|
“Seriously guys...”
Since: May 12
The 'Shwa
|
Please wait...
Judged:
1
The system isn't too lax. There's just too many liberal pinhead judges that have bought into the mantra that all a criminal needs is a cookie, a hug and some words of encouragment and they'll set themselves straight.
|
|
Janice
Ottawa, Canada
|
THe crime rate is up ask any criminologist! DId you know that ottawa has 600 ethnic gangs??
|
Since: Jul 12
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Janice wrote: THe crime rate is up ask any criminologist! DId you know that ottawa has 600 ethnic gangs?? I agree that the general crime rate is down. However, I am unclear about this, because the murder rate has by far gone up! What does this mean???
|
|
Since: Jul 12
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
The Canadian system is kinda pathetic. It lets crooks off way too easy. The government should probably reinstate the death penalty again.
|
|
steve
Whitby, Canada
|
Someone forgot to tell the citizens of Toronto
|
|
ShanghaiSenator
Sendai, Japan
|
Judged:
1
I don't believe for a second that the crime rate is falling. I think it just seems lower because people have come to realize that law enforcement and the legal system are useless, so they aren't even bothering to report a lot of crimes.
|
|
simple solution
Toronto, Canada
|
|
|
Since: Aug 12
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
I have to disagree. Anyone foolish enough to commit a crime in Canada is going to pay a heavy price by spending time in our penal system. Once the judge sentences you to 20 years in jail, you'd better prepare for a harrowing life of free room and board, free dental care, free clothing, free medical care, free heating, free air conditioning, free education, free gymnasium facility, free television, free library, free conjugal visitation, free criminal training from seasoned inmates, etc. etc.. And when you're paroled 1 year after your 20 year term began, you'll vow never to go back to jail again.
|
|
|
|
Since: Jul 12
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
Hellywood wrote: The only crime statistic that has gone up in the last 10 years is Hate Crimes. We are now keeping an eye on Chad, Mike and Uncle Buck. Prove it! I want statistical evidence. Or STFU!
|
|
“Seriously guys...”
Since: May 12
The 'Shwa
|
Please wait...
Hellywood wrote: The crime rate is down and has been going down for over 20 years. Angry White rural bigots will have you believe it is going up to entice you to blame racialized people, especially "Black" men. No one intelligent believes in your wonky fake racist statistics anymore Canadian KKK. The VIOLENT crime rate has been going down for more than 20 years. However, PROPERTY crimes have increased. But it's no surprise with your limited intellectual capacity and intellectual dishonesty that you'd leave that part out. And here's the "funny" part, most violent crime in Canada is not racially motivated. Much of it is White on White, Black on Black and Asian on Asian. With all the strawmen you like to build, your mother's kennel must be runnng low.
|
|
“Seriously guys...”
Since: May 12
The 'Shwa
|
Please wait...
PURELYCANADIAN wrote: <quoted text>
Prove it! I want statistical evidence. Or STFU! His pulls his "facts" from the Encyclopaedia Imbecilica, or as it is colloquially known, his ass.
|
|
no mercy
Toronto, Canada
|
I have read about a lot of home invasions so far this year- these low life subhuman scums of the earth do not deserve a second chance and should be put to death,if only the death penalty was still around.
|
|
Since: Aug 12
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
I don't mind if criminals are simply jailed rather than being put to death for their crimes.(I should point out that I am a proponent of capital punishment as most Canadians are. Unfortunately, the politicians we elect refuse to reinstate capital punishment, believing that those of us who wish to return to such a savage practice are uncivilized barbarians.) However it does bother me when a vicious criminal who has committed an extremely heinous crime is sentenced to 20 years in jail and then a year or two later is declared "no longer a threat to society" by a panel of experts. That criminal is then, with little or no notice or fanfare, released back into the midst of an unsuspecting public where, all too often, some innocent soul pays the price for the misguided optimism of the panel of "experts". I'd be a lot more comfortable with early releases if it became law that any criminal released early by a panel of experts must move into a house next door to the "head expert" of the panel that decided the subject criminal was no longer a threat to society. I have a feeling that early releases of violent offenders who have been "cured" would decrease to zero within weeks of the passage of such a law.
|
|
no mercy
Toronto, Canada
|
so there was another home invasion- when are we going to change the stupid "reasonable force" laws- if someone breaks into your house you should have the right to kill them- none of this reasonable force bullshit. How can we be safe in our own homes when we have to worry about breaking the law by going beyond reasonable force- and it's a thin line between that and getting charged yourself- which would be ridiculous. This is one area in which we could learn something from America- at least they allow you to protect your home.
|
|
Since: Aug 12
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
no mercy wrote: so there was another home invasion- when are we going to change the stupid "reasonable force" laws- if someone breaks into your house you should have the right to kill them- none of this reasonable force bullshit. How can we be safe in our own homes when we have to worry about breaking the law by going beyond reasonable force- and it's a thin line between that and getting charged yourself- which would be ridiculous. This is one area in which we could learn something from America- at least they allow you to protect your home. It is a very confusing situation for law abiding citizens when someone breaks into their home. Do they have the right to shoot this intruder who has chosen to forcibly enter their home in the middle of the night or must they first make sure that the intruder is not armed? If they must first find out if the intruder is armed, how do they go about doing that? Should they ask? If they ask, then do they run the risk of alerting the invader to their location so that he may then pull out his gun and shoot them? If the intruder begins shooting at them, do they then have the right to shoot back without being charged with murder if they are lucky and are able to shoot the invader before he shoots them? Would the home owner be wiser to try and just wound the invader so that they will only be charged with wounding rather than with murder? If the wounded home invader is not wounded badly enough that he’s unable to move and he starts shooting back at the home owner, does the home owner then have the right to shoot to kill the home invader? If, while the home owner is trying to decide whether he has the right to kill the home invader, the wounded home invader shoots and kills the home owner, and one of the home owners family members is present at the scene, does the home owner’s family member then have the right to shoot and kill the home invader, or should the family member first give the home invader an opportunity to surrender before shooting him? If the home owner does shoot the home invader and it turns out that he shouldn’t have because the home invader had a troubled, deprived childhood and was not loved by his parents, and is therefore found not guilty of any crime, must the home owner then, in addition to going to jail for shooting the poor home invader, also pay the poor home invader’s hospital bill? If the home invader rapes and shoots several of the home owner’s family members and the home owner arrives home from work and catches the home invader in the act, does he have the right to shoot the home invader without first warning him that he is on private property, breaking the law and will be shot if he does not cease and desist immediately? As you can see, it’s a slippery slope for homeowners when they find a criminal breaking into their home in the dark of night. You cannot just assume that that person is there to break the law. He may be there for perfectly legitimate reasons and you have no right to shoot the poor soul before you establish what his intentions are. Don’t forget, as a law abiding citizen who is the victim of a crime in Canada, all of your rights as a victim are subordinated to the rights of the criminal so always ensure that you don’t violate the criminal’s rights.
|
|
no mercy
Toronto, Canada
|
Hartwick wrote: <quoted text>It is a very confusing situation for law abiding citizens when someone breaks into their home.
Do they have the right to shoot this intruder who has chosen to forcibly enter their home in the middle of the night or must they first make sure that the intruder is not armed?
If they must first find out if the intruder is armed, how do they go about doing that? Should they ask? If they ask, then do they run the risk of alerting the invader to their location so that he may then pull out his gun and shoot them?
If the intruder begins shooting at them, do they then have the right to shoot back without being charged with murder if they are lucky and are able to shoot the invader before he shoots them?
Would the home owner be wiser to try and just wound the invader so that they will only be charged with wounding rather than with murder?
If the wounded home invader is not wounded badly enough that he’s unable to move and he starts shooting back at the home owner, does the home owner then have the right to shoot to kill the home invader?
If, while the home owner is trying to decide whether he has the right to kill the home invader, the wounded home invader shoots and kills the home owner, and one of the home owners family members is present at the scene, does the home owner’s family member then have the right to shoot and kill the home invader, or should the family member first give the home invader an opportunity to surrender before shooting him?
If the home owner does shoot the home invader and it turns out that he shouldn’t have because the home invader had a troubled, deprived childhood and was not loved by his parents, and is therefore found not guilty of any crime, must the home owner then, in addition to going to jail for shooting the poor home invader, also pay the poor home invader’s hospital bill?
If the home invader rapes and shoots several of the home owner’s family members and the home owner arrives home from work and catches the home invader in the act, does he have the right to shoot the home invader without first warning him that he is on private property, breaking the law and will be shot if he does not cease and desist immediately?
As you can see, it’s a slippery slope for homeowners when they find a criminal breaking into their home in the dark of night. You cannot just assume that that person is there to break the law. He may be there for perfectly legitimate reasons and you have no right to shoot the poor soul before you establish what his intentions are.
Don’t forget, as a law abiding citizen who is the victim of a crime in Canada, all of your rights as a victim are subordinated to the rights of the criminal so always ensure that you don’t violate the criminal’s rights. I hope you were being sarcastic. You can't actually be saying that someone who breaks into your home could be there for legitimate reasons, are you? What legitimate reason could there be for them breaking into your home?
|
|
Since: Aug 12
Location hidden
|
Please wait...
no mercy wrote: <quoted text>I hope you were being sarcastic. You can't actually be saying that someone who breaks into your home could be there for legitimate reasons, are you? What legitimate reason could there be for them breaking into your home? Of course I was being sarcastic. The problem is, the enquities in our justice system are so absurd that you can only discuss how ridiculous they are in a sarcastic way. Please understand that my earlier comment on this forum was also sarcastic.
|
|
Tell me when this thread is updated:
(Registration is not required)
Add to my Tracker
Send me an email
|
Cancer