Crime, not necessarly going down, but is it going up?

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

There's an old saying "there is an exception to every rule"- I'd have a hard time buying it for child molestation, but for the other crimes you just never know.

Sorry, unless there is extenuating circumstances I think our laws are far too weak on felony crime.

 

[JLM]

Sorry, unless there is extenuating circumstances I think our laws are far too weak on felony crime.

I'm inclined to agree, but I've never liked sweeping with a broad brush as too often things are just not quite as they seem. I'm in favour of "warehousing" dangerous people. First I think ways should be found for people to compensate for their crimes (obviously that can't be done with a murderer or with a person who has hopelessly traumatised a person for life) but locking a person up for 10 years who has been guilty of fraud to satisfy a gambling addiction, doesn't solve much, it doesn't recover the money and it doesn't rehabillitate the offender.

 

[Bar Sinister]

A lot of statistics are just an accumulation of anecdotes. Pollster phones me I give him/her an answer eg. "is crime increasing or decreasing in your neighbourhood?" - If I haven't been robbed in the last two years I might say down, if I have I'm liable to say up. The pollster doesn't hear the anecdote - just the conclusion. That's why statistics are so suspect.

No they are not. Official crime statistics in Canada deal with only reported crimes; not some nebulous guesswork. Statistics involving reported crime are only suspect if you choose to ignore them.

 

[JLM]

No they are not. Official crime statistics in Canada deal with only reported crimes; not some nebulous guesswork. Statistics involving reported crime are only suspect if you choose to ignore them.

Therein lies the problem, they say crime is going down but there are no statistics of the unreported crime, but there are anecdotes about it. Do you really think a person with a pot grow op in his house is going to report minor vandalism to his property?

 

[Tonington]

So far as I know, habeus corpus still exists in this country. You can't fill up new billion dollar prisons with unreported criminals.

 

[JLM]

So far as I know, habeus corpus still exists in this country. You can't fill up new billion dollar prisons with unreported criminals.

Where are these "billion dollar prisons"?

 

[Tonington]

Where are these "billion dollar prisons"?

They aren't built yet. The Conservatives are using the unreported crime to bolster support for an expansion of the correctional system. The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates the cost to be in the neighbourhood of $5 Billion.

 

[JLM]

They aren't built yet. The Conservatives are using the unreported crime to bolster support for an expansion of the correctional system. The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates the cost to be in the neighbourhood of $5 Billion.

While I am against prison for certain types of crime like property crimes or for things like embezzling to support a gambling habit, I'm am in favour of locking up criminal gang members involved in the likes of drug importing and trafficking and for those purposes Stephen Harper has my full support.

 

[Tonington]

While I am against prison for certain types of crime like property crimes or for things like embezzling to support a gambling habit, I'm am in favour of locking up criminal gang members involved in the likes of drug importing and trafficking and for those purposes Stephen Harper has my full support.

You're ignoring the issue. What do we get for $5 Billion? We already prosecute gang members, building prisons doesn't mean more will be convicted, or that unreported crime will suddenly be reported. That's assinine.

 

[JLM]

You're ignoring the issue. What do we get for $5 Billion? We already prosecute gang members, building prisons doesn't mean more will be convicted, or that unreported crime will suddenly be reported. That's assinine.

I don't think so - our prisons are over crowded while the gang activity is still rampant. What do we get for $5 billion? 21/2 million mandays of work at $200 a day and a place to warehouse the bastards. That is good enough for me. We do suffer from unemployment, don't we???????????

 

[Tonington]

I don't think so - our prisons are over crowded while the gang activity is still rampant.

You have to convict before they can go to prison...new prisons don't mean more convictions.

We're now being warned by Americans involved in law enforcement, to not follow in the US footsteps and repeat the same mistakes made by their tough on crime approaches. I'd rather the government does something that will actually work, as opposed to throwing money at a problem to make it look like we're doing something constructive.

The mistakes his government made were two-fold, he said.
First, it did not put enough emphasis on preparing convicts for release, which led to a high degree of recidivism. Critics say Canadian proposals to reduce parole eligibility, which will cut the amount of time convicts spend under supervision in the community, will have the same effect.
Second, said Mr. Hutchinson, the mandatory minimum sentences introduced in the United States were often unfair and put people behind bars who did not need to be there. In some cases, he said, people who were only peripherally involved in a crime were sent to jail for 10 years because of mandatory minimum sentencing.

Canada warned not to follow U.S. tough-on-crime ‘mistakes’ - The Globe and Mail

But that's me. I guess others are more interested in appearances.

 

[JLM]

You have to convict before they can go to prison...new prisons don't mean more convictions.

We're now being warned by Americans involved in law enforcement, to not follow in the US footsteps and repeat the same mistakes made by their tough on crime approaches. I'd rather the government does something that will actually work, as opposed to throwing money at a problem to make it look like we're doing something constructive.
Canada warned not to follow U.S. tough-on-crime ‘mistakes’ - The Globe and Mail

But that's me. I guess others are more interested in appearances.

While I agree with some of what you say, it will be a loooooooooooooooooooooooong time before murderers, hit men, drug importers and child molesters will be ready for release back into society (won't happen in my lifetime) Also what's the use of the conviction if there's no place to house them. Now I think $5 billion is tad excessive, concrete and rebar aren't THAT expensive. :lol:

 

[Tonington]

While I agree with some of what you say, it will be a loooooooooooooooooooooooong time before murderers, hit men, drug importers and child molesters will be ready for release back into society (won't happen in my lifetime)

So? You have kids and grand kids? You think it's better that those criminals get released with higher recidivism rates to terrorize them instead?

That's perverse.

Also what's the use of the conviction if there's no place to house them.

Did you not understand the problem with mandatory minimums?

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

Really? I suspect that comment is purely anecdotal.

I often leave the house and don't bother to close the garage door. Never been robbed. It would seem my anecdote would indicate crime is going down.

Sure, I've done the same at times, but I usually lock my back door. But we never hear anyone saying publicly that crime is down. I mean, who says this? What newspapers write it?

 

[JLM]

So? You have kids and grand kids? You think it's better that those criminals get released with higher recidivism rates to terrorize them instead?

That's perverse.


Did you not understand the problem with mandatory minimums?

I don't think I mentioned anything about releasing them - In fact I believe it should be a long time before they are even considered for release. I see absolutely no problem with minimum sentences for dangerous offenders. The problem up until now is they have been considering raising the maximum sentence (which is insane) as virtually nobody gets sentenced to the maximum.

 

[Tonington]

I don't think I mentioned anything about releasing them - In fact I believe it should be a long time before they are even considered for release.

You did, when you said they won't be released in your lifetime. If you read the post and link you quoted of mine, you'll note that the path Harper is taking us on has lead to higher rates of recidivism when tried in the US. So again, I'm not sure why you would support that, when it's your kids and grand kids that will have to deal with the problem.

I see absolutely no problem with minimum sentences for dangerous offenders.

Dangerous offenders in Canada don't get minimums. They can be held for life, with no parole. The sentence given to dangerous offenders is called "indeterminate".

Let me google that for you:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=dangerous+offenders+designation+canada

 

[JLM]

You did, when you said they won't be released in your lifetime. If you read the post and link you quoted of mine, you'll note that the path Harper is taking us on has lead to higher rates of recidivism when tried in the US. So again, I'm not sure why you would support that, when it's your kids and grand kids that will have to deal with the problem.

Dangerous offenders in Canada don't get minimums. They can be held for life, with no parole. The sentence given to dangerous offenders is called "indeterminate".

Let me google that for you:
Let me google that for you

Don't you think they'd be too old by then to be a problem? I have no problem with "minimums" as they are aren't restrictive- just make sure it's about 50 years.

 

[JLM]

This is pretty funny, the OP touched on the fact that StatsCan uses categories of crimes, and you come along now and think you can do better by counting bodies...what about crimes that don't leave bodies to count, what are you going to count to reflect those crime statistics?

That's just the whole point- there's nothing to count, but that certainly doesn't prove a crime hasn't been committed. When one guy sells another guy dope, what is there to count?

 

[Tonington]

That's just the whole point- there's nothing to count, but that certainly doesn't prove a crime hasn't been committed. When one guy sells another guy dope, what is there to count?

Well, there's police reports to count. If you want to count just the bodies, have at er. If there's nothing to count, then there's no need to build a jail for this hypothetical crime now is there? :roll: