Originally Posted by zombiejesus

To everyone recommending jail time...
The United States has 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prison inmates. If you honestly believe that prison is an effective deterrent or a method of rehabilitation, then one of the most developed countries in the world with one of the harshest justice systems should be the safest, right? Honestly, do some reading before you spout off draconian "do the crime pay the time" crap, because most of the time that kind of talk makes people sound like ignorant rednecks.

Of course, you're using the United States as an example, a place that has harsher sentences for drug dealers than for rapists, so I don't think its quite a good example. Wanting harsher sentences for people who wilfully endanger other people's lives is not logically equivalent to wanting the justice system of the United States. Or maybe I'm just a redneck! Its easier to attack the person than the argument, amirite?

And there is a huge difference between lighting up a joint and lighting a building on fire... So I'm not quite sure what point you were trying to make with bringing up a stupid drug law. I don't think anyone here would argue that tougher drug laws are needed, but many would argue that tougher laws should be given to several other areas of the justice system.

Originally Posted by zombiejesus

Anyways, crime is not a new things and neither is severe punishment. If prisons worked then we'd have a crimeless society. Never before in human history have we had the resources, the knowledge, and the ability to rehabilitate criminals in opposed to throwing them in a concrete time-out for a few years. Probably because the closest we've come is a pastor telling people that they're born convicts and can't help what they do until they psycicly communicate their guilt to some dude who was born 2000 years agoand walks on water, instead of instilling the golden rule printed in the same book. In fact, I've never heard the golden rule until I was in grade 9! I think that honestly a bottom up approach to crime, likely based around the golden rule (treat others the way you'd like to be treated) is the only way to better society. The current model of crime "A" + observation of crime "A" by a LEO = punishment "B" makes morality a benefit/cost problem instead of a guide for life and the treatment of others.

Well, a few societies are pretty close. Singapore has a problem with too tough sentences for a lot of stupid crimes (chewing gum in public), but its a great example of what a willingness to give harsh punishments for crimes can do.

There is also a huge difference between morality/immorality and legal/illegal. The justice system should not exist to enforce morality, it should exist to keep people safe. Its the belief that laws should enforce morality that gives us bills like Bill C-15.

Originally Posted by A.Marlowe

Of course, you're using the United States as an example, a place that has harsher sentences for drug dealers than for rapists, so I don't think its quite a good example. Wanting harsher sentences for people who wilfully endanger other people's lives is not logically equivalent to wanting the justice system of the United States. Or maybe I'm just a redneck! Its easier to attack the person than the argument, amirite?

And there is a huge difference between lighting up a joint and lighting a building on fire... So I'm not quite sure what point you were trying to make with bringing up a stupid drug law. I don't think anyone here would argue that tougher drug laws are needed, but many would argue that tougher laws should be given to several other areas of the justice system.

Quite true, but I was just citing an example of extreme justice for a harmless crime because the crime/punishment relationship is still very scalable all the way up to murder with the dealth penalty or California's 3 strike policy leading to life in prison. Also I'm not gonna pull an Obama and explain the difference between acting LIKE a redneck and BEING a redneck :p

Originally Posted by A.Marlowe

Well, a few societies are pretty close. Singapore has a problem with too tough sentences for a lot of stupid crimes (chewing gum in public), but its a great example of what a willingness to give harsh punishments for crimes can do.

Its also a city state of only a few million people, so the social dynamics are quite different. I'm not too familiar with their justice system but I think the low-crime effect is the exception rather than the rule in the case of harsh punishments, but who knows I'm no criminology major.

I love this thread. People get so riled up that they'll launch personal attacks because they don't have any real points to make.

There have been way too many things on here to quote them all, so I'm just going to make a few points:

1. Bill C-15 is stupid if it means getting jail time for smoking a joint. That doesn't mean you shouldn't get jail time for endangering human lives.

2. If you want to prove a point regarding the complete lack of taser deaths, perhaps CNN isn't the most unbiased source...

3. Police officers' lives are very often at risk, and I don't object to them carrying tasers. That being said, the taser has become a substitute for physical restraint. The inquiry into the Vancouver Airport incident has determined that the RCMP officers had decided to use their "less than lethal" weapons before they had even arrived and assessed the situation. Tasers should be treated as a last resort, not as a preemptive strike.

I sure hope no one calls me a redneck for thinking some of these things... That would hurt my feelings so bad that I wouldn't be able to go on with life...

Originally Posted by sniderj

I sure hope no one calls me a redneck for thinking some of these things... That would hurt my feelings so bad that I wouldn't be able to go on with life...

Hahaha tell me about it.... :p

You can call me old-fashioned (or a redneck lol) all you want, but the reason prison costs so much is because of how they live. Have you seen what a prison looks like in Canada? They have quite the comfortable living in there, not to mention free post-secondary education. In prison, people should be living off of bread and milk (or water even) and having a walk for an hour every day, but that's just me.

Prison isn't the "hard" time people here seem to think it is. Emerson can rehabilitate all he wants during his (hopefully) 14 year prison stay and free postsecondary education.

In the end this all doesn't matter much anyways. We'll see what the result is in January. I just have the sneaking suspicion that he won't get much of a sentence since Canada's legal system has become a big joke.

Since there's no point in speculating as to the whims of the legal system, I will simply leave you with this:

I work at the court house, so in January I will keep on top of the listings to see exactly when and where his sentencing hearing will be held. I will post the information on here, so anyone interested can attend.

Some of us need to get back on topic. The discussion has drifted off to talks about cops and their practices and other irrelevant matters.