Author Topic: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::  (Read 11469 times)

Shwa

  • Member
  • Posts: 501
    • View Profile
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #15 on: March 27, 2008, 06:23:50 AM »
The LOVE of money is the root of all evil.  But when I was referring to what a judge must balance in terms of "costs" I was more or less referring to a balancing the "values" of different crimes in comparison to one another.  ie - what "costs" more to a victim - a sexual assault, assault with a deadly weapon, an amputation, etc.  Death being the highest cost.

I don't believe judges live isolated from society (if thats what you mean by "cocoon") and they have far more contact with the criminal world and it inhabitants than I ever will.  So they must have developed some way to deal with all of this and so we can ask does this coping method have an influence on how they sentence.  Really, it is truly baffling how anyone in their right mind could allow a violent recidivist pedophile out on the streets again.  But the fact is, unless someone can prove that the judge is insane, something informed their decision.  I think we ought to know what that was.

I think the American way is something we should carefully look at - and that is elect judges, warts and all.  In Canada, there tends to be this monopoly on justice by lawyers and law schools and I think this is wrong.  I believe that if judges were held directly accountable for their decisions they would listen more carefully to how the public perceives the costs of crimes against children.

On the other hand, do we want justice based on the wavering opinion or terror of the majority?


Carol-Lynn

  • Guest
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #16 on: March 27, 2008, 07:14:26 AM »
Having been a service provider for over 20 years working the streets massage dancing and a few more things I think we should all have the same rights as anyone alce,Yes even if your a social worker who was raped or held agenst your will.Were is equicle justice in this country.
I do not care if your black white or yellow or pink we all have the right to justice in this counrty and it is sad to see a small group of people trying to take away or rights as humans to freedom and health and saftey.
I am NOT in anyway assamed if anything I have done it has been my choice no one alces.
If anyone person is forced to do anything they do not feel comfortable with then they should have the same rights as anyone alce and charges should be layed with out the fear of shame or discrase.

Shwa

  • Member
  • Posts: 501
    • View Profile
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #17 on: March 27, 2008, 11:40:41 AM »
The 'terror of the majority' is simply a recognized condition that the majority of people (a la democracy)are capable of making awfully big mistakes.  History is littered with such cases, Hitler being one example and some would say, George W. Bush being another.  Even majorities within institutions are capable of making big mistakes that can have negative outcomes in society.

Politicians tend to keep their thumbs on the pulse of society, to determine what their platforms will be.  On the contrary, other than some political affiliation or another, judges do not have to worry about that.  Should they?  Should we say that our judiciary must be elected to reflect the wishes of the majority?

We expect that since we are, as a rule, a pretty level headed people, we expect our judges to be level headed as well.  But who judges the judges?  The ruling political power?  Not likely.  What happens when a judge, whom we expect to be level headed, makes a judgement that is anything but?  Like the case which started this thread.  Or perhaps, our indignation about such things represent the only voices in a silent or ignorant or cowered or indifferent society.  Maybe the "majority" are actually silent on this.  And we all know what silence implies.  How else could this sort of thing happen?  When was the last time a judgment was over-ruled because of public out-cry at a lenient sentence?

To kind of tie in with what Carol-Lynn says, having the same rights as anyone else is what is in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but how well does some of that play out in reality in the public?  When it comes to STWs, well, there is a whole different attitude - so it seems to me - in the public with regard to crimes against STWs.

If there is a whole adult class that is 'less-than' how can we expect a difference in justice for children?  Or folks with disabilities?  And so on.

Lallieth

  • Member
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #18 on: March 27, 2008, 03:07:33 PM »
You wont BELIEVE THIS!

Where I live,is a small country village and in a similiar village not far from mine,a convicted pedo was released least year for time served..Of course the community and police are aware of him,but he was released WITHOUT CONDITIONS!

He was convicted of sexually assaulting his own kids and impregnating his eldest daughter,he has 6 kids.

This guy,who does not have  a lack of money is living with his parents and regularly visits the local schools,where he sits in his car(A BMW by the way),taunts the kids,calls them etc and the police can do NOTHING,because he was released with no conditions imposed on him

The police have to sit in their cars and watch this guy as he looks at them with a smug look on his face.He is pretty much free to come and go as he pleases.Because of his actions,the Crown is trying to get conditions imposed,but it maybe too late,they basically have to wait until he molests another child before they can act

How SAD is that?

Chris

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 7215
  • The Webmaster
    • View Profile
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #19 on: March 28, 2008, 12:44:48 AM »
Knowing  from past performance what kind of lenient sentencing a judge will order, leaves a bad taste in the mouths of the public. 

I've heard that sentiment many times too. Some feel more screwed by the system then the accused.

Chris

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 7215
  • The Webmaster
    • View Profile
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #20 on: March 28, 2008, 12:48:56 AM »
I think the American way is something we should carefully look at - and that is elect judges, warts and all.

I agree with that. Or at the least, have public hearings on the appointment of judges like they do.

What I mean by cacoon is that they are divorced from the reality of the victims. They become so familiar with criminals that they forget there are people counting on the system. Too often they fail.


Chris

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 7215
  • The Webmaster
    • View Profile
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #21 on: March 28, 2008, 12:52:17 AM »
Quote
On the other hand, do we want justice based on the wavering opinion or terror of the majority?

I think society, in Canada, generally, does not tolerate the acts of violence toward its citizens.

Perfectly said. Most people, of all political view points, rich poor middle, man female all despise violence and sex crimes and are looking for solutions including keeping these people locked up. Like 1 or 2 percent of all criminals commit most of the violence in our society.

Rehabiliation requires justice, not leniency.

Chris

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 7215
  • The Webmaster
    • View Profile
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #22 on: March 28, 2008, 12:59:08 AM »
You wont BELIEVE THIS!

Where I live,is a small country village and in a similiar village not far from mine,a convicted pedo was released least year for time served..Of course the community and police are aware of him,but he was released WITHOUT CONDITIONS!

He was convicted of sexually assaulting his own kids and impregnating his eldest daughter,he has 6 kids.

This guy,who does not have  a lack of money is living with his parents and regularly visits the local schools,where he sits in his car(A BMW by the way),taunts the kids,calls them etc and the police can do NOTHING,because he was released with no conditions imposed on him

The police have to sit in their cars and watch this guy as he looks at them with a smug look on his face.He is pretty much free to come and go as he pleases.Because of his actions,the Crown is trying to get conditions imposed,but it maybe too late,they basically have to wait until he molests another child before they can act

How SAD is that?

That is sad! Which province is this in? Who would let a pedo out without conditions? Crap man, this guy is heading back to jail, if he keeps that up he is going to draw community action. This is a failure of the system.

Chris

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 7215
  • The Webmaster
    • View Profile
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #23 on: March 28, 2008, 01:07:35 AM »
The 'terror of the majority' is simply a recognized condition that the majority of people (a la democracy)are capable of making awfully big mistakes.  History is littered with such cases, Hitler being one example and some would say, George W. Bush being another.  Even majorities within institutions are capable of making big mistakes that can have negative outcomes in society.

Politicians tend to keep their thumbs on the pulse of society, to determine what their platforms will be.  On the contrary, other than some political affiliation or another, judges do not have to worry about that.  Should they?  Should we say that our judiciary must be elected to reflect the wishes of the majority?

We expect that since we are, as a rule, a pretty level headed people, we expect our judges to be level headed as well.  But who judges the judges?  The ruling political power?  Not likely.  What happens when a judge, whom we expect to be level headed, makes a judgement that is anything but?  Like the case which started this thread.  Or perhaps, our indignation about such things represent the only voices in a silent or ignorant or cowered or indifferent society.  Maybe the "majority" are actually silent on this.  And we all know what silence implies.  How else could this sort of thing happen?  When was the last time a judgment was over-ruled because of public out-cry at a lenient sentence?

To kind of tie in with what Carol-Lynn says, having the same rights as anyone else is what is in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but how well does some of that play out in reality in the public?  When it comes to STWs, well, there is a whole different attitude - so it seems to me - in the public with regard to crimes against STWs.

If there is a whole adult class that is 'less-than' how can we expect a difference in justice for children?  Or folks with disabilities?  And so on.

Hilter is a very bad example. He rode a wave of anger that was caused by resentment towards the countries that beat Germany in WW1 for there punitive actions (much like the south in the USA was angry for punitive actions the Republicans forced on them after the civil war). Hitler rode that anger and then manipulated that and gave himself dictator powers. That will never happen here.

With Bush, there wre checks and balances. Congress and the Senate. All 3 bodies in agreement had to make the choice to go to war. If that happens, and the minority was on board, it is hard to blame the majority since the minority was in lockstep.

If the majority of Canadians want to see pedophiles and violent people go to prison longer, the minority have ample time to make a case. Canadians are fair, but they are not stupid.

I kind of see it opposite of you. I see the terror of the minority. A small group of people have more influence over the way justice is dispensed in this country then the majority. Canadians are tired of the mentality that they know better then us. They don't.

Just out of curiosity, what do you think Canada should do with violent people and sex criminals?

Shwa

  • Member
  • Posts: 501
    • View Profile
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #24 on: March 28, 2008, 06:31:07 AM »
The reason I used Hitler as an example is to illustrate the power of terror of the majority throughout history.  A population goes along with something they see as "right" when in fact it is very wrong.  By the time your average German took a clue Hitler was a dictator drafting their sons into the army.

The example of Bush is that even checks and balances can be subverted to craft political will.  I mean, on the flip side of the coin was Lincoln who suspended habeas corpus and initiated several controversial drafts for the Union Army in the American Civil War.  Even when the "minority" is on board, they are then considered part of the majority.

The point is that, if there is enough public pressure, laws and processes can be changed.  But we have to always be prudent for what we wish for.

As for minority rule in Canada or the US, that is the result of us being such an institutionalized society.  A long time ago, the communities would take care of their issues through community cooperation until specialization took over and then eventually institutions - which are communities of specialists.  The good thing is that public demonstration is easier when you know which institution to target.

I don't think a small group of people protesting is considered a 'minority.'  They could be the active part of a very large majority.

Shwa

  • Member
  • Posts: 501
    • View Profile
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #25 on: March 28, 2008, 06:40:47 AM »
"Just out of curiosity, what do you think Canada should do with violent people and sex criminals?"

That could be considered a leading question!   ;D  So the only answer I can give is that I think Canada should punish violent people and sex criminals.


Chris

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 7215
  • The Webmaster
    • View Profile
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #26 on: March 28, 2008, 08:12:09 PM »
Quote
The reason I used Hitler as an example is to illustrate the power of terror of the majority throughout history

That is true. There have been a lot of examples of that from the past. That was also in the day when people only knew what they were told. In this day and age, we have access to all sorts of information, being manipulated and tricked just is not going to happen.

Yes, Lincoln did much worse to get his way then Bush\Clinton ever did. Even look at Kennedy\Nixon, that would be unheard of today what they did. And that is the point. Things have improved, even in Canada, no longer are people having to rely on what they are told, they can learn for themselves.

The whole system was birthed as you probably know by Magna Carta in 1215 when the common folk in what is now Great Briton were tired of having a King with unlimited power. From there we got a public justice system. Elected officials. Over time it keeps improving and power is slowly but surely making it's way to the people.

ANd you know what, I agree with what you are saying. I have always felt communities are better equiped to do most governing themselves. This central planning (also known as socialism or communism) where one group of people make all the laws is not effective.  And society has been moving away from that for the most part for years. That peaked in about 1930. Hitlers socialist party is probably why that never became popular, no one wants to go back to that. Stalin and Moi are testiment to that too.

Freedom of speach, a public justice system and democracy are always going to lead to the slow but sure evolution of our way of life. And part of the evolution is ending the cycle of sexual abuse. It was a subject no one talked about, now we do. Our officials are responding. Not out of hate, but a groudswell of frustration and the fact we are more educated about this.

I for one understand your main point and agree. A policy made out of anger or in haste tends to be bad policy. For anyone who wants proof of that just needs to look at BC's new law that people have to pre-pay for gas now.



The reason I used Hitler as an example is to illustrate the power of terror of the majority throughout history.  A population goes along with something they see as "right" when in fact it is very wrong.  By the time your average German took a clue Hitler was a dictator drafting their sons into the army.

The example of Bush is that even checks and balances can be subverted to craft political will.  I mean, on the flip side of the coin was Lincoln who suspended habeas corpus and initiated several controversial drafts for the Union Army in the American Civil War.  Even when the "minority" is on board, they are then considered part of the majority.

The point is that, if there is enough public pressure, laws and processes can be changed.  But we have to always be prudent for what we wish for.

As for minority rule in Canada or the US, that is the result of us being such an institutionalized society.  A long time ago, the communities would take care of their issues through community cooperation until specialization took over and then eventually institutions - which are communities of specialists.  The good thing is that public demonstration is easier when you know which institution to target.

I don't think a small group of people protesting is considered a 'minority.'  They could be the active part of a very large majority.


Lallieth

  • Member
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #27 on: March 29, 2008, 07:47:21 AM »

Ontario...40 mins east of Ottawa

Quote

That is sad! Which province is this in? Who would let a pedo out without conditions? Crap man, this guy is heading back to jail, if he keeps that up he is going to draw community action. This is a failure of the system.

Chris

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 7215
  • The Webmaster
    • View Profile
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #28 on: March 30, 2008, 02:57:53 PM »
That amazes me. I think it should be automatic that if you are a sex offender, you get lifetime restrictions and conditions. There is no excuse for this in 2008, it is not like society is ignorant of what a sex offender is anymore.

I hope that judges is preaseed to quit if this creep does reoffend.

Chris

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 7215
  • The Webmaster
    • View Profile
Re: YOU WON"T BELIEVE THIS:::::
« Reply #29 on: March 31, 2008, 12:38:08 AM »
It is in the hands of the US supreme court right now. They have to decide if this is legal or not. Back in the 70's it was ruled that rape was not an offence punishable by death, but since child rape is different, it has a chance of going thru.

Personally, I do not think it will. Bush appointed a few judges there who are strict legal types and will probably rule against Louisiana based on the fact that the line between rape and child rape is not clear enough to distinguish. So basically, due to a technicality, they are expected to say no to that unless they over ride the 1970's decision, but they won't, they are strict legal types and they tend to respect precident.

It's too bad. I debated this on AMW over and over and it does seem like it would be a pedophiles worst nightmare come true. They kind of like the 3 months - 3 year sentences they get right now. Death sentences would terrify them.

And one more thing. A new Governor was chosen in Louisiana last November. He is not a huge fan of the death penalty even for murder. He is actually likely to repeal that law if the court rules in there favor too. But who knows, that Govenor also wants to be John McCains running mate as VP so maybe he won't.

I'd quite happy if states would at least put the predator types in prison for life without a chance of parole.