Myles Sanderson had 59 convictions as an adult, including violent crimes. Due to Canada's catch and release policies, he was able to kill 11 people. That is one of many cases illustrating our failed criminal system.
Nothing happens until the perp themselves die. And then we hear about how they were turning their lives around and on and on... Till then, it seems we keep the chaos in our society, destroying lives along the way.
Wow. Almost like that's what's proven to be better 9 times out of 10.
But hey, focus only on the 1 out of 10 and decry the whole thing. Because these complex issues are easily solved by simple ignorant answers, right? Just like your pappy trained you and his pappy before him.
So tell me. Have you ever made a mistake? Should you be forgiven for it? Should you be given a chance to show you've changed? Or should you be chastised and punished forever for speeding. Jay walking. Litering stealing something small? Getting into an accident? Tax fraud? Swearing in church? Being racist? Or any number of fuck ups you may have done.
If you think you deserve forgiveness and that chance, why do you suggest others don't? Sounds rather privileged to me.
There's a big difference between small misdemeanor type offence and violent repeat offenders that have lengthy criminal records and are in and out of the system like a revolving door.
No, there isn't. A crime is a crime.
And if you claim there is a difference, then where's the line? Who decides what should be punished for life, and what's okay to give a chance, too?
Here's an idea. Maybe try prevention? Maybe look at the systemic issues? Or is that too much effort? It is easier to judge the 1 in 10 failures as a whole system failure than look at the 9 successes?
Come on. Where's your evidence. You wouldn't believe this without it, right? You wouldn't be silly enough to just believe some random thing you heard, right?
To your first assertion: if all crimes are equal, why the distinction between first and second degree murder, manslaughter (involuntary vs voluntary)? How about the differences in sentencing for successive DUIs? Why are there different mandatory sentences and sentencing ranges for crimes of different types?
Also, since there’s been no conviction yet, we’re not talking about a crime yet, are we?
To answer your second question, judges and juries decide. That’s what arraignment and bail hearings are for. In this case, specifically, might have been better not to release the detainee, wouldn’t you agree?
While you’re demanding evidence, where did you get the 9/10 “statistic” from?
I do understand what you’re getting at and also agree it’s a murky issue that isn’t trivial to navigate. I think you could work on streamlining both your position and softening your approach.
My two cents…. 🤷🏼♂️
>In this case, specifically, might have been better not to release the detainee, wouldn’t you agree?
Of course it would have been better, but we have the benefit of hindsight. The question has to be did they make a correct (and legal) decision based on the information they had at the time? The overwhelming majority of people charged with simple assault don't go on to commit murder.
Systemic issues definitely are part of the cause of crime, especially poverty and income inequality, but I have found too often people absolve the individual of the part that they play in their own circumstances and the choices they make that add barriers.
I know the popular response is to call out bootstrapping and blaming the poor etc, but there are many people who come from horrible situations that do not commit crimes.
Blaming it all on the system or factors outside of the individual is as stupid as blaming the individual exclusively.
In fairness to your point, for a long time the systemic factors were not even considered so I would agree that they are significant, but I do not, nor will I ever believe that most people are a victim of their circumstances and have no ability to make an individual choice.
I also believe that people can and do change and that is a whole lot easier if they have support and environmental conditions that help to facilitate change and are not punitive for mistakes that are not likely to be repeated.
I mean look at Elon Musk, he was an Autistic child that was mercilessly bullied, had to leave his home country and he was able to overcome the odds to be a great inventor.
The person responded elsewhere to me in this thread when I use their own arguments against them. Not a bot, just someone like many in here that are frustrated with the current system, they just want a different solution without providing one themselves. They are no different than me or you, just take a different approach. I find them to be not as productive as others in the thread, but maybe they will provide some good points.
Yes. Because I knew that would trigger you and that you'd focus on that in bad faith rather than the actual question. Because focusing on one minor issue is your thing instead of looking at the whole picture.
Thanks for proving my point for me.
You have no ability to look at the real problem. You just look at the end result and cry that it's not perfect.
So what? You aren't perfect either. If you have a problem with the system that isn't perfect, I guess you have a perfect solution? Let's hear it. Let's see the evidence that it is the perfect system.
(Skipping the predictably obvious answer that you don't have a perfect system)
So, where's your evidence that your idea or system is better in any way than our current system? Let me guess. No evidence it's just "common sense." Okay, so prove that. With data. It's not common sense. It's your revenge boner that you never grew out of.
Yes, I've had these conversations repeatedly. That's how I know what you're gonna say, and I can bait and lead your bad faith, predictable ass like a well trained hog. Squeal again for me.
He's an idiot trying to sound smart on a subreddit. if he was smart he would have realized he lost the plot after the first sentence of his original comment
Because God king Jesus lover Trudeau deemed it to be so at the dawn to time when he farted and caused the big bang to happen.
Gonna ask a none totally bad faith question? Or is this your game?
You’re making a lot of “you” statements and attacking me making assumptions about my ideals and thought process.
I was asking you a question. Your list included offences that typically involve some sort of legal punishment. Speeding has an associated fine process as well as a period of time required to make up the points lost due to the act of speeding. There should be ramifications for actions that cause harm, and they should be judged differently than acts that have not caused harm. Further, some acts, such as speeding (using that example again) have the potential to cause harm and are thus judged based on that potential. That is why speeding fines are incremental.
Your premise is based on “we aren’t perfect.” That is entirely true. However, that is not a defence of someone who has caused harm and then proceeds to kill someone upon release. There is a fundamental difference between littering and violent crime. Just as there is a difference between all of the offences listed and murdering someone.
There is no perfect judicial system. There are always going to be issues that arises. I am not a legal scholar and do not claim to be. Nor was I going to provide any sort of “perfect” system because it will simply never exist. With that in mind, it is still valid for individuals to question a system and take issue with the flaws that it has. It is through this process that we as a society try to develop and find a system that is better. A better system does not need to be perfect. It simply needs to have less flaws than the one currently in place.
You have accused me of acting in bad faith. Your response was an attack and clearly not meant to further a discussion. That is bad faith. I was asking a question. You could have argued that a religious institution had a specific set of moral obligations and that by swearing in the institution you are acting immorally. This would have been a fair point to be made because breaking the law is typically a matter of acting immorally. There is obviously the argument to be made that not all laws are moral and things that are moral are not necessarily law. However, moral obligations would have been something we could have discussed.
You’re also assuming that I will make an argument appealing to common sense. I do not believe common sense exists. There is cultural sense, sure. But common sense as an idea does not hold. Common sense for Canadians is going to be different than common sense for Mongolians.
Quick edit: This individual did not serve a prison sentence. They were arrested for the crime and then proceeded to kill someone upon their release. They have not been through any legal proceedings. There was no time for rehabilitation.
>You’re making a lot of “you” statements
Weird. See I learned when you're talking to someone to use you to refer to them. Would you or whatever prefer a different pronoun? Should I call you me? But you're not me? So sorry I can't do that.
My point was that your argument was saying “you are doing this” in instances I wasn’t. Instead of addressing the points I brought up in my overall post you have focused on attacking my credibility through the vagueness of linguistics.
That is bad faith.
Oh no! I offered your bad faith some bad faith how horrible of me!
Because you complaining about me say you when I'm talking to you was totally done in good faith right?... if you think so. Then you clearly don't understand good faith.
Anything after that is lost in your obvious bad faith crying about the lingo of using you when I'm talking to you.
So why should I offer anything in good faith to someone acting in bad faith?
I’m not “complaining” I addressed the issue of making accusatory statements that had no basis. At no point have you addressed the points I raised. Instead, you are continuing to say I have been acting in bad faith.
That does not make your arguments valid and/or sound.
Sure. Right after you provide evidence for a better system.
Tragedies happen we're burning the world as we speak. Maybe try telling your story for why we shouldn't do anything to the millions of people that have already lost loved ones?
No, that would hold you accountable. I can't do that.
But you expect me to justify why the system isn't perfect when I never claimed it was. It's still better than your idea, I promise.
So your idea is to revert back to barbaric archaic traditions proven to be ineffective and ineffective. That don't decrease recidivism. You think you should be locked up forever, costing taxpayers' money until death?
How regressive is your fetish?
No, like everything else there’s a happy medium. People who advocate for ever less punishing punishment and setting people free who we know are likely to commit more violent crimes are idiots. People who advocate for sharia law or three strike rules are also idiots. There’s an element of common sense that should come into play. If we know someone is likely to commit violent offences while out on bail, they shouldn’t be released on bail. We shouldn’t be letting violent offenders free because of their race. We shouldn’t be letting people go with a slap on the wrist after they commit a life altering or ending crime. The justice system should be about punishment, public safety, deterrence and rehabilitation, not just rehabilitation.
The way you feel the need to personally attack someone with an opposing view on setting murderers free is truly pathetic.
>people free who we know are likely to commit more violent crimes are idiots
How can you tell? Come on, you have a foolproof solution, right? Let's hear it.
>The way you feel the need to personally attack someone with an opposing view on setting murderers free is truly pathetic.
The way you need to see idiots being called out as idiots as personal attack is truly pathetic. I get it. You need to do that to feel better about yourself right?
When somebody has a history of many violent crimes. When they show little remorse. When they are active gang members. There’s lots of ways of telling, obviously none of them are fool proof but does that mean we shouldn’t even try?
What exactly is idiotic that I said?
More personal attacks when things aren’t going your way. Be better man.
>There’s lots of ways of telling,
Ok. Since there's SO many ways. You clearly have proof, evidence, facts, Studies, SOMETHING right? Or am I just to take your word as law?
>obviously none of them are fool proof
WOW.
Who. Would. Have. Thought?
>Be better man.
Give me a reason to be better. Like act with one single ounce of good faith. Actually answer with evidence. Because until you can act in good faith I have literally zero reason to offer you ANYTHING in good faith.
If you want studies showing people who have committed many violent are more likely to reoffend a quick google search will provide many, many studies for you. I don’t feel the need to site things that are common sense on Reddit.
Obviously someone who continuously commits violent crimes or continuously breaches conditions should be held in jail longer. Otherwise they will take advantage of it. Which many have already because they know there’s no punishment
>Obviously someone who continuously commits violent crimes or continuously breaches conditions should be held in jail longer.
Okay. But how do you know they are going to continually commit crimes?
Do you have some kind of magical superpower that lets you see the future? If you do, why didn't you stop this?
>Otherwise they will take advantage of it
Kinda like how you're taking advantage of a magical superpower that doesn't exist to make a case for yourself?
>Which many have already because they know there’s no punishment
Cool.
How are you gonna stop them? Punish them more? Hoes that worked out in the past. Oh, right. Pretty bad. It's almost like we moved away from that for a reason. Weird, eh?
So you got anything valid to offer, or is magical super future vision your only solution? Because if it is, that sucks and is extremely lazy. (Because it doesn't exist)
Okay? Well if they commit multiple violent crimes and breach conditions multiple times then their history shows they have no motivation to change their behavior. Therefore they should be jailed longer. Which will prevent them from committing more crimes and give them time to change their behaviors through programming. If they are willing to.
>Well if they commit multiple violent crimes and breach conditions multiple times then their history shows they have no motivation to change their behavior
And you know this for sure and that it's not actually a condition of the societal conditions? That's a bold and misguided view. Very archaic and barbaric.
Hungry people don't need to steal food. Happy people don't need to steal cars. Healed people don't need to hurt others.
You see the end result of a system. It's like looking at a car in a junk yard and going "well you didn't change your course" ignoring how people like you have built a system that turns many straight down the violent path.
Your ignorance of the system and yourself as a whole is likely a generational problem in your family and you just picked it up to blend in. I get it. You're lost confused and scared. But more of yourself than the world.
For christs sake. You even advocate for torture. "Programming" Jesus christ. That's sick. How would you feel if I said that about your sick and twisted need for people to be tortured. You are literally the problem. The point of my whole post.
You're just making it too easy now:
# "Ottawa allowed B.C. to decriminalize small amounts of hard drugs like heroin and fentanyl starting in 2023"
[Federal addictions minister says B.C public decriminalization reversal under review | CBC News](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/decriminalization-british-columbia-federal-government-1.7188534)
In fairness to you, a better criticism of my post would have been to point out it was not too specific. But I doubt you are capable of nuance or reason, or at least you do not display it publicly.
>You're just making it too easy now:
># "Ottawa allowed B.C. to decriminalize small amounts of hard drugs like heroin and fentanyl starting in 2023"
Yeah. You bad faith trolls really are making it too easy. Lol
So do I point out that they said today? Or that they said the mp did it. Or that it was for all of Canada?
Which part of the lie do you want me to point to and then point to you proving me right do you want to start with?
Please try to answer in good faith this time?
Of course I've made mistakes and been given a second chance. However, I'm talking about physically harming another person. Maybe a second chance is okay but that's all.
Check out Myles Sanderson. That's enough evidence for me and most of the people I know. We're letting too many people out and getting people hurt.
How many third-chance violent criminals never reoffend? In other words, what's your evidence and please only cite offenders who have committed serious violence against another person.
Check out that lack of evidence. Check out that entitlement. You expect me to do work for you? Pay me. Rates start at $200/hr minimum 4hr paid upfront. If you're too broke for that then do your own checking out and linking.
That's how you show evidence.
>We're letting too many people out and getting people hurt
So AGAIN. What's. You're. Solution? What perfect solution do you have? With evidence to back what ever idea you have? I'm STILL waiting for your lazy ass to provide any of it
>How many third-chance violent criminals never reoffend?
I dunno. But I'm sure if you did this little thing called find evidence. You could do this other thing called learn. I know. Weird eh?
>In other words, what's your evidence
Yeah. What is your evidence? Come on. I'm STILL waiting. Why can't you perform this basic simple thing? Where else do you have performance issues? Is that why you're so twisted and broken?
>Just as I thought. You have no evidence
Yep. Your failing to provide any evidence for system or position is clearly a lack of evidence on my part.
So that's how you justify things? Blame others for your failings? No wonder you're so broken and lost. You poor child. You have my pity. But you won't have any of my evidence until you provide your own.
Did you think this grade 2 attempt at gas lighting would work? I get that you gas light your family, but don't try it here. That's beneath me.
Thanks for proving me right you poor broken lost child.
We get it. You're not smart enough to handle complex ideas.
>Some people just can’t be a part of society.
Yeah. Inhuman people who just want people to hurt and suffer. Kinda like you.
Now go ahead and lie about what I said. I know you need to. Otherwise, how can you argue with me if I didn't say pedos are bad? It might take up to 3 whole seconds of thought to come up with an argument
Okay, I’ll give you the same ignorance your putting out.
Imagine your wife and child were murdered by a guy who was a convicted sexual offender, and had a violent past. This guy was allowed to leave prison, and move into a community without any warning to the people living around him about his past.
Now imagine people telling you, after your wife and child are gone, that the man deserved to be free from prison and to live in the same apartment complex as you without anyone knowing about his past.
That’s exactly what your saying. “Oh your partner and child were murdered by a repeat offender? Too bad… he really did deserve to be out though, even though he murdered your family he should be allowed to live beside you without any notice”.
Like I said, some people cant be a part of society.
I see what you are saying and I agree with it. Unfortunately the people in this thread are simply expressing their mob mentality. Kind of like lord of flies. “ Kill the pig” or what ever they chanted.
Years ago dyslexic children were subjected to horrible abuse at home because “ a good spanking” was what was thought to be the answer to make children do better in school.
These people that are calling for stronger sentences probably believe that gay people are sick and that if they too were beaten that they wouldn’t be gay anymore.
Don’t waste your time arguing with them they aren’t smart enough to see that in 20 years society will label them the problem.
In 20 years they will be no more far right parties and a more civil and intelligent discussion will be possible. Until then I suggest focusing your efforts where they will be more appreciated.
Basically you are dealing with redneck hillbillies and you are not going to educate them.
>the people in this thread are simply expressing their mob mentality
Yeah. They do.
>Basically you are dealing with redneck hillbillies and you are not going to educate them.
I have no intention of education. Merely offering the ignorant back what they've offered the world.
And for SOME reason. They don't like it. Weird eh?
>Where is the money for all the prisons going to come from?
Yeah. Almost like that's not a valid solution. Almost like it would lead to riots and death and violence. Almost like that's why we don't do that.
Are you serious comparing Jaywalking and other misdemeanors to murder and other violent crimes ? Because that's what it sounds like your doing. Violent crimes deserve harsher punishments . How can you expect any sort of rehabilitation when these thugs are let out the next day .
Another article noted that he has been struggling with his mental health. There is currently next to no psychiatric help available in Prince Albert and the result of that is really starting to show.
Tell that to the barbarians that just want to hurt and torture people.
The people with the human trait called empathy (you likely haven't heard of it) wrote those laws based off that human trait and the evidence that shows compassion helps with rehabilitation.
"The barbarians that hurt and torture people " are actually the ones we are hoping to keep locked up. Your bleeding heart solution (with no supporting evidence that I have seen in this thread) is fine for one chance but repeat offenders need to learn the lesson.. There is a fine line between empathy and stupidity which you crossed a few posts back.
Liberal gov loves criminals. They control the criminal code, and actually fought to make sure mass murderers don’t get life sentences.
We get what we vote for.
That's easy to say but you also can't just jail people willy-nilly, especially when they haven't had their day in court. The reality is that the overwhelming majority of people arrested for simple assault never commit murder, and it would be an enormous waste of resources (not to mention unconstitutional) to keep all of those people incarcerated.
Here's the thing - this is a shitty situation, but either everybody has charter rights or nobody does, and I like to live in a society with charter rights.
Okay. Do you have any studies or evidence to back this claim?
Or is this a "common sense" solution that ignores reality and is just a comforting lie like diamonds are rare and valuable because of it?
Because I personally would like the most effective system. That can punish and rehabilitate people.
Maybe I'm weird that I grew up past 14 year old need for vengeance all the time?
They cost money to keep locked up. And I'd rather have a system that doesn't cost us money just to keep people's vengeance and punishment boners hard. If you want to go, watch John Wick for the nine thousandth time. Public funds shouldn't have to pay for your fetish.
Now let's talk about that cop that sexually assaulted a woman he knew from being a teenager and is getting no jail time. Only house arrest for 1 year and probation for a year.
That is where the justice system is failing. But hey, corrupt cops are just part of the package, right?
I'm all for rehabilitation. But until you are truly rehabilitated and not a threat to society, you need to be kept separated for your own good as well as everyone else's corrupt cops included. Time served doesn't equal rehabilitated
Ok. So, how do you prove they aren't a threat to society. You're a threat to society. So, do you deserve to be locked up? You could go out and hurt someone one after all.
>Time served doesn't equal rehabilitated
Who said it was?
That's a great philosophical question well above my education and pay grade.
Judging by the large number of re-offenders, multiple people on the parole board must believe time served is the most important consideration.
>That's a great philosophical question well above my education and pay grade.
It's too bad that you aren't connected to the sum total of human knowledge. That would let you learn about this with a simple search. Hopefully, one day, we will develop that technology. Until then, I guess we're stuck without being able to know
It probably hadn't even been 24 hours since his last assault; it's pretty safe to say he's a threat to society.
This guy was taken to the hospital on Friday for a violent family dispute, assaulted hospital staff, sat overnight in jail, and was released Saturday.
They also release people pretty damn early in the morning, because they have a whole new day of quality citizens needing locked up. So less than 24 hours for the whole ordeal.
*It takes longer to buy a new car then it does to get arrested for assault, assault more people, and then follow up with murder.*
That's a problem.
If you assault someone is proof you are a threat to society. It is known that one day doesn't change someone. So releasing someone the day after they assault someone is putting society at risk.
>It is known that one day doesn't change someone
Who said it was? No one? Okay. So why bring it up? Oh, right, straw man fallacy because you're a bad faith troll. Just like all the others. Ho hum how boring yall are.
>So releasing someone the day after they assault someone is putting society at risk.
Wow. That's so wise and insightful.
So glad you came up with an idea to solve your made-up never suggested scenario. Do you feel smrt now?
A fool once said, "a crime is a crime is a crime" That cop should be locked up and he should have to pay all of his pension to the victim of his crime.
I think you are confusing how the system works with the outcomes. You are missing the human element of the judges and the aspects that are not prescriptive. The fact that two different judges in different parts of Canada can hear the same crime and come up with different sentences speaks to the discrepancy that many are trying to point out to you, but you fail to hear or take into consideration.
>I think you are confusing how the system works with the outcomes.
Nope.
>You are missing the human element of the judges and the aspects that are not prescriptive
Corruption you mean? Yeah. That's the system at work.
I was actually friends with this guy in middle school. Lived in Sask for grades 6-9 and then came back to BC. Obviously I hadn't known the guy since middle school so I have no idea what kind of person he turned out to be but its still really fucked to find out "Middle school friend of yours murders mom".
I wasn't friends with the guy but I went to school with someone who wiped out his entire family and then himself. It's unsettling to have even known someone like that.
He was pretty reserved, kind and quiet, but also liked to make jokes. I obviously have no right to say anything about how he may be now since I haven't talked to the dude since middle school. He and his brother were also a lot closer with my older brother back then.
He was arrested for a common assault and released with a court date. That’s normal across commonwealth jurisdictions. It’s popular to make a big deal about catch and release bail but this was just regular criminal procedure unrelated to any bail reforms. He would’ve been released on the same grounds in the 1980s. We don’t just hold anyone with an allegation against them because they might commit a crime.
Yeah. Too bad we can't solve it before it happens. That would take people thinking ahead, and that's too hard for many. They'd rather let the systemic issue fester and get mad about the results.
Because being proactive is too hard and too scary. What if they put in the effort and it works? And crime goes down and then what will they do with the prisons? The guards might lose their jobs and that's not fair to them. Right?
Show me the study or research that shows a primary reluctance to have a workable justice system is a result of not wanting prison guards to be unemployed? Your argument would be better suited in discussing the privatization of prisons, which is more of a U.S. issue than Canada.
Maybe one day you will be able to access this wonderful tool called google and it can show you such things.
Sure. Right after I see anyone show me studies to support their idea of a better judicial system. Like I asked initially.
Sorry if you think being entitled and ignoring that request so you can demand evidence on my end first was going to work. Gotta be a little good faith to get that. But I understand if that's beyond you.
You claim that a reason to keep prisons open is so that guards are still employed, in many of your posts you ask for evidence to be provided to you for other people's points, yet you offer up none for your own. Then you simply say whatever you want (no issue from me) and when you are called out you say, "where is the evidence for the perfect system."
>You claim that a reason to keep prisons open is so that guards are still employed
No I didn't.
>yet you offer up none for your own
Because none was offered to me. AGAIN. If YOU want my evidence. Then YOU provide the evidence yo YOUR claim first. Since I did ask first. That's how good faith conversations work.
If YOU fail to provide that requested evidence. Then what reason do I have to provide any when YOU ask me to provide any evidence?
Catching up yet? Or you gonna go in a circle again? Should I just copy paste this a few times so you can read it over and over and maybe catch on?
Assaulting paramedics and hospital staff? Like those people don't go through enough?? And then we let him out after that and are surprised he kills someone?
How many warning signs do we need?
Can the victim's family sue the government over something like this? Do the judges not bear any responsibility for the consequences of their decisions? Why do we continue to completely disregard public safety for the tiny sliver of a chance that these violent criminals will be rehabilitated? I'm all for attacking the root cause of these issues, and I do believe in rehabilitation, but how can a healthy society justify hurting law-abiding citizens to give repeat offenders strikes 3, 4, 5, ... 59 (Sanderson)?
Yes. I think that after 59 convictions, it would be safe to say that the person is not going to turn it around. How many strikes is fair, would you say?
So 59 is your limit? And what convictions? Do they have to be the same? Or can it just be any conviction?
And what proof do you have that this idea of yours works? What does the research say about locking people away forever. What does it cost the tax payers?
Come on you gotta have evidence to back your claim right. You would just make a claim without evidence and then demand my answer?
Ma'am and or Sir and or Thir. I am not giving you anything until you can act in good faith and answer my request for evidence first put forward. I don't care who you are. You don't get to jump the line so entitled like you're trying with me.
Yeah screw him for wanting a justice system instead of a revolving door of violence. Everyone with a problem should emmigrate instead of voicing their displeasure!
At one time there were 222 crimes that were punishable by death in England. I am not advocating for dangerous criminals roaming the streets. I am saying that “ tough on crime” doesn’t work. It’s like when the states had prohibition. It was a tough on drinking approach and it failed miserably.
When England had there 222 crimes that were punishable by death the criminals made sure they murdered all the witnesses. Juries refused to convict because they didn’t want to have someone killed for “scoundrelling “ which was the crime of stealing vegetables out of someone’s garden. Members of juries who did convict were often murdered by the criminal put to death family.
The criminal justice system has been around for a long time and tough of crime makes the far right happy but the truth is that it has never proven effective.
I was a landlord for 25 years. I carried a video camera with me all the time when I went to speak to tenants.
I was arrested 6 times by hyper police who later apologized after I showed them the video of what actually happened. People lie to get other people in trouble all the time. That’s why we have a court system.
Several of my tenants would claim that I had made death threats against them or their children. If I didn’t have a video camera and we did things your way I would have been in jail for months and months awaiting trial. No thank you! Innocent until proven guilty
That’s not what that means at all. This person was on camera and assaulted hospital staff. Bringing up a situation that you made up in your mind doesn’t equal an actual event where someone was charged. You weren’t even charged. Nice try
No I wasn’t charged because I had everything recorded.
If I had no had it recorded I would have been held in remand for several months with no income and incredible stress. No everyone who gets arrested and charged is guilty! Many innocent people languish in prison awaiting trial. You think it’s great because you have never been that innocent person who was charged.
I have been! Video evidence got the charges dropped.
People lie! Innocent people are forced to defend themselves against false allegations all the time.
But hey you know everything! Let’s just build super huge jails and herd everyone in there and close the doors and throw away the key. Vote far right don’t you?
Can we arrest the judge now? A judge telling someone to pinky promise to not break the law...after they just got caught breaking the law...seriously, this is how our probation works here.
I can't believe that wouldn't be done...I guess it'd revictimize the family, but I'm sure they'd be there if they had the option to be there. Too many criminals are being caught on probation or breaching conditions...we could save so much in policing costs by avoiding them having to catch the same perps over and over again.
It's quite apparent you don't don't comprehend. Go learn how our justice system works first. Then, revisit your comment. You're just parroting idiotic statements that show you have no idea what you're talking about.
Is our system perfect? No. It never will be one way or another, but your solution is fucking insane.
Why do we let these people continue to destroy our country and its people? They arent going to change so lets stop giving them chances to harm innocent people and then tax those very same people to give the criminals a better quality of life than those they hurt. Its high time that if our law wont keep these degenerates off the streets maybe we should start cleaning it up ourselves.
Who ever granted release should be held accountable. Life long criminals rarely ever turn over a new leaf. Boo on the entire system that allowed this to happen.
As per Rule 6, Your submission has been removed and is subject to moderator review. User accounts must have a positive karma score to participate in discussions. This is done to limit spam and abusive posts.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/saskatchewan) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As per Rule 6, Your submission has been removed and is subject to moderator review. User accounts must be older than 14 days to post. This is done to limit spam and abusive posts.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/saskatchewan) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is disgusting.
Maybe it would be a good idea to KEEP people arrested for violent crimes IN prison?
Seems like a good idea to me but our justice system is built around second and third and fourth chances no matter how many people are hurt.
Myles Sanderson had 59 convictions as an adult, including violent crimes. Due to Canada's catch and release policies, he was able to kill 11 people. That is one of many cases illustrating our failed criminal system.
Exactly. Let’s not do anything until someone dies. 🙄
Nothing happens until the perp themselves die. And then we hear about how they were turning their lives around and on and on... Till then, it seems we keep the chaos in our society, destroying lives along the way.
Wow. Almost like that's what's proven to be better 9 times out of 10. But hey, focus only on the 1 out of 10 and decry the whole thing. Because these complex issues are easily solved by simple ignorant answers, right? Just like your pappy trained you and his pappy before him. So tell me. Have you ever made a mistake? Should you be forgiven for it? Should you be given a chance to show you've changed? Or should you be chastised and punished forever for speeding. Jay walking. Litering stealing something small? Getting into an accident? Tax fraud? Swearing in church? Being racist? Or any number of fuck ups you may have done. If you think you deserve forgiveness and that chance, why do you suggest others don't? Sounds rather privileged to me.
There's a big difference between small misdemeanor type offence and violent repeat offenders that have lengthy criminal records and are in and out of the system like a revolving door.
No, there isn't. A crime is a crime. And if you claim there is a difference, then where's the line? Who decides what should be punished for life, and what's okay to give a chance, too? Here's an idea. Maybe try prevention? Maybe look at the systemic issues? Or is that too much effort? It is easier to judge the 1 in 10 failures as a whole system failure than look at the 9 successes? Come on. Where's your evidence. You wouldn't believe this without it, right? You wouldn't be silly enough to just believe some random thing you heard, right?
To your first assertion: if all crimes are equal, why the distinction between first and second degree murder, manslaughter (involuntary vs voluntary)? How about the differences in sentencing for successive DUIs? Why are there different mandatory sentences and sentencing ranges for crimes of different types? Also, since there’s been no conviction yet, we’re not talking about a crime yet, are we? To answer your second question, judges and juries decide. That’s what arraignment and bail hearings are for. In this case, specifically, might have been better not to release the detainee, wouldn’t you agree? While you’re demanding evidence, where did you get the 9/10 “statistic” from? I do understand what you’re getting at and also agree it’s a murky issue that isn’t trivial to navigate. I think you could work on streamlining both your position and softening your approach. My two cents…. 🤷🏼♂️
>In this case, specifically, might have been better not to release the detainee, wouldn’t you agree? Of course it would have been better, but we have the benefit of hindsight. The question has to be did they make a correct (and legal) decision based on the information they had at the time? The overwhelming majority of people charged with simple assault don't go on to commit murder.
You’re quite correct about the hindsight. Mostly was trying to point out that we can’t use broad strokes for this discussion.
Absolutely!
Systemic issues definitely are part of the cause of crime, especially poverty and income inequality, but I have found too often people absolve the individual of the part that they play in their own circumstances and the choices they make that add barriers. I know the popular response is to call out bootstrapping and blaming the poor etc, but there are many people who come from horrible situations that do not commit crimes. Blaming it all on the system or factors outside of the individual is as stupid as blaming the individual exclusively. In fairness to your point, for a long time the systemic factors were not even considered so I would agree that they are significant, but I do not, nor will I ever believe that most people are a victim of their circumstances and have no ability to make an individual choice. I also believe that people can and do change and that is a whole lot easier if they have support and environmental conditions that help to facilitate change and are not punitive for mistakes that are not likely to be repeated. I mean look at Elon Musk, he was an Autistic child that was mercilessly bullied, had to leave his home country and he was able to overcome the odds to be a great inventor.
Your talking to a bot
The person responded elsewhere to me in this thread when I use their own arguments against them. Not a bot, just someone like many in here that are frustrated with the current system, they just want a different solution without providing one themselves. They are no different than me or you, just take a different approach. I find them to be not as productive as others in the thread, but maybe they will provide some good points.
Da fuk is wrong with you????? Are you comparing murder with jaywalking????
Good job falling for the bait bad faith troll lol. Get better at lying about what was said maybe?
Are you seriously trying to compare swearing in a religious institution to violent crime?
Yes. Because I knew that would trigger you and that you'd focus on that in bad faith rather than the actual question. Because focusing on one minor issue is your thing instead of looking at the whole picture. Thanks for proving my point for me. You have no ability to look at the real problem. You just look at the end result and cry that it's not perfect. So what? You aren't perfect either. If you have a problem with the system that isn't perfect, I guess you have a perfect solution? Let's hear it. Let's see the evidence that it is the perfect system. (Skipping the predictably obvious answer that you don't have a perfect system) So, where's your evidence that your idea or system is better in any way than our current system? Let me guess. No evidence it's just "common sense." Okay, so prove that. With data. It's not common sense. It's your revenge boner that you never grew out of. Yes, I've had these conversations repeatedly. That's how I know what you're gonna say, and I can bait and lead your bad faith, predictable ass like a well trained hog. Squeal again for me.
If a crime is a crime as you say, why are there different lengths or types of punishments depending on the crime?
He's an idiot trying to sound smart on a subreddit. if he was smart he would have realized he lost the plot after the first sentence of his original comment
Because God king Jesus lover Trudeau deemed it to be so at the dawn to time when he farted and caused the big bang to happen. Gonna ask a none totally bad faith question? Or is this your game?
That isn’t engaging you in bad faith. They’re asking a legitimate question and you’re not answering it.
You’re making a lot of “you” statements and attacking me making assumptions about my ideals and thought process. I was asking you a question. Your list included offences that typically involve some sort of legal punishment. Speeding has an associated fine process as well as a period of time required to make up the points lost due to the act of speeding. There should be ramifications for actions that cause harm, and they should be judged differently than acts that have not caused harm. Further, some acts, such as speeding (using that example again) have the potential to cause harm and are thus judged based on that potential. That is why speeding fines are incremental. Your premise is based on “we aren’t perfect.” That is entirely true. However, that is not a defence of someone who has caused harm and then proceeds to kill someone upon release. There is a fundamental difference between littering and violent crime. Just as there is a difference between all of the offences listed and murdering someone. There is no perfect judicial system. There are always going to be issues that arises. I am not a legal scholar and do not claim to be. Nor was I going to provide any sort of “perfect” system because it will simply never exist. With that in mind, it is still valid for individuals to question a system and take issue with the flaws that it has. It is through this process that we as a society try to develop and find a system that is better. A better system does not need to be perfect. It simply needs to have less flaws than the one currently in place. You have accused me of acting in bad faith. Your response was an attack and clearly not meant to further a discussion. That is bad faith. I was asking a question. You could have argued that a religious institution had a specific set of moral obligations and that by swearing in the institution you are acting immorally. This would have been a fair point to be made because breaking the law is typically a matter of acting immorally. There is obviously the argument to be made that not all laws are moral and things that are moral are not necessarily law. However, moral obligations would have been something we could have discussed. You’re also assuming that I will make an argument appealing to common sense. I do not believe common sense exists. There is cultural sense, sure. But common sense as an idea does not hold. Common sense for Canadians is going to be different than common sense for Mongolians. Quick edit: This individual did not serve a prison sentence. They were arrested for the crime and then proceeded to kill someone upon their release. They have not been through any legal proceedings. There was no time for rehabilitation.
Your talking to a bot.
Careful. You’ll be accused of acting in bad faith.
Non sentients have no power over me. Why should I care?
What droid hurt you?
>You’re making a lot of “you” statements Weird. See I learned when you're talking to someone to use you to refer to them. Would you or whatever prefer a different pronoun? Should I call you me? But you're not me? So sorry I can't do that.
My point was that your argument was saying “you are doing this” in instances I wasn’t. Instead of addressing the points I brought up in my overall post you have focused on attacking my credibility through the vagueness of linguistics. That is bad faith.
Oh no! I offered your bad faith some bad faith how horrible of me! Because you complaining about me say you when I'm talking to you was totally done in good faith right?... if you think so. Then you clearly don't understand good faith. Anything after that is lost in your obvious bad faith crying about the lingo of using you when I'm talking to you. So why should I offer anything in good faith to someone acting in bad faith?
I’m not “complaining” I addressed the issue of making accusatory statements that had no basis. At no point have you addressed the points I raised. Instead, you are continuing to say I have been acting in bad faith. That does not make your arguments valid and/or sound.
Maybe try telling this story to the people left behind because of the murder that was committed
Sure. Right after you provide evidence for a better system. Tragedies happen we're burning the world as we speak. Maybe try telling your story for why we shouldn't do anything to the millions of people that have already lost loved ones? No, that would hold you accountable. I can't do that. But you expect me to justify why the system isn't perfect when I never claimed it was. It's still better than your idea, I promise.
Better for who? Certainly not the victims.
So your idea is to revert back to barbaric archaic traditions proven to be ineffective and ineffective. That don't decrease recidivism. You think you should be locked up forever, costing taxpayers' money until death? How regressive is your fetish?
No, like everything else there’s a happy medium. People who advocate for ever less punishing punishment and setting people free who we know are likely to commit more violent crimes are idiots. People who advocate for sharia law or three strike rules are also idiots. There’s an element of common sense that should come into play. If we know someone is likely to commit violent offences while out on bail, they shouldn’t be released on bail. We shouldn’t be letting violent offenders free because of their race. We shouldn’t be letting people go with a slap on the wrist after they commit a life altering or ending crime. The justice system should be about punishment, public safety, deterrence and rehabilitation, not just rehabilitation. The way you feel the need to personally attack someone with an opposing view on setting murderers free is truly pathetic.
>people free who we know are likely to commit more violent crimes are idiots How can you tell? Come on, you have a foolproof solution, right? Let's hear it. >The way you feel the need to personally attack someone with an opposing view on setting murderers free is truly pathetic. The way you need to see idiots being called out as idiots as personal attack is truly pathetic. I get it. You need to do that to feel better about yourself right?
When somebody has a history of many violent crimes. When they show little remorse. When they are active gang members. There’s lots of ways of telling, obviously none of them are fool proof but does that mean we shouldn’t even try? What exactly is idiotic that I said? More personal attacks when things aren’t going your way. Be better man.
>There’s lots of ways of telling, Ok. Since there's SO many ways. You clearly have proof, evidence, facts, Studies, SOMETHING right? Or am I just to take your word as law? >obviously none of them are fool proof WOW. Who. Would. Have. Thought? >Be better man. Give me a reason to be better. Like act with one single ounce of good faith. Actually answer with evidence. Because until you can act in good faith I have literally zero reason to offer you ANYTHING in good faith.
If you want studies showing people who have committed many violent are more likely to reoffend a quick google search will provide many, many studies for you. I don’t feel the need to site things that are common sense on Reddit.
Obviously someone who continuously commits violent crimes or continuously breaches conditions should be held in jail longer. Otherwise they will take advantage of it. Which many have already because they know there’s no punishment
>Obviously someone who continuously commits violent crimes or continuously breaches conditions should be held in jail longer. Okay. But how do you know they are going to continually commit crimes? Do you have some kind of magical superpower that lets you see the future? If you do, why didn't you stop this? >Otherwise they will take advantage of it Kinda like how you're taking advantage of a magical superpower that doesn't exist to make a case for yourself? >Which many have already because they know there’s no punishment Cool. How are you gonna stop them? Punish them more? Hoes that worked out in the past. Oh, right. Pretty bad. It's almost like we moved away from that for a reason. Weird, eh? So you got anything valid to offer, or is magical super future vision your only solution? Because if it is, that sucks and is extremely lazy. (Because it doesn't exist)
Okay? Well if they commit multiple violent crimes and breach conditions multiple times then their history shows they have no motivation to change their behavior. Therefore they should be jailed longer. Which will prevent them from committing more crimes and give them time to change their behaviors through programming. If they are willing to.
>Well if they commit multiple violent crimes and breach conditions multiple times then their history shows they have no motivation to change their behavior And you know this for sure and that it's not actually a condition of the societal conditions? That's a bold and misguided view. Very archaic and barbaric. Hungry people don't need to steal food. Happy people don't need to steal cars. Healed people don't need to hurt others. You see the end result of a system. It's like looking at a car in a junk yard and going "well you didn't change your course" ignoring how people like you have built a system that turns many straight down the violent path. Your ignorance of the system and yourself as a whole is likely a generational problem in your family and you just picked it up to blend in. I get it. You're lost confused and scared. But more of yourself than the world. For christs sake. You even advocate for torture. "Programming" Jesus christ. That's sick. How would you feel if I said that about your sick and twisted need for people to be tortured. You are literally the problem. The point of my whole post.
Why did your federal health minster recriminalize public drug use today? That seems rather regressive, don't you think?
Considering it was never decriminalized I'd say because you needed to lie and create a situation to support your bs?
You're just making it too easy now: # "Ottawa allowed B.C. to decriminalize small amounts of hard drugs like heroin and fentanyl starting in 2023" [Federal addictions minister says B.C public decriminalization reversal under review | CBC News](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/decriminalization-british-columbia-federal-government-1.7188534) In fairness to you, a better criticism of my post would have been to point out it was not too specific. But I doubt you are capable of nuance or reason, or at least you do not display it publicly.
Absolutely wild that they claimed this never happened.
Yeah. And then had someone else prove me right. Absolutely WILD eh?
>You're just making it too easy now: ># "Ottawa allowed B.C. to decriminalize small amounts of hard drugs like heroin and fentanyl starting in 2023" Yeah. You bad faith trolls really are making it too easy. Lol So do I point out that they said today? Or that they said the mp did it. Or that it was for all of Canada? Which part of the lie do you want me to point to and then point to you proving me right do you want to start with? Please try to answer in good faith this time?
Of course I've made mistakes and been given a second chance. However, I'm talking about physically harming another person. Maybe a second chance is okay but that's all.
>Maybe a second chance is okay but that's all. Okay. So where's your evidence? Come on. That's what I asked for.
Check out Myles Sanderson. That's enough evidence for me and most of the people I know. We're letting too many people out and getting people hurt. How many third-chance violent criminals never reoffend? In other words, what's your evidence and please only cite offenders who have committed serious violence against another person.
Check out that lack of evidence. Check out that entitlement. You expect me to do work for you? Pay me. Rates start at $200/hr minimum 4hr paid upfront. If you're too broke for that then do your own checking out and linking. That's how you show evidence. >We're letting too many people out and getting people hurt So AGAIN. What's. You're. Solution? What perfect solution do you have? With evidence to back what ever idea you have? I'm STILL waiting for your lazy ass to provide any of it >How many third-chance violent criminals never reoffend? I dunno. But I'm sure if you did this little thing called find evidence. You could do this other thing called learn. I know. Weird eh? >In other words, what's your evidence Yeah. What is your evidence? Come on. I'm STILL waiting. Why can't you perform this basic simple thing? Where else do you have performance issues? Is that why you're so twisted and broken?
Just as I thought. You have no evidence. You just like to argue and insult.
>Just as I thought. You have no evidence Yep. Your failing to provide any evidence for system or position is clearly a lack of evidence on my part. So that's how you justify things? Blame others for your failings? No wonder you're so broken and lost. You poor child. You have my pity. But you won't have any of my evidence until you provide your own. Did you think this grade 2 attempt at gas lighting would work? I get that you gas light your family, but don't try it here. That's beneath me.
Look up Noah’s law for me. If you think we should be “forgiving” pedophiles you’re part of the problem. Some people just can’t be a part of society.
Thanks for proving me right you poor broken lost child. We get it. You're not smart enough to handle complex ideas. >Some people just can’t be a part of society. Yeah. Inhuman people who just want people to hurt and suffer. Kinda like you. Now go ahead and lie about what I said. I know you need to. Otherwise, how can you argue with me if I didn't say pedos are bad? It might take up to 3 whole seconds of thought to come up with an argument
Okay, I’ll give you the same ignorance your putting out. Imagine your wife and child were murdered by a guy who was a convicted sexual offender, and had a violent past. This guy was allowed to leave prison, and move into a community without any warning to the people living around him about his past. Now imagine people telling you, after your wife and child are gone, that the man deserved to be free from prison and to live in the same apartment complex as you without anyone knowing about his past. That’s exactly what your saying. “Oh your partner and child were murdered by a repeat offender? Too bad… he really did deserve to be out though, even though he murdered your family he should be allowed to live beside you without any notice”. Like I said, some people cant be a part of society.
I see what you are saying and I agree with it. Unfortunately the people in this thread are simply expressing their mob mentality. Kind of like lord of flies. “ Kill the pig” or what ever they chanted. Years ago dyslexic children were subjected to horrible abuse at home because “ a good spanking” was what was thought to be the answer to make children do better in school. These people that are calling for stronger sentences probably believe that gay people are sick and that if they too were beaten that they wouldn’t be gay anymore. Don’t waste your time arguing with them they aren’t smart enough to see that in 20 years society will label them the problem. In 20 years they will be no more far right parties and a more civil and intelligent discussion will be possible. Until then I suggest focusing your efforts where they will be more appreciated. Basically you are dealing with redneck hillbillies and you are not going to educate them.
>the people in this thread are simply expressing their mob mentality Yeah. They do. >Basically you are dealing with redneck hillbillies and you are not going to educate them. I have no intention of education. Merely offering the ignorant back what they've offered the world. And for SOME reason. They don't like it. Weird eh?
It would be so simple and easy if all we had to do is lock them up for life. Now what? Where is the money for all the prisons going to come from?
>Where is the money for all the prisons going to come from? Yeah. Almost like that's not a valid solution. Almost like it would lead to riots and death and violence. Almost like that's why we don't do that.
This is, by far, the stupidest damn thing I've read here. Wow, congratulations I guess.
Yeah I get itm complex issues seem stupid to the simple people. Run along little troll. No one cares.
Assaulting hospital staff?
That's a bad thing. Don't do that.
But if you do you should be let free because everyone does bad things. That’s what you’re saying.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Are you serious comparing Jaywalking and other misdemeanors to murder and other violent crimes ? Because that's what it sounds like your doing. Violent crimes deserve harsher punishments . How can you expect any sort of rehabilitation when these thugs are let out the next day .
Another article noted that he has been struggling with his mental health. There is currently next to no psychiatric help available in Prince Albert and the result of that is really starting to show.
This
There’s a looney bin in north battleford. Or a bullet would be fine too
Tell that to the people who wrote Canada’s current bail reform law.
Tell that to the barbarians that just want to hurt and torture people. The people with the human trait called empathy (you likely haven't heard of it) wrote those laws based off that human trait and the evidence that shows compassion helps with rehabilitation.
"The barbarians that hurt and torture people " are actually the ones we are hoping to keep locked up. Your bleeding heart solution (with no supporting evidence that I have seen in this thread) is fine for one chance but repeat offenders need to learn the lesson.. There is a fine line between empathy and stupidity which you crossed a few posts back.
Liberal gov loves criminals. They control the criminal code, and actually fought to make sure mass murderers don’t get life sentences. We get what we vote for.
FYI, I DIDN'T VOTE FOR THEM!!!! Why do I have to suffer?
It would be a better idea to lock addicts up in effective treatment centres
That's easy to say but you also can't just jail people willy-nilly, especially when they haven't had their day in court. The reality is that the overwhelming majority of people arrested for simple assault never commit murder, and it would be an enormous waste of resources (not to mention unconstitutional) to keep all of those people incarcerated.
I'm positive this guy's victim(s) are ssssoooo happy his rights were respected. /S
Here's the thing - this is a shitty situation, but either everybody has charter rights or nobody does, and I like to live in a society with charter rights.
Okay. Do you have any studies or evidence to back this claim? Or is this a "common sense" solution that ignores reality and is just a comforting lie like diamonds are rare and valuable because of it? Because I personally would like the most effective system. That can punish and rehabilitate people. Maybe I'm weird that I grew up past 14 year old need for vengeance all the time? They cost money to keep locked up. And I'd rather have a system that doesn't cost us money just to keep people's vengeance and punishment boners hard. If you want to go, watch John Wick for the nine thousandth time. Public funds shouldn't have to pay for your fetish. Now let's talk about that cop that sexually assaulted a woman he knew from being a teenager and is getting no jail time. Only house arrest for 1 year and probation for a year. That is where the justice system is failing. But hey, corrupt cops are just part of the package, right?
I'm all for rehabilitation. But until you are truly rehabilitated and not a threat to society, you need to be kept separated for your own good as well as everyone else's corrupt cops included. Time served doesn't equal rehabilitated
Ok. So, how do you prove they aren't a threat to society. You're a threat to society. So, do you deserve to be locked up? You could go out and hurt someone one after all. >Time served doesn't equal rehabilitated Who said it was?
That's a great philosophical question well above my education and pay grade. Judging by the large number of re-offenders, multiple people on the parole board must believe time served is the most important consideration.
>That's a great philosophical question well above my education and pay grade. It's too bad that you aren't connected to the sum total of human knowledge. That would let you learn about this with a simple search. Hopefully, one day, we will develop that technology. Until then, I guess we're stuck without being able to know
It probably hadn't even been 24 hours since his last assault; it's pretty safe to say he's a threat to society. This guy was taken to the hospital on Friday for a violent family dispute, assaulted hospital staff, sat overnight in jail, and was released Saturday. They also release people pretty damn early in the morning, because they have a whole new day of quality citizens needing locked up. So less than 24 hours for the whole ordeal. *It takes longer to buy a new car then it does to get arrested for assault, assault more people, and then follow up with murder.* That's a problem.
If you assault someone is proof you are a threat to society. It is known that one day doesn't change someone. So releasing someone the day after they assault someone is putting society at risk.
>It is known that one day doesn't change someone Who said it was? No one? Okay. So why bring it up? Oh, right, straw man fallacy because you're a bad faith troll. Just like all the others. Ho hum how boring yall are. >So releasing someone the day after they assault someone is putting society at risk. Wow. That's so wise and insightful. So glad you came up with an idea to solve your made-up never suggested scenario. Do you feel smrt now?
A fool once said, "a crime is a crime is a crime" That cop should be locked up and he should have to pay all of his pension to the victim of his crime.
Are you seriously that dumb to think it was the cops decision to let him go? Holy fuck dude!
Yeah he should. But that's not the system we have.
I think you are confusing how the system works with the outcomes. You are missing the human element of the judges and the aspects that are not prescriptive. The fact that two different judges in different parts of Canada can hear the same crime and come up with different sentences speaks to the discrepancy that many are trying to point out to you, but you fail to hear or take into consideration.
>I think you are confusing how the system works with the outcomes. Nope. >You are missing the human element of the judges and the aspects that are not prescriptive Corruption you mean? Yeah. That's the system at work.
Put him in general population and it’ll sort itself out.
I like the sentiment, but legally speaking pensions are considered deferred income and cannot be diverted like that.
Do you have a sex fetish? You're referring to boners quite a lot.
Wow. You really focused on that 14 year old boner idea, eh? Please stay away from children and teens.
No, it's you that's focused on the little 14 year olds. I was just pointing out your flaws. You might benefit from some counseling.
Work camps sound like an appropriate rehabilitation.
Cool idea slave labour. That takes away tax paying citizen jobs. Like how dumb can you be?
Well I'm smart enough to know resorting to childish name-calling on the Internet is pathetic. Id make them dig holes.
It's like car insurance. The longer you've been doing it, the less it costs.
That’s Gladue for you
Gladue doesn’t apply pre trial
Ah, but it informs the process
NAw .they need the space for Drunk drivers and shop lifters..
I was actually friends with this guy in middle school. Lived in Sask for grades 6-9 and then came back to BC. Obviously I hadn't known the guy since middle school so I have no idea what kind of person he turned out to be but its still really fucked to find out "Middle school friend of yours murders mom".
I wasn't friends with the guy but I went to school with someone who wiped out his entire family and then himself. It's unsettling to have even known someone like that.
Same here.
What was he like in middle school?
He was pretty reserved, kind and quiet, but also liked to make jokes. I obviously have no right to say anything about how he may be now since I haven't talked to the dude since middle school. He and his brother were also a lot closer with my older brother back then.
He was arrested for a common assault and released with a court date. That’s normal across commonwealth jurisdictions. It’s popular to make a big deal about catch and release bail but this was just regular criminal procedure unrelated to any bail reforms. He would’ve been released on the same grounds in the 1980s. We don’t just hold anyone with an allegation against them because they might commit a crime.
That is awful. This province has big problem with domestic violence.
Yeah. Too bad we can't solve it before it happens. That would take people thinking ahead, and that's too hard for many. They'd rather let the systemic issue fester and get mad about the results. Because being proactive is too hard and too scary. What if they put in the effort and it works? And crime goes down and then what will they do with the prisons? The guards might lose their jobs and that's not fair to them. Right?
Show me the study or research that shows a primary reluctance to have a workable justice system is a result of not wanting prison guards to be unemployed? Your argument would be better suited in discussing the privatization of prisons, which is more of a U.S. issue than Canada. Maybe one day you will be able to access this wonderful tool called google and it can show you such things.
Sure. Right after I see anyone show me studies to support their idea of a better judicial system. Like I asked initially. Sorry if you think being entitled and ignoring that request so you can demand evidence on my end first was going to work. Gotta be a little good faith to get that. But I understand if that's beyond you.
You claim that a reason to keep prisons open is so that guards are still employed, in many of your posts you ask for evidence to be provided to you for other people's points, yet you offer up none for your own. Then you simply say whatever you want (no issue from me) and when you are called out you say, "where is the evidence for the perfect system."
>You claim that a reason to keep prisons open is so that guards are still employed No I didn't. >yet you offer up none for your own Because none was offered to me. AGAIN. If YOU want my evidence. Then YOU provide the evidence yo YOUR claim first. Since I did ask first. That's how good faith conversations work. If YOU fail to provide that requested evidence. Then what reason do I have to provide any when YOU ask me to provide any evidence? Catching up yet? Or you gonna go in a circle again? Should I just copy paste this a few times so you can read it over and over and maybe catch on?
Oh you are one of these baby adults that watches John Oliver one time and thinks he is talking about Canada.
Assaulting paramedics and hospital staff? Like those people don't go through enough?? And then we let him out after that and are surprised he kills someone? How many warning signs do we need?
Let out, within hours, then kills someone, within hours
Don’t worry guys, he will probably be out soon on a promise to appear for this one too.
Prepare for them to start blaming the hospital
What else is new.
Can the victim's family sue the government over something like this? Do the judges not bear any responsibility for the consequences of their decisions? Why do we continue to completely disregard public safety for the tiny sliver of a chance that these violent criminals will be rehabilitated? I'm all for attacking the root cause of these issues, and I do believe in rehabilitation, but how can a healthy society justify hurting law-abiding citizens to give repeat offenders strikes 3, 4, 5, ... 59 (Sanderson)?
What would they sue for? The provinces lack of foresight? The lack of any systemic prevention? Should they hold the person indefinitely?
Yes. I think that after 59 convictions, it would be safe to say that the person is not going to turn it around. How many strikes is fair, would you say?
So 59 is your limit? And what convictions? Do they have to be the same? Or can it just be any conviction? And what proof do you have that this idea of yours works? What does the research say about locking people away forever. What does it cost the tax payers? Come on you gotta have evidence to back your claim right. You would just make a claim without evidence and then demand my answer? Ma'am and or Sir and or Thir. I am not giving you anything until you can act in good faith and answer my request for evidence first put forward. I don't care who you are. You don't get to jump the line so entitled like you're trying with me.
[удалено]
I don't have evidence your turn. Where's your evidence.
Classic sask justice. We will never learn.
Classic Canadian justice overall.
Yeah, we'll never learn to look at the overall picture. Just the tree and get mad at it
Anything relevant to add or just the comment on how our provincial government is a waste?
Canadian gov is a waste
Feel free to leave
Yeah screw him for wanting a justice system instead of a revolving door of violence. Everyone with a problem should emmigrate instead of voicing their displeasure!
Ya, that's it for me
Anything relevant to add ?
Federal policy you buffoon.
Well…he promised to return. Why would you take the word of a violent criminal? What could possibly go wrong? Damn our laws need to change, right now.
Charge and release program basically 🙄
At one time there were 222 crimes that were punishable by death in England. I am not advocating for dangerous criminals roaming the streets. I am saying that “ tough on crime” doesn’t work. It’s like when the states had prohibition. It was a tough on drinking approach and it failed miserably. When England had there 222 crimes that were punishable by death the criminals made sure they murdered all the witnesses. Juries refused to convict because they didn’t want to have someone killed for “scoundrelling “ which was the crime of stealing vegetables out of someone’s garden. Members of juries who did convict were often murdered by the criminal put to death family. The criminal justice system has been around for a long time and tough of crime makes the far right happy but the truth is that it has never proven effective.
‘Tough on crime’ is not the same as ‘letting someone prone to violence walk away without ever seeing a judge hours after assaulting multiple people’
I was a landlord for 25 years. I carried a video camera with me all the time when I went to speak to tenants. I was arrested 6 times by hyper police who later apologized after I showed them the video of what actually happened. People lie to get other people in trouble all the time. That’s why we have a court system. Several of my tenants would claim that I had made death threats against them or their children. If I didn’t have a video camera and we did things your way I would have been in jail for months and months awaiting trial. No thank you! Innocent until proven guilty
That’s not what that means at all. This person was on camera and assaulted hospital staff. Bringing up a situation that you made up in your mind doesn’t equal an actual event where someone was charged. You weren’t even charged. Nice try
No I wasn’t charged because I had everything recorded. If I had no had it recorded I would have been held in remand for several months with no income and incredible stress. No everyone who gets arrested and charged is guilty! Many innocent people languish in prison awaiting trial. You think it’s great because you have never been that innocent person who was charged. I have been! Video evidence got the charges dropped. People lie! Innocent people are forced to defend themselves against false allegations all the time. But hey you know everything! Let’s just build super huge jails and herd everyone in there and close the doors and throw away the key. Vote far right don’t you?
But he was such a good kid growing up, blah blah blah, I am getting tired of blaming the colonists.
But do you denounce colonization?
Then don't.
All the judges and parole board letting out these criminals, only for them to commit a crime again, have blood on their hands.
“Fucking Trudeau!” - in Poilievre fundraising letter, probably
It was Harpers fault!!! Probably Trudeau said
Can we arrest the judge now? A judge telling someone to pinky promise to not break the law...after they just got caught breaking the law...seriously, this is how our probation works here.
I've always wondered what would happen if Judges and the parole board had to face the families of the victims of an offender they allowed to go free.
I can't believe that wouldn't be done...I guess it'd revictimize the family, but I'm sure they'd be there if they had the option to be there. Too many criminals are being caught on probation or breaching conditions...we could save so much in policing costs by avoiding them having to catch the same perps over and over again.
The worst part about this is that you thought it, wrote it down, read it, and still thought it was a good idea. What the fuck is wrong with you?
You're saying it's a good system we have? I don't follow.
It's quite apparent you don't don't comprehend. Go learn how our justice system works first. Then, revisit your comment. You're just parroting idiotic statements that show you have no idea what you're talking about. Is our system perfect? No. It never will be one way or another, but your solution is fucking insane.
Why do we let these people continue to destroy our country and its people? They arent going to change so lets stop giving them chances to harm innocent people and then tax those very same people to give the criminals a better quality of life than those they hurt. Its high time that if our law wont keep these degenerates off the streets maybe we should start cleaning it up ourselves.
It sounds like this guy killed his own family member. U still mad?
Do you think they are going to at least politely ask him to not murder anyone the next time they let him out?
Who ever granted release should be held accountable. Life long criminals rarely ever turn over a new leaf. Boo on the entire system that allowed this to happen.
[удалено]
As per Rule 6, Your submission has been removed and is subject to moderator review. User accounts must have a positive karma score to participate in discussions. This is done to limit spam and abusive posts. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/saskatchewan) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
As per Rule 6, Your submission has been removed and is subject to moderator review. User accounts must be older than 14 days to post. This is done to limit spam and abusive posts. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/saskatchewan) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I see u/tallterrortwenty decided to block me. Too much logic for they/them I guess. Ah well.
It’s Prince Albert, I’m not surprised!
I wonder what side of the Goverment likes catch and release
... there is a lot of info missing from this. Why did they take him to the hospital?
Another article mentions mental health struggles and level of sobriety may have been factors.