Where did you get the idea we have a true real functioning democracy?
What decisions have you made about the future of Canada beyond voting for your MP?
What decisions have you made about the future of Canada beyond voting for your MP?
Canada more democratic than the U.S.?
- Thread starter Sublime
- Start date
So if someones money comes from ALLEGEDLY selling crack to crack heads, they don't get to use any what may ( , legally they aren't guilty) have been hard earned cash to prove they aren't guilty.
But if someones money comes from allegedly destroying peoples pensions they worked for 40 years to build and cannot rebuild, he SHOULD get to use that money to prove they aren't guilty?
A crime is a crime, either seize assets or don't, for everyone.
No more and no less than you have. Take one away from 'them' and you lose one yourself.
Trudeau or anyone else for that matter, had nothing to do with giving anyone more rights than you.
Those rights are you rights and you never know when you will need them.
What if you clippped a pedestrian and didn't know it until you got a knock on your door? Would you still want to have ALL your rights?
JLM, I don’t know who came up with the index, but that may be one of the reasons why USA ranks below Canada as a democratic country. Most democracies just don’t have the death penalty. The only exception I can think of is Japan (and I don’t know how often they carry it out).
Death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment, ands ranks along with torture. I can see how any country that practices death penalty is not considered fully democratic.
I don’t think it is irrelevant at all. Democracy does not only mean that the will of the majority is always done, that is mob rule.
Suppose majority of people in a country support slavery, and they legalize slavery. Would you call that country democratic? I wouldn’t, even though slavery was legalized because a majority of people were for it.
Democracy means that the will of the majority is done, subject to strong protection of minority rights in the constitution. Without the protection of minority rights it is not a democracy.
Indeed, the recent outcry over the draconian legislation passed in Afghanistan (severely curtailing women’s rights) is striking. While condemning Hamid Karzai for signing the legislation into the law (where women are striped off their property rights, a man now has the right to rape his wife, a woman is not allowed to leave house without express permission of man etc.), nobody bothered to ask if the legislation is supported by majority of Afghanis.
And rightly so. Whether majority of Afghanis support it or not does not matter. In a democracy, such a legislation is not passed; there must be strong protection for minority rights in the constitution.
In my opinion, death penalty comes in the same category; it is the violation of most basic of human rights, right to life. So I can understand how a country where death penalty is legal would be considered less of a democracy, because of it.
What has democracy to do with how we deal with criminals?
Democracy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Democracy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I agree whole heartedly. Any guy or gal who pillages pension funds should have all their assets seized as well.
If the people want the death penalty and it is approved as it is then that is a form of democracy.
That is your opinion as far as cruel and unusual. The SJC says it is not therefore we have the death penalty.
It is what the majority wants... what can be more democratic?
Good luck with him on that. His opinion is absolute... you should know that by now.
Yes it is. Justice and equality are separate matters. Democracy is simply a system for governance by elected representatives, elected by a jurisdictions eligible voters. The makeup of democracies around the world is as varied as earth's inhabitants. How criminals are treated, has nothing to do with whether or not a government is elected by a citizens or not.
That's what constitutional law is for. Democracy can be just that. Californians voted to keep marriage a privilege for only those with complimentary sex organs. It was done democratically. It's not at all equitable, but it certainly was democratic.
Right, but not all democracies have the same level of protection for minority rights. Conflating justice issues with democracy is a fallacy.
There is nothing intrinsic to democracy that says the weak must be protected. That's solely the domain of Constitutional law.
If the people want the death penalty and it is approved as it is then that is a form of democracy.
I don’t think so, EagleSmack. There is such a thing as cruel and unusual punishment, protection of fundamental rights. Death penalty comes in this category, in my opinion. Any society that does not protect fundamentals rights to the fullest extent is not a complete democracy; it is still work in progress.
That is your opinion as far as cruel and unusual.
Indeed, it is my opinion. And that of Amnesty International. Amnesty International has long expressed concern about the presence of death penalty in USA. Also, it is the opinion of many thinkers, lawyers, politicians etc. I am hardly alone in holding that opinion.
It is what the majority wants... what can be more democratic?
Again I come to my question. If a majority wants to legalize slavery or to take vote away from women and they do it, would you call it democratic? I wouldn’t’. Just because something is passed by the majority does not make it democratic.
I don’t think so, EagleSmack. There is such a thing as cruel and unusual punishment, protection of fundamental rights. Death penalty comes in this category, in my opinion. Any society that does not protect fundamentals rights to the fullest extent is not a complete democracy; it is still work in progress.
That is your opinion as far as cruel and unusual.
Indeed, it is my opinion. And that of Amnesty International. Amnesty International has long expressed concern about the presence of death penalty in USA. Also, it is the opinion of many thinkers, lawyers, politicians etc. I am hardly alone in holding that opinion.
It is what the majority wants... what can be more democratic?
Again I come to my question. If a majority wants to legalize slavery or to take vote away from women and they do it, would you call it democratic? I wouldn’t’. Just because something is passed by the majority does not make it democratic.
It is what the majority wants... what can be more democratic?
95% of Canadians didn't want water to be part of FTA or NAFTA but water is in there. Is that democracy or dictatorial?
95% of Canadians didn't want water to be part of FTA or NAFTA but water is in there. Is that democracy or dictatorial?
Quoting lone wolf
What has democracy to do with how we deal with criminals?
Democracy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good luck with him on that. His opinion is absolute... you should know that by now.
What are you talking about, EagleSmack? That link actually supports what I am saying. This is what it says:
The first principle is that all members of the society (citizens) have equal access to power and the second that all members (citizens) enjoy universally recognized freedoms and liberties.[4][5][6]
That is what I am saying. An important principle of a democracy is that ALL members (including criminals) enjoy universally recognized freedoms and liberties (such as the right to life).
The "majority rule" is often described as a characteristic feature of democracy, but without responsible government it is possible for the rights of a minority to be abused by the "tyranny of the majority"
Indeed. Again, just what I have been saying.
Justice and equality are separate matters.
Really, EagleSmack? That is news to me. I thought equal justice for all was the hallmark of democracy. Justice and equality are integrally linked together.
Democracy is simply a system for governance by elected representatives, elected by a jurisdictions eligible voters.
That is where we differ. To your definition, I would add ‘with strong protections for minority rights built in into the constitution.’
The makeup of democracies around the world is as varied as earth's inhabitants.
Sure it is, but the common thread is the guarantee of minority rights.
How criminals are treated, has nothing to do with whether or not a government is elected by a citizens or not.
It has everything to do with it. You only have to see how criminals are treated in democracies and how they are treated in dictatorships to realize that.
There is nothing intrinsic to democracy that says the weak must be protected. That's solely the domain of Constitutional law.
Again, that is where we differ. I don’t think a country can call itself a democracy without a constitution, without constitutional law. Democracy without constitutional law is mob rule. Constitutional law is an integral part of democracy.
Really, EagleSmack? That is news to me. I thought equal justice for all was the hallmark of democracy. Justice and equality are integrally linked together.
Democracy is simply a system for governance by elected representatives, elected by a jurisdictions eligible voters.
That is where we differ. To your definition, I would add ‘with strong protections for minority rights built in into the constitution.’
The makeup of democracies around the world is as varied as earth's inhabitants.
Sure it is, but the common thread is the guarantee of minority rights.
How criminals are treated, has nothing to do with whether or not a government is elected by a citizens or not.
It has everything to do with it. You only have to see how criminals are treated in democracies and how they are treated in dictatorships to realize that.
There is nothing intrinsic to democracy that says the weak must be protected. That's solely the domain of Constitutional law.
Again, that is where we differ. I don’t think a country can call itself a democracy without a constitution, without constitutional law. Democracy without constitutional law is mob rule. Constitutional law is an integral part of democracy.
There is also such thing as Crime and Punishment and in certain states death is the penalty for certain crimes.
As you say it is your opinion. Many Americans think different and we are a type of democracy.
We do not answer to Amnesty Intl. It is also the opinion of many thinkers, lawyers, politicians etc that the death penalty is a proper form of punishment.
Well those are Unconstitutional. The Death Penalty isn't.
We do not answer to Amnesty Intl.
EagelSmack, that is what they all say. Whenever Amnesty International calls out a country such as North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Myanmar (or USA) for a human rights violation, they all say that they don’t care what Amnesty International thinks.
However, Amnesty has a very high reputation worldwide. What it says is taken seriously by many people.
It is also the opinion of many thinkers, lawyers, politicians etc that the death penalty is a proper form of punishment.
It most certainly is, mostly in USA.
EagelSmack, that is what they all say. Whenever Amnesty International calls out a country such as North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Myanmar (or USA) for a human rights violation, they all say that they don’t care what Amnesty International thinks.
However, Amnesty has a very high reputation worldwide. What it says is taken seriously by many people.
It is also the opinion of many thinkers, lawyers, politicians etc that the death penalty is a proper form of punishment.
It most certainly is, mostly in USA.