: 931
June 16th, 2006, 12:05 AM
I think the purpose of having the judge consider street racing when sentencing is to give a tougher penalty, which I think is the same purpose of the conservatives bill. The sentences might be harsher under the conservative bill, but I think they share the same principle.
Quoting
Actually, I like the Liberal bill better, but I'm a firm believer the less law the better.
The Conservatives, however, are NOT being hypocritical or duplicitous in this instance.......just a different view on solutions.
Perhaps, but to the conservatives isn't the liberal bill better than nothing? I mean they couldn't possibly know that they would form the next government and introduce their own bill, so I would think that if they were committed to ending street racing that they would have voted with the liberal bill as it would be better than nothing. Personally I think it's playing politics where the conservatives oppose the liberals bill because it's the liberals bill , then introduce their own to look "tough on crime" (not to say that all parites aren't guilty of playing politics). Quoting
I think the Conservatives voted against this bill because it did NOT create a new offense, just required that the fact of street racing be considered when a judge was passing sentence for certain other offenses.Actually, I like the Liberal bill better, but I'm a firm believer the less law the better.
The Conservatives, however, are NOT being hypocritical or duplicitous in this instance.......just a different view on solutions.
I think the purpose of having the judge consider street racing when sentencing is to give a tougher penalty, which I think is the same purpose of the conservatives bill. The sentences might be harsher under the conservative bill, but I think they share the same principle.
Genius
Posts: 953
Location: Calgary, AB
Location: Calgary, AB
June 16th, 2006, 01:56 AM
Quoting
good post, obviously they wanted more....
I just read through the bill, it really didn't go far enough, but not voting for it was obviously just a political statement saying they want more.
Commentary on the bill: (conservative only)
Some Conservative Party MPs believe, rather, that Bill C-65 is a “watered down version” of the legislation proposed by Mr. Cadman.(92) They criticize the fact that there are no special rules for repeat offenders.(93) The bill should at least leave the door open to the possibility of police and Crown attorneys looking into the facts and seeking harsher sentences for repeat offenders. In addition, there should be express provisions making spectators and organizers of street races liable.(94) Amendments are therefore needed, in their view.
-----------
Obviously that is why they want to make a whole new offence - so they could properly punish racers and not have to follow the guidelines of "reckless driving"
Commentary on the bill: (conservative only)
Some Conservative Party MPs believe, rather, that Bill C-65 is a “watered down version” of the legislation proposed by Mr. Cadman.(92) They criticize the fact that there are no special rules for repeat offenders.(93) The bill should at least leave the door open to the possibility of police and Crown attorneys looking into the facts and seeking harsher sentences for repeat offenders. In addition, there should be express provisions making spectators and organizers of street races liable.(94) Amendments are therefore needed, in their view.
-----------
Obviously that is why they want to make a whole new offence - so they could properly punish racers and not have to follow the guidelines of "reckless driving"
House Member
Posts: 3,167
June 16th, 2006, 09:19 AM
I remain surprised that any new bill would be needed. Why couldn't existing legislation deal with street racing? Obviously, there is a problem and if an illegal act like this is commonplace, who or what is at fault? Street racers will continue their goofy, self-centred behaviour because the deterrence isn't meaningful. Looks like a judge problem to me. Acting, as they do, on precedence, they continue to use the spaghetti whip on offenders.
Loved the picture of the crushed street cars recently. If police were able to seize and quickly destroy such vehicles- without compensation to owners - a helluva lot of the problem would stop quickly. Canada doesn't need more laws. It needs fast, in-your-face enforcement of what we already have. In this case, an already existing Ontario law about the right to seize the proceeds of and materials used to commit crimes.
I remain surprised that any new bill would be needed. Why couldn't existing legislation deal with street racing? Obviously, there is a problem and if an illegal act like this is commonplace, who or what is at fault? Street racers will continue their goofy, self-centred behaviour because the deterrence isn't meaningful. Looks like a judge problem to me. Acting, as they do, on precedence, they continue to use the spaghetti whip on offenders.
Loved the picture of the crushed street cars recently. If police were able to seize and quickly destroy such vehicles- without compensation to owners - a helluva lot of the problem would stop quickly. Canada doesn't need more laws. It needs fast, in-your-face enforcement of what we already have. In this case, an already existing Ontario law about the right to seize the proceeds of and materials used to commit crimes.
Genius
Posts: 931
June 19th, 2006, 01:41 PM
Quoting
This still doesn't answer my question, was the Liberal bill still not better than nothing?
Quoting
good post, obviously they wanted more....
Obviously that is why they want to make a whole new offence - so they could properly punish racers and not have to follow the guidelines of "reckless driving"
House Member
Posts: 3,167
June 20th, 2006, 09:51 PM
Driving suspensions or bans are a joke in Canada. During the recent Canada Road Safety Week blitz across the country a total of 188 suspended drivers were stopped in Toronto alone. Past surveys indicate fully 75% of such drivers routinely ignore court orders. Canada has a reputation for being soft on crime. It's earned.
Driving suspensions or bans are a joke in Canada. During the recent Canada Road Safety Week blitz across the country a total of 188 suspended drivers were stopped in Toronto alone. Past surveys indicate fully 75% of such drivers routinely ignore court orders. Canada has a reputation for being soft on crime. It's earned.
Super Genius
Posts: 1,458
Location: Toronto
Location: Toronto
June 20th, 2006, 11:58 PM
Quoting
Of course street racing could be (and should be) addressed with existing legislation. This is more about optics than substantive policy, where politicians can pretend they are doing something about it and pretend that they can stop it... its totally meaningless.
I remain surprised that any new bill would be needed. Why couldn't existing legislation deal with street racing? Obviously, there is a problem and if an illegal act like this is commonplace, who or what is at fault? Street racers will continue their goofy, self-centred behaviour because the deterrence isn't meaningful. Looks like a judge problem to me. Acting, as they do, on precedence, they continue to use the spaghetti whip on offenders.
Loved the picture of the crushed street cars recently. If police were able to seize and quickly destroy such vehicles- without compensation to owners - a helluva lot of the problem would stop quickly. Canada doesn't need more laws. It needs fast, in-your-face enforcement of what we already have. In this case, an already existing Ontario law about the right to seize the proceeds of and materials used to commit crimes.
Loved the picture of the crushed street cars recently. If police were able to seize and quickly destroy such vehicles- without compensation to owners - a helluva lot of the problem would stop quickly. Canada doesn't need more laws. It needs fast, in-your-face enforcement of what we already have. In this case, an already existing Ontario law about the right to seize the proceeds of and materials used to commit crimes.
