NationStates Region: The Library
 
HomeHome  FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  
Due to issues with this forum and dislike of this forum, we've moved! Please join us at:http://library.taijitu.org/! Smile Thanks so much! -The Admin Team

Share | 
 

 Canada's Not So Great, Liberal Americans..

Go down 
AuthorMessage
Oliver
Admin
avatar

Posts : 149
Join date : 2011-09-19

PostSubject: Canada's Not So Great, Liberal Americans..   Mon Oct 03, 2011 9:43 pm

Back to top Go down
http://nsthelibrary.canadian-forum.com
PASD

avatar

Posts : 32
Join date : 2011-10-02
Age : 28
Location : PA

PostSubject: Re: Canada's Not So Great, Liberal Americans..   Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:30 pm

Back to top Go down
http://twitter.com/mjportash
Guy

avatar

Posts : 11
Join date : 2011-10-04
Location : Melbourne, Australia. Usually. Not now.

PostSubject: Re: Canada's Not So Great, Liberal Americans..   Tue Oct 04, 2011 10:21 am

If you actually look up what the Act does, it increases the minimum sentences, while maintaining the high maximum sentences.

Here in Victoria, the Crimes Act 1958 does not set any minimum sentences (for any offence), despite setting very lengthy (maximum) sentences for sexual offences. The 2005 (I think?) amendment of the Crimes Act which dealt with sexual offences was hailed by women's rights groups.

This is just pure sensationalism by the media. Minimum sentences are pretty useless.
Back to top Go down
Oliver
Admin
avatar

Posts : 149
Join date : 2011-09-19

PostSubject: Re: Canada's Not So Great, Liberal Americans..   Tue Oct 04, 2011 10:28 am

Guy wrote:
This is just pure sensationalism by the media. Minimum sentences are pretty useless.

Minimum sentences are pretty useless; judicial discretion should generally be the way to go. The article is rather explicit in its reference to minimum sentences. It's somewhat sensationalistic, but the topic is rather sensational. Why are even the minimums so discordant from reasonable reality? There's no reason for that. While it might be unlikely that a person who rapes a child would get a lesser sentence than a person who grew some pot, putting a higher minimum on pot suggests that pot is more important. It's still disgusting, and it's still going to result in a huge increase in the weight put on our prison system; something America has shown to have serious long-term issues.
Back to top Go down
http://nsthelibrary.canadian-forum.com
Guy

avatar

Posts : 11
Join date : 2011-10-04
Location : Melbourne, Australia. Usually. Not now.

PostSubject: Re: Canada's Not So Great, Liberal Americans..   Tue Oct 04, 2011 10:34 am

What I don't like is that this is only being noticed when Harper's crime-bill makes the news, while it actually increases those minimum sentences.

Of course child-abuse and rape is much worse than growing some pot, and I hope anyone should be able to notice that regardless of the minimum sentences. Personally I don't think anyone who uses or grows pot for personal use should be prosecuted at all; whereas child abusers and rapists of course very much should be. I still don't see how the minimum sentences would change anything.

I'm not justifying the difference, rather saying it seems to me like a big deal is being made out of nothing.
Back to top Go down
Oliver
Admin
avatar

Posts : 149
Join date : 2011-09-19

PostSubject: Re: Canada's Not So Great, Liberal Americans..   Tue Oct 04, 2011 11:00 am

Guy wrote:
What I don't like is that this is only being noticed when Harper's crime-bill makes the news, while it actually increases those minimum sentences.

It increases minimum sentences for sex offenders, yes, but also imposes minimum sentences which weren't there before for growers of marijuana, and puts the minimum sentences on a similar scale with the sex offenders. I'm not angry about the one-year minimum for sex offenders (except on principle, as I think judicial discretion is a better way to handle these things), but I am angry about the manner in which the marijuana growers are being treated here. The comparison of minimum sentences is just that; a comparison, designed to illustrate the sorts of crimes that carry similar minimum sentences.
Back to top Go down
http://nsthelibrary.canadian-forum.com
Guy

avatar

Posts : 11
Join date : 2011-10-04
Location : Melbourne, Australia. Usually. Not now.

PostSubject: Re: Canada's Not So Great, Liberal Americans..   Tue Oct 04, 2011 2:24 pm

Right, so it's a pot-debate.

In which case you know my opinion. Razz
Back to top Go down
Earth

avatar

Posts : 154
Join date : 2011-09-22
Age : 23
Location : Floooorida.

PostSubject: Re: Canada's Not So Great, Liberal Americans..   Tue Oct 04, 2011 4:32 pm

I agree with Oliver on this one. It's the comparison that's, well, rather stupid.

Pot growers <<<< Child molesters.

And yes, pot should be legal and all that fun jazz.
Back to top Go down
Skizzy Grey

avatar

Posts : 30
Join date : 2011-10-06

PostSubject: Re: Canada's Not So Great, Liberal Americans..   Thu Oct 06, 2011 10:01 am

Guy wrote:
What I don't like is that this is only being noticed when Harper's crime-bill makes the news, while it actually increases those minimum sentences.

I thought that was clear from the article. (I know nothing about the Canadian proposal besides what's in the linked article and the discussion here.) I think the issue is one of priorities -- the author contends that if you believe the minimum sentence for a pot grower should be longer than the minimum sentence for a pedophile, your priorities are f--ked up.

Reasonable people can disagree with that. While no decent person has any use for pedophiles, I think the author implies that people who grow 200+ plants are akin to the sort of people we all know who smoke a ton of weed, and may even grow a handful of plants, but harm no one but (perhaps) themselves. In reality, people growing 200+ plants are almost certainly deeply connected with organized crime of one flavor or another. I still think it's wrongheaded to send them to jail for longer than pedophiles (and it's reasonable to assume that a longer minimum sentence on the books will result in longer average sentences in practice), but I don't have any sympathy for them -- and I don't think Canada is wrong to want to lock up these people.

Edit: Oh yes, I'm pro-legalization as well. As long as drugs are illegal, however, drug trafficking will be the lifeblood of organized crime, as illegal gambling once was.
Back to top Go down
Peaceful Llamas

avatar

Posts : 27
Join date : 2011-10-06
Age : 23
Location : Ottawa

PostSubject: We can put titles on posts? Weird   Thu Oct 06, 2011 6:19 pm

Ah yes, the crime bill. Crime rates falling? Increase sentences and prison sizes! Short on cash? Build more prisons? Need the scared old white people vote? Build more prisons... Oh wait, that one makes sense.

Ugh. Suspect

Putting people in prison should be avoided when possible. Because prisons tend to just make criminals worse.

Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Canada's Not So Great, Liberal Americans..   

Back to top Go down
 
Canada's Not So Great, Liberal Americans..
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» MOTUC Great Unrest Weapons Pack Zoar eagle
» The Great Santini - Bathroom scene
» The greatest secret of Bobby Fischer
» The great challenge of the 8-bit.
» Ideas that will; blow your mind!

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
The Library :: Multimedia and Culture Centre :: Marlowe Community Centre-
Jump to: