Canada won't oppose death penalty..

[Sal]

You are assuming guilt and you are assuming that the death penalty was the penalty for murder. In the case of Singapore someone could be facing the death penalty because someone placed drugs in their luggage without their knowledge. I agree that people need to take responsibility for their actions and there is a limited amount that the Canadian government can do. This does not mean though that we should never try to persuade the country to extradite instead of terminate the individual.

I was just about to write that very argument.

 

[Kreskin]

Why assume that we need to investigate? Those countries have constitutions and court systems and defense lawyers. A local defense lawyer is in a better position to defend the accused.

 

[Sal]

Why assume that we need to investigate? Those countries have constitutions and court systems and defense lawyers. A local defense lawyer is in a better position to defend the accused.

Not investigate, but at least review. I am against the death penalty BUT after we review I would not be absolutely against leaving them there to face their fate.

 

[Kreskin]

Ah, not necessarily Kreskin. I point to the OJ mishap. Money speaks and race is an issue, always.

So our legal system is better than the US? Theirs got him off, not convicted and executed.

 

[s243a]

Why assume that we need to investigate? Those countries have constitutions and court systems and defense lawyers. A local defense lawyer is in a better position to defend the accused.

I’m not assuming every case needs to be investigated. Give the department a budget and if the budget is not sufficiently high enough to deal with cases in countries which have fairer judicial systems then those cases will be set aside.

 

[karrie]

Why assume that we need to investigate? Those countries have constitutions and court systems and defense lawyers. A local defense lawyer is in a better position to defend the accused.

I personally never said investigate (don't know if anyone else did), but rather simply review the situation. Is the country one we consider truly democratic, not just claiming democracy? Is the legal system one we find to be relatively in keeping with the voice of its people? Does the crime fit the punishment? Was there representation and a fair trial? I'm not willing to just assume these things based on a definition of their electoral process.

 

[Kreskin]

We can all review the newspapers. I will also assume that any trial in the US is a fair trial unless their legal system determines it otherwise. They are capable, and are certainly in a far better position to determine if a fair trial has occured than someone doing an univestigated review.

 

[karrie]

I'd have very little concern and expect that an absolute minimum of effort would need to be expended to review a trial being conducted in the US. We're all very familiar with their electoral process, their legal system, and we get the news from their country. Now, have a trial occur in some tiny little middle eastern or south american country, and I'd want review, even IF they're titled 'democratic'.

 

[Kreskin]

I'd have very little concern and expect that an absolute minimum of effort would need to be expended to review a trial being conducted in the US. We're all very familiar with their electoral process, their legal system, and we get the news from their country. Now, have a trial occur in some tiny little middle eastern or south american country, and I'd want review, even IF they're titled 'democratic'.

Then you need to investigate, which is what you said you wouldn't do. With that kind of attitude Karrie I might have to give you a timout, or at least an infraction with a stern warning.

 

[karrie]

Then you need to investigate, which is what you said you wouldn't do. With that kind of attitude Karrie I might have to give you a timout, or at least an infraction with a stern warning.

you want to take this up in the cage Kreskin? Huh? huh? Because I'm grumpy enough I think I could take you.

I never said anything about investigating the crime.

Reviewing the state of the country and its legal system and how the charges compare to the sentence is what I would encourage. Or having that information compiled ahead of time on each country so that we know which we will simply allow to carry out a sentence on our citizens, and which we won't. But a flimsy description of 'democratic' just doesn't seem like enough of a reason to guarantee abandonment of a citizen.

 

[Kreskin]

Now you're baiting me to go to the Steel Cage? This is real troublemaking Karrie. Any more of this and we'll have to review this entire incident. I can see at least 2 infractions here.

 

[karrie]

keep it up and I'll just lock the whole thing down and ban us both Kreskin... let Andem sort out the mess. :angryfire: grrrrr..... just try me....

 

[s243a]

Then you need to investigate, which is what you said you wouldn't do. With that kind of attitude Karrie I might have to give you a timout, or at least an infraction with a stern warning.

You’re of course joking right????????????????????????

 

[karrie]

no, he's not... report him... he's gone power mad. he's running amok!!! lol


mad mod, mad mod!!!

 

[Kreskin]

keep it up and I'll just lock the whole thing down and ban us both Kreskin... let Andem sort out the mess. :angryfire: grrrrr..... just try me....

Andem has had his admin privileges revoked, so don't even think about getting him involved.

 

[karrie]

evil AND insane.... damnit, that's the most horrific combo. Well, unless you find a way to lock me off my computer I'm going to

 

[Kreskin]

I'm saving that pm Karrie and will call the RCMP asap.

 

[s243a]

Okay, I’m confused. I can’t tell a joke from seriousness. If I thought Kreskin wasn't joking I'd have no trouble reporting him or negative repping him. If that gets me kicked out so be it, I hardly see myself as a trouble maker.

 

[Kreskin]

Okay, I’m confused. I can’t tell a joke from seriousness. If I thought Kreskin wasn't joking I'd have no trouble reporting him or negative repping him. If that gets me kicked out so be it, I hardly see myself as a trouble maker.

You can give me one, but it's Karrie who needs at least a few.

 

[gerryh]

It's already been pointed out by the opposition as to why this about face by the cons is bad news....here's a quote from the article supplied in the OP:

On Thursday, the Liberals pointed out several inherent contradictions and potential problems with the new Tory policy:
-Canada was among 72 countries that urged the United Nations to call for an international moratorium on the death penalty Thursday - the same day the Commons heard Smith would be left to die.
-Canadian law prohibits the extradition of an American citizen back to the U.S. when facing the death penalty. But even as it protects Americans from the death penalty, the government will remain silent while Canadians are executed south of the border.

As for Karrie's suggestion of a "review" of the country involved, here's also from the article in the OP:

Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe said the death penalty is not only abhorrent, but cast the government position as a diplomatic disaster-in-waiting.
"At one point they're going to need to ask another country where there's the death penalty - to tell them they're not a democratic country," Duceppe said.
"I can't wait to see what that does to international relations. Imagine, telling another country, 'From you, we want (our prisoner back), because you're not a democratic country.' "

Can you all not see the can of worms the cons have now opened? Not to mention the fact that the cons changed this policy without a vote in the House.