Crime & Punishment

[fvkasm2x]

Besides, the “bullets are cheaper than jail” responses save us time in identifying what level of knowledge some folk have – noting with some interest that those who know the least about certain issues often have the strongest opinions on them.

Disagree 100%

I have 3 degrees. I work in the system with mental health recidivists. Bullets are definitely cheaper than jail and a method I'd fully endorse, even if it meant I'd be out of work. I know more about the system than 99% of the people here... and there is no way you can question my knowledge or experience

[whatwhat]

^^ It's actually super easy to question your knowledge or experience anoymous stranger on the Internet. Because you are an anoymous stranger on the interent, there is literally no way for anyone to check your knowledge or experince. Unless you decide to out yourself, but as someone who openly wants to kill his/her clients I doubt they will happen.

[Queen K]

Disagree 100%

I have 3 degrees. I work in the system with mental health recidivists. Bullets are definitely cheaper than jail and a method I'd fully endorse, even if it meant I'd be out of work. I know more about the system than 99% of the people here... and there is no way you can question my knowledge or experience

Unfortunately Whatwhat is right, super easy to question someone on the internet about what they claim for themselves.

fvkasm2x, you go back a long ways on this forum and I do not remember you posting anything remotely like this. My question to you is, are you getting very comfortable with this idea that putting people down is the best solution? And how comfortable?

See, there is this thing in nursing called the "angel of mercy" syndrome where nurses, RNs and LPNs alike, put down their patients apparently without remorse.

I'm actually worried about you.

[fvkasm2x]

fvkasm2x, you go back a long ways on this forum and I do not remember you posting anything remotely like this. My question to you is, are you getting very comfortable with this idea that putting people down is the best solution? And how comfortable?

See, there is this thing in nursing called the "angel of mercy" syndrome where nurses, RNs and LPNs alike, put down their patients apparently without remorse.

I'm actually worried about you.

Ha ha. I am fine. I've simply grown tired of the system wasting time, money and resources on people who don't even try or who are incapable of trying.

Perhaps I never posted anything like this, because back then I was optimistic and looking to help people before I actually saw how bad it is? Not sure, as it's not like I was ever a super nice and kind person to being with... but it's probably a fair bet to say I've become a bit jaded.

As I mentioned in another thread... when you see the same person off and on for 4 years, who you constantly try to help and who is afforded so many things that others are not and they still keep relapsing, going to jail, hurting friends, family and even strangers... it can definitely drag you down. If it was just one person... you could probably just write them off and move on to someone else, but when it's literally almost every person you encounter and try to help, it kind of shines a new light on your way of thinking.

^^ It's actually super easy to question your knowledge or experience anoymous stranger on the Internet. Because you are an anoymous stranger on the interent, there is literally no way for anyone to check your knowledge or experince. Unless you decide to out yourself, but as someone who openly wants to kill his/her clients I doubt they will happen.

Fair enough. Some people on the forums know me personally and have met me and I've been around here for 9 years now, and others know enough to not question my credientials... (although I was absent from here for about 4 years) so I guess I forget that some of you may not know me.

But please don't put words in my mouth. I don't openly want to kill my clients. I said they'd be better off dead and there should be a death penalty... not that I am personally going to murder them. But consider what I deal with and then think of society. Think of your family. Please, read the brief news story below.

http://cnews.canoe.com/CNEWS/Crime/2015 ... 69121.html

I had the pleasure of dealing with this "young man" last year. He's fairly severe FASD. He raped a 6 year old girl. Beat her almost death and left her unconscious in a snow bank to die. He has no remorse for what he did. The only good thing, is that he is 100% guilty and has openly said he did it. He just doesn't really grasp how bad of a thing he did. Hopefully she will recover, but knowing what happened and where she is from... I highly doubt it.

This is the kind of person I have to deal with and this is the kind of person I speak of when I say the world would be better off without them.

[Queen K]

Yes, it is horrible. Worse than that right.

Some of us have the pleasure to help and assist people who tell us horrible things about themselves. Or their adult children tell us what mom and dad used to do to them. And we still have to treat them respectfully as clients.

We all have to deal with crappy people. Remorseless monsters sometimes. I ask a lot of questions all time, why do wonderful people die early with loving families crying their eyes out and monsters live and live and live.

[fvkasm2x]

And we still have to treat them respectfully as clients.

I always do. Not one person I work with would ever hear me say something like what I've posted here. It's not appropriate in our environment, unless of course you're just making dark humor.

I give everyone 100%, even though they probably don't deserve it. I work hard and do a good job.

[Queen K]

Deserve is a concept foriegn to the human services industry.

[Rosemary1]

Castanet is a forum . Polls and questions get people thinking and share their thoughts and opinions on bigger scales - as you can see with posts. Just part of the deal here. Not necessarily a bad thing.

[canuck2245]

You voted for Justin so dont complain. Harpers tough on crime policies had some bite but JT is slowly reversing them. For example Harper had abolished the "2 for 1" for time served that allowed Snelson and others early release but Its back now. You Liberals made your bed, now sleep in it. Idiots.

[my5cents]

You voted for Justin so dont complain. Harpers tough on crime policies had some bite but JT is slowly reversing them. For example Harper had abolished the "2 for 1" for time served that allowed Snelson and others early release but Its back now. You Liberals made your bed, now sleep in it. Idiots.

I believe the Supreme Court made that decision, not the Liberals

[Ka-El]

Harpers tough on crime policies had some bite but JT is slowly reversing them. For example Harper had abolished the "2 for 1" for time served that allowed Snelson and others early release but Its back now.

Tough on crime policies are great when you don’t want to actually impact rates of crime but are prepared to ineffectively waste huge amounts in tax dollars in convincing uninformed and uninterested in becoming informed voters to believe you’re the guy. Harper wasn’t the guy. Just another reason he was turfed.

Tough on crime” or “smart on crime”? That is the question. “Tough on crime” is a policy buzzword that is regularly bandied about to secure elections and appointments1 and (ostensibly) to protect the public at large2 from unknown and innumerable criminal elements. However, despite all the promises of a safer society, “tough on crime” initiatives have been spectacular disappointments. Society is being tough on crime when it should actually be getting smart on crime.

https://www.nacdl.org/champion.aspx?id=24521

The need to keep Canadians safe with ―get tough on crime‖ policies is not supported by statistical information on crime rates, which shows that crime has been declining over the past decade, or by Canadians‘ perceptions of well-being and safety.

<snip>

Crime prevention activities require long-term investments before results in the reduction of crime and victimization are visible, but governments are impatient to show their responsiveness to tragic situations and must be seen to be taking action and, in the case of the Harper government, acting on election promises to keep Canadians safe. Tough-on-crime policies are not, in themselves, effective at reducing the crime rate; they do serve, however, to feed off the public‘s anxiety and mood for more punitive measures. The real costs of getting tough on crime extend beyond government spending to impacts on individuals, families and communities. Long-term results need longer-term solutions to prevent crime and victimization.

http://jppal.journals.yorku.ca/index.ph ... 4373/31270

Research clearly shows that mandatory minimums don’t deter crime. People don’t stop before they use a gun and think, oh, if I do this, I am going to get three years automatically in jail. Even the government’s own research shows this.

http://www.prisonjustice.ca/downloads/t ... rticle.pdf

“Our criminal justice policies have failed to effectively reduce crime and recidivism; they have needlessly placed hundreds of thousands of individuals at risk of criminal victimization each year, ”

http://thecrimereport.org/2015/06/09/20 ... me-failed/

Being tough on criminals isn't akin to being tough on crime – and perhaps being focused on being tough on criminals is in effect to be soft on crime

http://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/opinion ... gh-rethink

Easy to find more research on the topic for anyone interested in actually informing themselves.

[my5cents]

I would suggest that we don't need to conduct research. We have a VERY large (by population) country just to the South of us, who has failed miserably in the Crime & Punishment department.

All we have to do is govern our system based on what they have done. That is don't do anything they're doing.

Longer sentences
Mandatory minimums
Return to the death penalty

We do need some work on violent criminals though.

[fvkasm2x]

I would suggest that we don't need to conduct research. We have a VERY large (by population) country just to the South of us, who has failed miserably in the Crime & Punishment department.

All we have to do is govern our system based on what they have done. That is don't do anything they're doing.

Longer sentences
Mandatory minimums
Return to the death penalty

We do need some work on violent criminals though.

If everything was in a bubble, sure... that point would have merit.

But the biggest contribution to their crime statistics is a society full of excess, me me me, no manners/morals and tons of other problematic societal concerns.

Tough on crime policies aren't contributing to the crime rate... crappy people are.

[Ka-El]

Tough on crime policies aren't contributing to the crime rate... crappy people are.

Life without parole for pot. Just denied clemency

Ferrell Scott was sentenced to life in prison for possession and conspiracy to distribute marijuana, a drug that’s now legal in many states and turning a handsome profit for the (primarily white) pot industry. Scott, like many nonviolent drug offenders serving long sentences, is black. Without any chance at parole, despite an exemplary behavior record, he appealed to President Obama for clemency. He found out that his bid for clemency had been denied when he got an email about “bad news” from a friend.

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/he- ... id=SL5MDHP

I don’t know about you but I sure feel safer

[my5cents]

...........Tough on crime policies aren't contributing to the crime rate... crappy people are.

I suspect your comment had a large element of flippancy in it, however, I think you are correct. Perhaps the term "crappy people" could be reworked but I get the idea.

The question, though, is : "What makes crappy people ?" That is what has to be addressed.

I suggest when a group of people feel there are no viable legal means of improving their lives, some look to illegal means. Some give up and live in squalor, others give up and self medicate.

As a society we have to provide avenues for all to obtain the tools to succeed.

All old phrase "give a man a fish and he can feed himself for a day, teach the man to fish and he can provide for himself forever" has a lot of merit.

Looking at a problem globally, makes it seem insurmountable, even by country, so lets look at this province.

Can we agree, the one main difference between the "haves" and the "have nots", is education (over simplification I know). Basically that is the biggest.

Yes, it may be that uneducated people who have little or no means to support themselves, have children, who are raised in the same environment and the problem perpetuates itself.

So for starters lets look at our BC education system. What has our wonderful provincial government just gone through for 10 years ? Trying (and succeeding until the courts stepped in) to allow the deterioration of our school system by cutting budgets, increasing the ratio or teachers to students. The government didn't even change their ways when they were told by the courts. They continued to fight the education system (with our money) for a decade.

Now, what is one of the hallmarks of an expensive private education system ? Low ratio of teachers to students, just look at any web site of any private school.

Now, where do you think our premier's child goes to school ?

How can a province, put on such events as Expo '86, the Winter Olympics, when it hasn't dealt with it's own people in various forms of need ?

Isn't it like a successful, wealthy, entrepreneur building a palatial home, buying expensive luxuries, while his widowed mother lives in squalor on welfare ?

We need some programs to help people help themselves. Some in the meantime may need immediate TEMPORARY help to get on their feet, but hand outs aren't the solution.

In our province we have two basic parties. One helps themselves and their rich friends to stay that way and puts on periodic world class displays "look at us" at tax payer's expense. The other wants to give free housing and food to those who haven't the ability to provide for themselves, with little or no plans for providing a means for those who need help to become successful.

Even now, there is one segment of the population that we actually could control and show them the way to success. Those in prisons. Change that system to a literal "Corrections System" vs a "Prison System".

You have a dog, who misbehaves, so your solution is to just put it in a cage with other misbehaving dogs for a few months, no remedial training, then let it out and see if it improved ? Really ?