T Nation

I Love American Justice

[quote]ConorM wrote:
Looks like Canada has it wrong again. I mean compare the amount of murders, homicides, violent crime and rape in that shitty little country. That bastard would get only 4 years prison, look how that country turned out, its crime capital of the world.

Our good American justice, 4000 people on death row, over 2 million in prison, over 6 times more reported crimes each year than the next highest country, 10 000 gun related deaths per year vs 50-100 in any other western nation.

God Bless America[/quote]

It’s true that Canada has way less crime than the US in nearly every category. I think that it’s silly to draw a correlation between that and sentance times for manslaughter. There are many other factors at work.

From the looks of the crime statistics, American v. Canadian, you could hardly make the case that when it comes to punishment, more is better. Maybe, when it comes to punishment, enough is enough.

So I’m starting to get more curious about rates of recidivism in both countries.

Efficient use of the death penalty really brings down the rate of recidivism.

Since when is the American use efficient? Costs more money to kill them than prison for life. Innocent people are also inevitable killed. Every year people are released from Death Row who are usually very obviously innocent thanks to the hard work of people on appeals. Some people want to remove the appeals process to kill people quicker! Still can’t believe in the modern age, in modern times, a nation believe’s capital punishment is in any way acceptable.

[quote]doogie wrote:
Efficient use of the death penalty really brings down the rate of recidivism.[/quote]

In the eighteenth century you could get hung for stealing a loaf of bread, but it didn’t help with their crime problem all that much. People figured: get hung, starve, what’s the big deal?

Rehabilitation and post-release placement also reduce recidivism. Not as showy as an execution, I know, but actually a helluva lot cheaper.

We approach the problem these days with mandatory sentencing and three strikes laws: we just lock up the recidivists. Sounds swell and surefire, but it’s still too expensive and the next thing you know the corrections officer’s union is running your state (no wonder poor Ah-nold looks so strung out)

Vroom,

“Pick out some of the real problems, and point them out. Creating a problem, when there is none, because you assume it would turn out a certain way, isn’t very useful.”

I am pretty certain JPBear’s point - that Canada is soft on crime/criminals - is a real problem and should be talked about.

[quote]endgamer711 wrote:
In the eighteenth century you could get hung for stealing a loaf of bread, but it didn’t help with their crime problem all that much. People figured: get hung, starve, what’s the big deal?

Rehabilitation and post-release placement also reduce recidivism. Not as showy as an execution, I know, but actually a helluva lot cheaper.

We approach the problem these days with mandatory sentencing and three strikes laws: we just lock up the recidivists. Sounds swell and surefire, but it’s still too expensive and the next thing you know the corrections officer’s union is running your state (no wonder poor Ah-nold looks so strung out)[/quote]

HORSE SHIT.

Thunder,

As I’m sure you’ll see, there is much division on what really is important with respect to sentencing. Sure, it is useful to discuss it.

However, there are also situations where a longer sentence isn’t useful to society in any way. Let’s take a 19 year old, drinking in a bar, and some large jerk with his buddies around starts molesting his girlfriend and picking on the guy.

A fight happens, our 19 year old victim starts the fight, so it isn’t self defence, punches the larger guy in the nose, who later dies.

Great, lets lock him away for his entire life. He’s 19, got in a drunken fight which was provoked, and killed the guy by accident. It certainly wasn’t premeditated murder.

So, what is a realistic punishment for this, assuming he were convicted of something like involuntary manslaughter?

Let’s say this person is an A student, never has been in trouble before and is a volunteer who has always been active in the community.

Should the court not have any leeway in deciding the sentence? How exactly should things be done to represent true justice? In one sense, most of us understand the large guy deserved a punch in the face.

I don’t know the answer, but I think that here in Canada, the judge is allowed in most cases to take a look at the nature of the situation and make a determination.

However, this doesn’t mean that I wouldn’t like stiffer penalties for certain types of premeditated crimes, especially for repeat offenders.

As usual, it’s hard to simply paint the issue in black and white and expect it to work effectively in the real world.

Anyway, the issue I had was taking a case in the states, assuming the outcome here, and then complaining about that outcome. It didn’t seem like a reasonable way to go about criticizing our system – which of course is as ripe for criticism as anything else.

Have at it!

The US does have it’s messed up portions of the penal code.

Here in the Rochester area there was a man recently who got probation for touching a female friend of his 10 yo daughter over a number of years.

And a priest who was found with kiddy porn on his computer is facing 1 to 4 years PER IMAGE.

So apparently, looking at kiddy porn is a lot worse than actually molesting a kid…

[quote]ConorM wrote:
Since when is the American use efficient? Costs more money to kill them than prison for life. Innocent people are also inevitable killed. Every year people are released from Death Row who are usually very obviously innocent thanks to the hard work of people on appeals. Some people want to remove the appeals process to kill people quicker! Still can’t believe in the modern age, in modern times, a nation believe’s capital punishment is in any way acceptable.[/quote]

Lot’s of complaining Connor.

What is your idea on dealing with criminals who are convicted of a crime? Just curious since you have only expressed what you are against not what you are for.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Skin color played a huge part in this trial. Had the victims been KKKers, the case would have been lost in the bottom of the file cabinet years ago.

Don’t get me wrong, I think he got off easy. He could have gotten up to 180 years if I heard the judge correctly this morning.

But if you think this case was strictly about the killing of three people, you are mistaken. [/quote]

This is a hate crime and the old guy should fry.

The bible says and eye for and eye.

Since Vroom wanted stories, here are a few, this doesn’t even cover lenient sentencing, just recent offences committed while on some type of release:

In 1998 while on parole for the sexual assault of an Abbotsford woman, Dean Zimmerman was sent back to jail for severally beating his pregnant wife. In 2005, after having been granted early release once again by the Canadian National Parole Board, Zimmerman sexually assaulted a 24-year-old Edmonton woman by holding her captive, tying her up and sexually assaulting her for nine hours.

In 1994 Franklin Shane Dorfer was convicted of breaking into the home of a 69 year old Victoria woman, raping and robbing her, and breaking into a second home and robbing a 71 year old woman. Three years later while out on parole Franklin Dofer was jailed for six months for a Port Coquitlam break-and-enter. Back on the streets in 2004 Dofer was sentenced to two years in jail for break-and-enter and possession of stolen property. Once again, Dofer received early parole and is now accused of breaking into the home of an 89-year-old woman in Nanaimo and raping her.

In 2005 Brian Edward Abrosimo was arrested for the sexual assault of an 11 year old girl, only days after finishing a six month conditional sentence (served in the community) for sexual assault. Abrosimo has a court history that spans 18 years and includes two previous sexual assaults, as well as numerous other theft, assault and firearm convictions.

In 2004 sexual offender Michael William Gardiner, was released on statutory release in Hamilton. Thirteen days later he sexual assaulted a Hamilton woman, stabbing her multiple times.

In 1999 Clifford Howdle was released on statutory release in Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. Upon his release Howdle raped 3 women over a 36 hour period.

In 2004, convicted sex offender Charles Jamieson left his halfway house in East Vancouver. He then raped five people in Vancouver over a ten day period before being apprehended.

In 1999 Trevor James Fontaine was sentenced to 5 years in prison for sexual assault and attempted murder. Out on parole four years into his sentence, Fontaine befriended Vanderhoof woman Misty Franklin then stabbed her in the back of the neck. The 24 year old mother of two is now a quadriplegic kept alive by a ventilator.

In 1988 Eli Ulayuk was convicted of manslaughter. After being granted full parole in 2004 he murdred his Yellowknife parole officer Louise Pargeter during their first meeting.

In 2004 Eric Fish walked away from a Vernon halfway house. Six weeks later, 75 year old Bill Abramenko was beaten during a home invasion and later died in hospital. Fish is also the prime suspect in the murder of another Vernon resident, 60-year-old Jeffrey Drake who was killed two weeks after Fish left the halfway house, his body found in Okanagan Lake a month later.

In 1997 convicted killer and young offender Serena Nicotine was transferred to a community home in Saskatoon while part way through her sentence. Nicotine along with Catherine McKenzie, another young offender, murdered homeowner Helen Montgomery (who had no knowledge that the girls were violent offenders) by hitting her over the head with a cast iron frying pan and stabbing her 15 times.

The Statistics

Six out of every 10 convicted offenders aged 18 to 25 in 1999/2000 had at least one previous conviction, either in adult court since 1994/95 or in youth court since 1991/92, according to a new pilot study of court-based recidivism in seven provinces and two territories. Among these repeat offenders, 28% had one prior conviction, while 72% had multiple prior convictions.

9 out of 10 offenders sentenced to a federal corrections facility (meaning at least a two year sentence) had at least one prior conviction either in adult or youth court.

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
This is a hate crime and the old guy should fry.

The bible says and eye for and eye.

[/quote]

The hate crime designation doesn’t apply in this case. It happened before the PC race-based crime designation was created.

I agree the bastard should fry - but should he fry simply because one of the victims were black? Does a white man killing a black man mean more than a white man killing two white men?

It’s a stupid, stupid designation created to make folks feel better.

Well first I am totally against some of the silly drug penalties in the US. People getting convicted for 50 yerars for selling a bit of dope to their friends. Drug policy should be centred around rehabilitation, harsh punishments for known drug barons yes, but not for you poor guy using a bit of acid at the weekends to party.

In terms of murder and rape, I think harsh action needs to be taken. Life sentences for multiple murderers (ie never get out of jail within reason, not 14 years thats not a life sentence). Rapists need to be treated harshly too, although I think if one guy gets convicted on the testimony of one girl the sentence should be realistic (like nearly happened to be Kobe). Serial Rapists, lifetime jail terms no possibility of parole. Remove the archaic death penalty and instill a good appeals system to ensure innocent people get real justice as the court system is not infallible. Its like a built in safety. Just some quickly typed random thoughts.

You have done nothing but bash Canada over and over on these boards. And in a very immature manner.

If you were really intending on dicussing the differences in legal system, the punishments and compensations between two countries you would have provided more evidence and information rather than a simple “i bet in Canada he would have” statement. You can try to deny it as much as you want but over time all canadians on this site have realized you are nothing but an insecure person who loves bashing Canada.

The point you were trying to raise(asides from bashing Canada) is a very valid point our legal systems are different. There is some bad in that as seen with the holmoka(sp?) case for example but their are also some very good points to that, because you dont see people running into parked cars or spilling coffee on themselves in hopes of getting loony amounts of compensation.

Like Vroom said earlier, if you are really so in love with America, here is a stereotypical (no offense to any american on this site) American response to your thread. If you dont like Canada get the F out.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
endgamer711 wrote:
In the eighteenth century you could get hung for stealing a loaf of bread, but it didn’t help with their crime problem all that much. People figured: get hung, starve, what’s the big deal?

Rehabilitation and post-release placement also reduce recidivism. Not as showy as an execution, I know, but actually a helluva lot cheaper.

We approach the problem these days with mandatory sentencing and three strikes laws: we just lock up the recidivists. Sounds swell and surefire, but it’s still too expensive and the next thing you know the corrections officer’s union is running your state (no wonder poor Ah-nold looks so strung out)

HORSE SHIT. [/quote]

Brilliant rebuttal

JP,

Like I said, there will be no shortage of issues and problems to bring out. This isn’t an easy problem to solve.

I mean, we could simply kill everyone who is convicted of a serious offence, but then we’d eventually kill some innocent folks and there’d be a new uproar.

There are cases of innocent people spending years in jail, people that get long sentences that serve no purpose, people that get short sentences that should have gotten longer ones.

Perhaps we should pass some mandatory minimum sentences for certain types of crimes? I certainly don’t have any problem with that.

However, I’d also like the judge to be able to give leeway when there are truly extenuating circumstances.

Do you have any solutions… other than simply making everyone spend a lot more time in jail? Hopefully you have something more targeted than that for us?

[quote]samsmarts wrote:
There is some bad in that as seen with the holmoka(sp?) case for example but their are also some very good points to that, because you dont see people running into parked cars or spilling coffee on themselves in hopes of getting loony amounts of compensation.
[/quote]

Samsmarts, you are not too smart are you?

What you are referring to in this post is not even the criminal justice system, which I was discussing, but the civil system.

Since you are a retard I will give you a definition to help you out:

Civil Law - Laws dealing with non criminal relationships involving persons, businesses or other organizations. Civil lawsuits seek compensation, rather than punishment, for alleged wrongs.

[quote]samsmarts wrote:

If you were really intending on dicussing the differences in legal system, the punishments and compensations between two countries you would have provided more evidence and information rather than a simple “i bet in Canada he would have” statement. [/quote]

Read my other posts dipshit.

[quote]samsmarts wrote:
You have done nothing but bash Canada over and over on these boards. And in a very immature manner.

If you were really intending on dicussing the differences in legal system, the punishments and compensations between two countries you would have provided more evidence and information rather than a simple “i bet in Canada he would have” statement. You can try to deny it as much as you want but over time all canadians on this site have realized you are nothing but an insecure person who loves bashing Canada.

The point you were trying to raise(asides from bashing Canada) is a very valid point our legal systems are different. There is some bad in that as seen with the holmoka(sp?) case for example but their are also some very good points to that, because you dont see people running into parked cars or spilling coffee on themselves in hopes of getting loony amounts of compensation.

Like Vroom said earlier, if you are really so in love with America, here is a stereotypical (no offense to any american on this site) American response to your thread. If you dont like Canada get the F out.[/quote]

Love it or leave it! That’s truth samsmarts.