# Corporal Punishment



## Infanteer (26 Aug 2004)

Well, early this morning we caught two teenagers on the rooftop of our family business.  We were lucky we caught them before they caused any real trouble.  The RCMP held the kids, but refused to charge them for trespassing as they said it was useless to bring such a minor offence to trial.  A little frustrated, I admit the Mountie was right.

Does anyone feel an expedited system of punishment for petty youth offenders is needed?  I feel that simply letting them walk because their crime was so minor is wrong, as they still broke the law, and there is no lesson learned if they get away with it with no actual punishment.  What do you guys feel about caning?  I am unsure of how well the process works in Singapore, but I suspect that the social shame of such a punishment in East Asian cultures helps to drive home the effectiveness.  

In a worst case scenario, I could see corporal punishment, if instituted here, being some sort of "badge of honor" for juvenile criminals.  However, I understand the pain is quite intense, and perhaps if such a measure is applied quickly and efficiently by judicial bodies outside of the conventional courts (thus seen to be as almost a given if caught for a crime), perhaps this can act as some sort of real deterrent against petty crime.

What do you guys think?


----------



## Tach9 (26 Aug 2004)

There was talk, at one time, of punishing the parents of the kids who broke the law. However that might solve one problem but cause another.

If you punish the father for the sins of the son, so to speak, then the father gets a criminal record but is far more interested in making sure thast the sun isn't out causing trouble in the wee hours likethe example above. 

Some places also have a curfew for children under a certain age.

Mike


----------



## Pieman (26 Aug 2004)

> Does anyone feel an expedited system of punishment for petty youth offenders is needed?   I feel that simply letting them walk because their crime was so minor is wrong, as they still broke the law, and there is no lesson learned if they get away with it with no actual punishment.   What do you guys feel about caning?



caning? lol. I honestly can't see that happening in a million years in this country. I recall when an American kid was caught putting up graffiti in an Asian country a few years ago (I think it was Thailand) and everyone was up in arms about it as he was sentanced to 10 lashes.

I do agree that there should be some kind of discipline to be enforced on the kids. Perhaps a short term detention center? (kind of like a drunk tank, except for rowdy teens) Or better yet, a policy of family intervention. i.e. The police take the kids back home and turn them over to their parents and have a little chat. Maybe inform the student's school of the infraction and have them enforce discipline through detention. (assuming it is not summer of course) 

Do you know if the police made an effort to contact the kids parents?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (26 Aug 2004)

I also can't see caning ever being used to punish young offender but that is the crux of the problem IMO, _The Young Offender Act_. If you start giving them adult sentences for adult crimes I think it would be a wake up call for these kids and the parents. I am not saying to put them with adult prisoners but to give them similiar sentences to what adults get.


----------



## Cloud Cover (26 Aug 2004)

The Y.O.A. was repealed a few years ago, it seems to many youths [aka little b*st*rds" were ending up in youth jail.   [This happened in 2002, I believe]. The Youth Criminal Justice Act is the "modernized" replacement for the YOA , but I think that is the wrong term to use. How about "de-fanged", or even more correctly, "sensitized." 

Infanteer, I sympathize with your situation, but look what the cops have to deal with from this piece of trash legislation:

"6. (1) A police officer shall, before starting judicial proceedings or taking any other measures under this Act against a young person alleged to have committed an offence, consider whether it would be sufficient, having regard to the principles set out in section 4, to take no further action, warn the young person, administer a caution, if a program has been established under section 7, or, with the consent of the young person, refer the young person to a program or agency in the community that may assist the young person not to commit offences."

I won't even bother with the principles and objective portion of the Act, it is sickening. Next time this happens, you might want to think about calling their parents rather than the cops, and if their father is decent enough, he'll pay for the damage, and perhaps have a little heart to heart "behind the woodshed" with junior. But then again, odds are if the father gave a sh* at all, junior wouldn't be up on your roof at 5 in the morning. Don't ever put your hands on them, you will regret it and just end up getting charged yourself, and probably sued as well. Hows that for a dysfunctional justice system?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (26 Aug 2004)

> Don't ever put your hands on them, you will regret it and just end up getting charged yourself, and probably sued as well. Hows that for a dysfunctional justice system?



Not unless the body is found!


----------



## Infanteer (26 Aug 2004)

> I won't even bother with the principles and objective portion of the Act, it is sickening. Next time this happens, you might want to think about calling their parents rather than the cops, and if their father is decent enough, he'll pay for the damage, and perhaps have a little heart to heart "behind the woodshed" with junior. But then again, odds are if the father gave a sh* at all, junior wouldn't be up on your roof at 5 in the morning. Don't ever put your hands on them, you will regret it and just end up getting charged yourself, and probably sued as well. Hows that for a dysfunctional justice system?



Yeah, the parents were contacted.  They seemed a little inconveinced by the whole thing.  Anyways, my first idea was to line rooftop with low-strung concertina wire.  I was informed that we would be held liable for any injuries that the next trespasser suffered.  So much for defending your property these days; John Locke would be rolling in his grave....


----------



## Jarnhamar (26 Aug 2004)

Would it ever happen here? Nope.
Should it? Yes.

People aren't being held accountable for their actions.


----------



## patt (26 Aug 2004)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Yeah, the parents were contacted.   They seemed a little inconveinced by the whole thing.   Anyways, my first idea was to line rooftop with low-strung concertina wire.   I was informed that we would be held liable for any injuries that the next trespasser suffered.   So much for defending your property these days; John Locke would be rolling in his grave....



just set up a bunch of trip flares that would scare them off and get the cops over there!  i agree with most of the posts..our system is too easy on these kids everyday when i go to school kids always say "Im gonna commit a crime and they cant do anything to me cuz im not 18"


----------



## qjdb (26 Aug 2004)

My wife does an in-home daycare.   Last Friday, there were a total of 7 kids, including our 2, ranging in ages from 10 to 4.   My house backs onto a large park, and there is a playground about 3 houses down from our backyard.

Lorraine sent the kids ahead to go to the swings, while she grabbed a book and her sunglasses.   As she was getting to the gate, the eldest, Matthew, came running up to her, telling her that 4 other kids (approx 12-14 yrs old) had held him down, and restrained his 9-year old brother.   And then, once they had him down, they said, "2 down, 5 to go".   Well, needless to say, that got my wife going!

She started yelling for the older kids to come back to her so that she could talk to them, but, of course, they just laughed at her, and rode away on their bikes.   So she went inside, and phoned the RCMP, who have a really hard stance on bullying, due to several high-profile incidents recently, in BC.   She also phoned the parents of the day-care kids, and they got there as fast as they could.

At that point, I came home, and met one of the moms in the driveway.   I hadn't heard about the incident yet, but got the info quickly.   The mom and I each grabbed a FRS radio, and went to the two entrances to the park, while my wife stayed at the house with our kids, and another radio.   At which point she phoned the RCMP back, and let them know that we had the delinquints bottled up, not that we could have restrained them if they had really wanted to leave.

Anyways, when the police officer got there, you should have seen these kids' jaws drop   :crybaby:.   They obviously didn't expect that kind of response   ;D.

The cop took each of them home, and in all instances, at least one parent had to be called from their work.   As you can imagine, the parents were, thankfully, not impressed with their spawns' exploits, and at least one has called the mom of the daycare kid to apoligize for his kid's actions.

So, in some instances, the cops can do SOME things, but yeah, I agree, mostly, their hands are tied.   They have basically been told or figured on their own, that if there is not property damage or blood, to let it get handled by the parents.

But I have to commend this one cop.   She told us that when she took each kid home, that she wasn't leaving until each kid was crying.   Gotta like that attitude   .   Oh and one of the 'perpertrators' was a gal, and when the cop started talking to them, she said to the cop, "I'm ONLY a girl, I couldn't do any of that kind of stuff."   At that point the cop sort of huffed at her, and reminded her that she was ALSO a female.   It was pretty funny.

Quentin


----------



## Michael Dorosh (26 Aug 2004)

Booby traps are illegal.  What if the building caught on fire and a firefighter had to go up there into your concertina wire?  It's like putting a guillotine behind your bay window.  Great for killing thieves, bad for firefighters or paramedics who have to break into your place in an emergency.

However, the clever find ways.  I heard this story from a Customs Officer in the regiment, and may be embellished a bit through faulty memory, but you get the idea.

Seems some guy got tired of having his car stereo boosted, so he installed fish hooks behind the dash.

One morning he comes down to his car, and finds a miscreant there with his hands caught up behind the dash in the fish hooks. One way barbs, meaning you get your hands caught in them, you don't get them off again.  Buddy gets arrested, no problem.  Probably first offence (read that as: first time the thieving bastard got caught).

Gets off lightly, but sues the dude with the fish hooks.  It's illegal to booby trap personal property.  Goes to trial.

Judge: "Why did you have fish hooks behind the dash of your car?"

Dude: "To keep the wiring in place, it was untidy."

Judge: "Case Dismissed."

;D


----------



## mclipper (26 Aug 2004)

That's a great story.    The system (and a lot of parents) are too easy on delinquents.   I was over at a friends house a few weeks ago, and some kids in the park were throwing rocks at the smaller kids.   I confronted the one (who was about 10) and started chewing him a new one.   He just smirked.   I wanted to rips his lips off!   I told him I was going to go talk to his Dad, and he just got mouthier.   When I did speak with the father....I got the response that "You know how boys are."   He laughed.   I got the remember when we were young kinda thing.   I said that if I would've behaved like that when I was young....I would've got a beating!   First, for throwing rocks at little kids....secondly, for being disrespectful to an adult. :rage:


----------



## Inch (26 Aug 2004)

I'm willing to bet most of the older board members will remember the strap they used to give you in public school.  It was taken out of the system because it was considered cruel or something like that.  Anyway, when I was 7 I got caught for throwing snowballs and was sent to Principal's office. I got a long lecture followed by the strap across the palms of my hands, let me tell you, I never threw another snowball until I was 17. I'm all for belts and straps given out by parents and teachers, as long as it's reasonable and not excessive. I lied to my dad one time and got the spanking of my life, he threatened that it'd be worse the next time I lied and it worked because I never lied to my parents again. Kids have no fear anymore and until kids mature into adults, they need to have fear of something, it keeps them in line.

Cheers


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (26 Aug 2004)

H*ll.. Danjanou remembers being sent to the back of the cave without any mastadon meat if he got his cave paintings wrong!


----------



## Jarnhamar (26 Aug 2004)

I'm willing to bet that if a kids parents keep getting calls at work which leads to embarassing them and running the risk of losing their job (having to leave work to go pick your kids up over and over) they would take disiplining their kids much more serious.


----------



## George Wallace (26 Aug 2004)

Inch said:
			
		

> I'm willing to bet most of the older board members will remember the strap they used to give you in public school. It was taken out of the system because it was considered cruel or something like that. ...... Kids have no fear anymore and until kids mature into adults, they need to have fear of something, it keeps them in line.
> .




Wait for it......in the future when they become parents they will learn the meaning of fear..... >

GW


----------



## RCA (26 Aug 2004)

I'll start off by saying I am not in favour of corporal punishment. To often its is used out of frustration as opposed to discipline, and some don't know the difference between that and abuse.

 I think the problem today lies with the parents. As parents you have to draw the left and right arcs, and enforce them. Know where your kids are, and what they are doing. Let them know you give a rat's ass. What I see now a days is kids ruling the roost, and parents trying to be the kids friends. We are not their friends, we're their parents, we make the rules, and if they don't like them, tough. That is the way of the world. It means work, and there are no shortcuts when it comes to parenting. As they get older, and have earned it, so can start looseing the reins.

It worked for my kids, I never had to lay a hand on them and they turned out well, never gave us extra-ordinary trouble and both are now in university with solid career goals.


----------



## Infanteer (26 Aug 2004)

But we cannot hope to expect that all parents will be able to maintain control of their children, especially when they hit the teenage years.  You would have no reason to worry about your children getting the switch because you raised them well and they stayed out of trouble.  But what if a son decides to say "fuck you Dad, I'm 15 and I'm smoking pot and vandalizing the property of other people, and you can't do shit about it."  If a parant is unwilling or unable to step in, then I feel it is the job of the law to intervene when minor offences are committed.

I proposed a system of punishment that was seen to be quick and effective, that is the deterrent value in it.  What is the point of having laws if they are not enforced or the method of enforcement is so drawn out and fraught with compromise.  Perhaps the bamboo switch is not required, it could be something else; I just picked it because it can be administered quite quickly and efficiently and I really do think Heinlein is a genius.

As a note, this idea doesn't necessarily have to be restricted to youth crime; there are plenty of adults out there with no sense of social responsibility.  I chuckle at the thought of some tough "homeboy" crying like a baby after a caning for smoking pot in a park.


----------



## Tach9 (27 Aug 2004)

I have a friend who is a cop in York Region in Ontario.  He told me a story about some kids who thought it was funny to through lit firecrackers into an old lady's yard.

They were cornered by my boddy and a few other cops...All had their guns drawn. See the complaint had come to the police as a "person person firing a gun" near the old lady's house.

All the kids were severely scared by the cops before being taken home.

Mike


----------



## RCA (27 Aug 2004)

The seed of destructive behavior are sowed early. No teenager ( this is when parents start going grey) all of a sudden tells the parents to F off. Itass a fine line between too much leniency and too much control. as i said its work. Improving parenting skills will solve some of the problems.

  I agree there are some who need to be "taught" the proper way. I am in full agreement that all actions must have consequences. Done properly, the youth will correct his behavior. The question being is incarceration going to do the trick. Possibly if combined with continuing the educational process. Unfortunately, I think the only education the youth have is learning from his peers and when he/she gets out, just going back to what they were doing. When it comes to young offenders the emphasis must be on rehabilitation, not punitive, as you are just creating an adult criminal.

 Where I come from, some of the judges have resorted to sentance offenders to clean up there messes, apologizing to the the people they have wronged, pay restitution, write essays on why what they did was wrong and what effect he has on other people. Some may think this is mambie Pammie, but it forces them to think past themselves and their actions have consequences not just on them selves, but others.


----------



## Torlyn (28 Aug 2004)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> I proposed a system of punishment that was seen to be quick and effective, that is the deterrent value in it.  What is the point of having laws if they are not enforced or the method of enforcement is so drawn out and fraught with compromise.  Perhaps the bamboo switch is not required, it could be something else; I just picked it because it can be administered quite quickly and efficiently and I really do think Heinlein is a genius.
> 
> As a note, this idea doesn't necessarily have to be restricted to youth crime; there are plenty of adults out there with no sense of social responsibility.  I chuckle at the thought of some tough "homeboy" crying like a baby after a caning for smoking pot in a park.



Having been the victim of a few stereo thefts, I agree wholeheartedly.  If the parents aren't willing/able to, well, PARENT their children, perhaps the state should take over.  I know historically in BRitian (and in some instances in Canada that I'm aware of) the choice given the young offender was "join up, or start breaking rocks".  I wonder, if the federal government is so enthused about increasing our military strength, what about sliding some of the justice budget to the CF, and allow for "at risk" youth the chance to redeem themselves through military service.  Infanteer, I do like the mental image of the homeboy with his hat on backwards, pants around his waist trying to be all cool while getting caned, but I think I like the image of that same snot-nosed little punk getting a new one torn open on the parade ground by his new drill instructor...  A little discipline goes a long way, and might actually make them productive citizens...  IMHO, of course, but given the weakness of the YCJA, we need some sort of alternative.  Military service has "straightened out" many people in the past.  Why not use it?  And, if we don't want them, fine.  French Foreign Legion.  I hear they treat people nicely there...


----------



## Michael Dorosh (28 Aug 2004)

We've had the same debate about conscription in Canada; putting criminals in the ranks is NOT say again NOT the direction any professional soldier would want the Forces to go.  Not even worth considering - suggest you do a search on the various conscription threads for a detailed analysis of why that is such an undesirable option.


----------



## beach_bum (28 Aug 2004)

I agree that putting them in the CF is not the way to go.  However, I do feel that instead of sending them off to a detention home (or back with their parents who obviously are not capable or willing to deal with them) perhaps creating a pseudo-military school would be beneficial.  Somewhere they are going to get discipline (not a fun relaxing camp to go play video games), where they will have to earn privileges.  At the same time, teach them skills and help build their self-esteem and instill a sense of pride in themselves.  Teach them that they can be more than a punk running around getting into trouble.  It might help some of them and put them on the right track.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (30 Aug 2004)

For lack of a more politically correct term I think the lack of corporal punishment and continued weakness of the youth criminal code
(as well as the lack of support for our military) are part of a larger "pussification of the culture".

In particular our female demographic has been easily caught up in PC mantra's   "there is no justification for war" and "there is no 
justification for violence" without any deep consideration of the consequences.   

It is blind.   It is dumb.....and unfortunately I would contend it's going to be up to males to initiate a redressing of the balance....

JMHO,



Matthew.


----------



## Cloud Cover (31 Aug 2004)

Cdn Blackshirt said:
			
		

> "pussification of the culture".
> 
> In particular our female demographic has been easily caught up in PC mantra's   "there is no justification for war" and "there is no
> justification for violence" without any deep consideration of the consequences.
> ...



A little to harsh, and I would add probably not likely to be borne out by the facts. Would you care to elaborate before you write off 52% of the population with such a bold pronouncement? Note I am not challenging your intellect, just surprised by your assertions. Would you kindly present a modicum of evidence upon which to ground your opinion, be it empirical, statistical or otherwise. As much of a real conservative as I am,  I have a hard time accepting your thesis without further articulation that women are largely responsible for the particular social problem that is the subject of the thread.  If you are talking about a feminist construct of social order, that is a far different animal than the female demographic. I would counter with the proposition that there are as many men, if not more men than women, who ascribe to a preponderance of feminist principles, whether they realize it or not. After all, there are far more males seeking protection from accountability in the criminal justice system than females, more male union members than female etc.  ...


----------



## Infanteer (31 Aug 2004)

Blackshirt, that statement was just dumb.  I've seen enough granola heads with a Y chromosome to know that rejection of both authority and the use of force is more of a social phenomenon rather then a biological one.

As well, Margaret Thatcher thinks you're a pansy....


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (31 Aug 2004)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> As well, Margaret Thatcher thinks you're a pansy....



Hey Margaret Thatcher is one of my heroes.

In regards to the contention, I don't know how many dates you gentlemen have been on this last couple of years
but I've been on a lot, not to mention I manage about 15 women in my job.   In short, I'm drawing my conclusion from
personal discussions with between 35-50 women over the last 24 months.

Whether they are representative of the general population is something I couldn't guarantee.

My experience is as follows:

When discussions turn to military items, they don't know a thing....   In most cases they had bought into the 
"There is no justification for war" mantra and favoured cutting military spending and increasing foreign aid.     That being
said once a hypothetical like "the ability to intervene in a Rwanda #2" was raised, it was like a lightbuld went off.   
They simply had never considered the military in that context before. 

When discussion turn to crime/punishment, again they started with a different set of preconceptions.   Specifically
buying into the mantra "Who are we to take another person's life?" in context to the Capital Punishment date.

The best generalization I can make is that perhaps due to inherent communal bonding nature, they are naturally inclined 
to believe in societal causation over individual free will as the key contributing factor to an individual committing a crime.

My male friends who get together regularly are of an inherently different mindset.   

Most are young professionals.

They are big believers in military as a neccessary tool of foreign policy.   

My own hypothesis is that the reason males are more likely to have this opinion is that they had more experience with
bullies in thier teens and during those encounters they learned that appeasement or diplomacy with bullies is a devil's
bargain.   Women and guys who hung out with girls (and did not play contact sports) would not have had this 
experience and as such are more likely to be idealist pacificists....

I would add that while the males I associate with watch Frontline, Nova and the news and discuss current events,
the women I socialize with want to tell me about what happened on "The Bachelorette", "Survivor" and "What not
to Wear".

Bottom Line:   I stand by my contentions and would argue that anyone who looked at demographic breakdowns of
the War on Iraq or Capital Punishment would immediately recognize that gender-based differences are a reality and 
to pretend they do not exist is disengenuous.

Best wishes to all.



Matthew.


----------



## Danjanou (31 Aug 2004)

Interesting debate. 

I am old enough to remember corporal punishment in the school system and it was effective. Can't remember what it was I did to get sent to the Principles Office back in Grade 1 or 2, but I know damn well I never did it again. Double whammy was a full report that was sent home and another swift strap from the old man.

As suggested there are both pros and cons to the use of punishment. Yes it can be abused.Trust me I've seen enough abused kids at my civvy job and called Childrens Aid so often I once had it on speed dial. We've had debates on here before about persons in positions of trust (teachers, scout leaders etc) who have abused said trust and harmed children.

That said I have also seen kids, teens and adults who probably could have benefited greatly from a good old fashioned smack on the arse at some time in their life as opposed to a "time out" or being told its not "their fault" that they bully, lie, steal, etc. but fill in the blank (society, absent father, Mike Harris etc etc). Again often the end result becomes a part of the daily hell I call work. You need  licence to own a gun and/or drive a car in this country, but none to become a parent. Parenting, including disciplining your children if and when required, last time I checked is a skill that needs to be learned, and is one lacking these days among many members of our society. Especially in a nice touch of irony the most vulnerable.

Somewhere between the two extremes, as is often the case, is the ideal situation. As a society we have "advanced" but along the way I think we let a few things fall by the wayside. Todays politically correct minions who have taken over our courts, schools, and social safety net for some reason refuse to accept Murphys Law of Maintenance " if it ain't broke, don't fix it."  Especially when it suggest implies a little self responsibility and maybe swift action to deter or correct something we as  a society have determined is wrong or inappropriate. Sometimes a trip to the woodshed was/is warranted.

BTW the caning incident was in Singapore for those interested. A spoiled American teenaged tourist who thought the rules re littering and graffiti (Which are pretty damn strict in Singapore BTW) didn't apply to him. He made a big fuss on the talk show circuit along with his outraged parents IIRC and Oprah and Phil  all agreed that poor little Johnnie was the victim of a barbaric culture. That said I'll bet the little oxygen thief will think twice about dropping his candy bar wrapper on the street in some foreign city.

Oh yeah before I forget, (Damn old age and aluminum mess tins) I never got my cave drawings wrong there squid boy and I always got my share of mastadon meat.

Ummm Mastadon Meat. ;D ;D


----------



## beach_bum (31 Aug 2004)

Blackshirt.  I'm not sure where you meet your women, but they are sure different from most of the women I know.  First of all, I am a woman.  Secondly,  I have quite a few friends that are women.  They all watch the news, read the paper, vote, and are all capable of carrying on a conversation about politics and things other than such drivel as The Bachelor etc.  Perhaps you might want to rethink your dating grounds and broaden your horizens, instead of lumping women into these categories of mindless bon bon eating, soap opera watching zombies.
I am also a single parent.  Believe me.  There is discipline in my house.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (31 Aug 2004)

I read that last part while drinking a Timmies Danjanou...you trying to kill me??


----------



## Michael Dorosh (31 Aug 2004)

beach_bum said:
			
		

> Blackshirt.  I'm not sure where you meet your women, but they are sure different from most of the women I know.  First of all, I am a woman.  Secondly,  I have quite a few friends that are women.  They all watch the news, read the paper, vote, and are all capable of carrying on a conversation about politics and things other than such drivel as The Bachelor etc.



Can we please have some names and phone numbers?  ;D

PS.  Seriously....


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (31 Aug 2004)

beach_bum said:
			
		

> Blackshirt.   I'm not sure where you meet your women, but they are sure different from most of the women I know.   First of all, I am a woman.   Secondly,   I have quite a few friends that are women.   They all watch the news, read the paper, vote, and are all capable of carrying on a conversation about politics and things other than such drivel as The Bachelor etc.   Perhaps you might want to rethink your dating grounds and broaden your horizens, instead of lumping women into these categories of mindless bon bon eating, soap opera watching zombies.
> I am also a single parent.   Believe me.   There is discipline in my house.



I believe there is discipline in your home.

I believe that Margaret Thatcher was an outstanding leader.

I believe that Neville Chamberlain was a whuss.

The women from which I'm drawing a cross-section are by no means mindless zombies.   Most are dedicated professionals
in various fields whom in their worklife are exceptional.

The difference is quite candidly in what they choose to focus upon their non-work hours.

They do watch all that mindlesss crap and when they get together with other women (often at the same table at which
I am sitting) they choose rehash the trials and tribulations that occurred on these shows.   There seems to be a collective
emotional experience that I don't quite understand.   (Of note they also discuss shopping, especially shoe shopping 
the same collective way....)

The men at the exact same table are generally discussing politics, work experience, the stock market or sports and instead
of being based on a collective emotional experience is it generally very logisitics based (everything is meaured).   

The following are excerpts from my last dinner with male friends:

"I read a damning article on our current debt structure.   Regardless of what Martin is spouting we're still paying close to
20% of total tax revenues on servicing the interest on the debt.   That works out to about $35 billion dollars (on about
$180 billion in total revenues).   The scary part is these idiots believe the debt problem is resolved and although they've
had an opportuntiy to pay down large chunks of debt over the last couple of years, instead at the very last minute they've
bloody well spent it on "goodies" that they think will be politically rewarding.....
.
.
The scary part is that if underlying interest rates ever spike for whatever reason we are just screwed as within a couple of
years (with Martin's new fixation on shorter terms) we could end up with carrying costs jumping by upwards of $10 billion
(based on 2% of the current national debt of $516 billion) which could mean an inability to sustain his ever-expanding list
of programs without either raising taxes or falling back into debt."

"I met a really interesting guy on the road the other day.   He does web development for an engineering firm in Minnesota.
We got to talking and started to put together a plan to use our XXXXXXXXXX with his web savvy to create a new company.
The guy's got it all.....On the web side he's got Macromedia Studio Suite, Adobe Suite and on the database side he's got
SQL and Oracle experience out the wazzoo.
.
.
We're at the point of formulating a partnership agreement but based on my last incorporation I think it makes more sense
to go that route right off the bat and just get the accounting structures set-up right away."

"I've added some more PEY.UN-T to my portfolio this week.   I just love the damned stock.   I've made about 150% return
in the last year when it converted to an income trust.   Even with that return I'm still adding to my position because:
1)   I love the long-term play of natural gas as the demand for energy with only increase in coming years from China/India
2)   They are very conservative with their distributions paying out only 45% of generated cash as distributions while sinking
the remainder back into the drill bit.
3)   Even with that extremely low payout ratio, I still get paid a 6% yield to sit on my money
.
.
6)   Their reserve life is double that of most comparable Oil & Gas Trusts"

Bottom Line:   Although my generalization may not apply to you, I contend it is broadly applicable.   All inductive reasoning
indicates it is more than just happenstance that polling numbers re: Capital Punishment or War show clear gender preferences.
I would argue the reason is that there are genetic and cultural differences in the genders that shape our interests and it is 
those interests that generate the wisdom that we use to formulate our opinions.   If you make the jump from beginning to 
end of that rather long run-on sentence the implication is that gender significantly changes the probability you are pro-military 
or pro-corporal punishment.

Oh man, my fingers are tired from typing.... 

One last caveat:   I don't pre-judge anyone based on gender, race or anything other factor.   That being said, I simply 
cannot ignore what I feel are accurate observations because they appear politically incorrect to some....

Cheers ma'am and my apologies for any offence taken.



Matthew.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (31 Aug 2004)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Can we please have some names and phone numbers?   ;D
> 
> PS.   Seriously....



I'd like to put my name on that list right after Michael's....seriously.



Matthew.


----------



## nULL (1 Sep 2004)

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/magazine/story/0,11913,987172,00.html? 

_"Were you to glance up from the deserted beach below, you might mistake Tranquility Bay for a rather exclusive hotel. The statuesque white property stands all alone on a sandy curve of southern Jamaica, feathered by palm trees, gazing out across the Caribbean Sea. You would have to look closer to see the guards at the wall. Inside, 250 foreign children are locked up. Almost all are American, but though kept prisoner, they were not sent here by a court of law. Their parents paid to have them kidnapped and flown here against their will, to be incarcerated for up to three years, sometimes even longer. They will not be released until they are judged to be respectful, polite and obedient enough to rejoin their families."_

I found this awhile ago, thought it might apply here.


----------



## lfejoel25 (1 Sep 2004)

i remember getting the strap in grade 3 because a teacher saw a mark on my coat that "resembled" a hit from a snowball.  the fear and reputation of the strap was far worse than the hit.  you were just so terrified, and all of the stories going around about how it had nails in it.
personally, i think the answer is ditches.  have the suckers do community service, and a lot of it.  HARD work.  and if there is no ditches to be dug, just send them to a gravel pit to dig ditches, then fill them up.  and have them wear pink.  have them work for $2/hour that would pay off the damages.  i just feel like some of those kids need to learn what it's like to work for something, in order to have respect for other people and property.  because thats just the thing, some of these kids have never had any consequences, never had to work for anything, and never had any dicipline.  i'm relatively young, young enough to see these kids and know what they're like, and old enough to know the difference.

and blackshirt,  i know the kind of people you're talking about, but personally i don't think it has anything to do with gender, i just think there is an entire generation of pc morons out there.  there is nothing wrong with being pc, and there is nothing wrong with being a moron, but when you're a pc moron, there's a problem.  as soon as they hear "military", or "corporal punishment", all sense of debate goes out the window.  either oprah, or the backstreet boys said it was bad so it must be.  there is no longer such a thing as "having my own opinion"


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (1 Sep 2004)

I've been staying out of this one as my employer has a lot of different idea's than I.  From where I sit the biggest problems with the youth who are "troubled" is that there is no retribution for the crime, and there must be.  I've always used this saying in regards to life and thats once in a while everyone[including myself] needs a shot to the head just to stay focused on reality. The youth system today is brutally geared towards telling the kids its everyones fault but their own [didn't we have a thread on this?] and the fact that there is almost no punishment for bad behavior.
One of my former co-workers worked at an open custody facility and I always remember the story where one of the "residents" pushed his plate of spaghetti onto my friends lap and all he was allowed to do was to give him a "timeout" in his room.[with radio and nintendo]
Now in real life if someone did that to you in a restarant just what do you think the normal reaction would be?....    Exactly, but thats not what these kids learn.
My 2 cents.


----------



## Infanteer (1 Sep 2004)

> From where I sit the biggest problems with the youth who are "troubled" is that there is no retribution for the crime, and there must be.



Exactly Bruce, that was the main intent of my original post.

Getting the bamboo switch for a petty crime will be no more effective then a jail sentence or a criminal record if doing so entailed a lengthy court trial, lawyers, and the red tape and bureaucracy of the legal system.  In my opinion, justice is most effective when it is seen to be quick, efficient, and fair.

I used corporal punishment as a proposal because it is a form of punishment that really sucks (deterrent value), it can be easily adminsistered (even more deterrent value due to the fact youth *know* they will be dealt with if caught); and finally it can promote the message to a skeptical society that the law is really doing what its supposed to do.

I am sure other forms of punishment would work as well, as long as they were consistent with the intent that I stated above.  I like lfejoels example of immediate transfer to a local "chain gang" to serve a few days or weeks in hard labour to repay the community for ones transgressions (perhaps under the watchful eye of an NCO  >).


----------



## Jungle (1 Sep 2004)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> I like lfejoels example of immediate transfer to a local "chain gang" to serve a few days or weeks in hard labour to repay the community for ones transgressions (perhaps under the watchful eye of an NCO   >).


Hey... I can do that !!!  >  ;D  ;D


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (1 Sep 2004)

Infanteer,
The problem with the "chain gang" idea must still go back to the corporal punishment idea as what do you do when they say 
" no I won't work and what are you going to do about it"?


----------



## Inch (1 Sep 2004)

Bruce, I'm thinking along the same lines as your shot to the head comment.  I've always been of the opinion that sometimes the best way to shut someone up is to punch them in the mouth, it only took one punch in the mouth for me when I was a teenager to learn when to shut the fuck up. Unfortunately, that doesn't fly in today's society, we're turning into a bunch of liberal sissies.  :rage:

Cheers


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Sep 2004)

" no I won't work and what are you going to do about it"?


Put them in solitary confinment until they change their mind or their jail sentence is up.


----------



## pbi (4 Sep 2004)

This is a very interesting line of thought. I have often considered corporal punishment. I remember from my Psych studies (well...not much, but--anyway...) that punishment is at its most effective when it is immediate, painful, and directly connected to the wrong act. This seems to hold true for most of the population (so theory goes) with the exception of psycopaths who are unable to connect consequence to actions and usually lack any gauge of right or wrong. We normally reject corporal punishment as being "cruel and unusual", but in my opinion it may actually be more effective, less destructive and more humane (yes...you heard me...) than imprisonment.

Having visited a number of Federal institutions a few years back to conduct recces for military response in support to Corrections Service Canada, I am extremely skeptical of the value of our prison system as far as rehabilitation goes, even though this is its stated aim. At that time the recidivism rate was about 80%: I don't know what it is now but I wager it's no better. More to the point, I am not certain that the prison system even has much punishment value for many of its inmates. Again, if punishment is to be judged effective as a behaviour modifier, then a high recidivism rate would suggest to me that imprisonment isn't very effective.

In my opinion, prison serves largely as a holding pond and training depot for hardened, anti-social criminals who, should they be released, will immediately gravitate back to the lifestyle that got them into the sh*t in the first place. It has little lasting value. This is why I think talk of "boot camp" as a corrective system is pointless. You can give the baddie all the drill, PT and room inspections you want, and it might keep him in line while he's inside the camp. What matters is what happens when he leaves. I don't have the stats but I'm willing to bet that the success rate (ie: the guy straightens up and flies right...) is low. (Back to my observation on recidivism). 

"But", people say," it works in the military". Well, it does and it doesn't. This is why I am in complete agreement with Michael Dorosh (now-there's something!!!...) that the military is not to be used as a receptacle for hardened criminals, many of whom are so dysfunctional that they would be useless and would become administrative burdens. If recruit depot was a panacea for behaviour, we wouldn't need QR&Os or the SDB or courts martial. Fact is soldiers still go bad. Some of them go so bad, so often, we have to get rid of them. The reason it works at all in the military, in my opinion, is that recruit depot is not a "one time fix" . Instead, it is an introduction to a society in which discipline and group-oriented behaviour are rewarded on a fairly constant basis (or should be in a good unit...) That, to me is the reason recruit training has much lasting value and conversely why in the civilian setting it has very little. This is further aggravated in my opinion by the tendency of these sh*tbirds, immediately upon release from the digger, to hang around in the same dysfunctional environment that they left to go to prison (another severely dysfunctional environment-ask anybody who has to make his living as a guard in our Federal system).

So, I don't think prison does much lasting good. Caning, or flogging, on the other hand adheres alot more closely to principles of behaviour modification as I understand them. It seems horrible (although we accept that parents can smack kids ie: use physical force to modify behaviour) but I bet it would be more effective and less destructive in the long run. We might want to ask ourselves whether it would be so bad if a couple of canings put somebody on the straight and narrow, as opposed to the destruction of people that happens in the prison system, despite the nonsense about rehabilitation. Just a thought. Cheers.


----------



## Torlyn (5 Sep 2004)

pbi said:
			
		

> Having visited a number of Federal institutions a few years back to conduct recces for military response in support to Corrections Service Canada, I am extremely skeptical of the value of our prison system as far as rehabilitation goes, even though this is its stated aim. At that time the recidivism rate was about 80%: I don't know what it is now but I wager it's no better. More to the point, I am not certain that the prison system even has much punishment value for many of its inmates. Again, if punishment is to be judged effective as a behaviour modifier, then a high recidivism rate would suggest to me that imprisonment isn't very effective.



The recidivism rate in Canadian prisons for adults is (averaged for 1997-1999) is 41% (Juristat Reader, 2002), youths was 37%, and these numbers haven't changed much since the 70's.  Now, to further delve in to those numbers, that 41% includes the relatively few chronic re-offenders...  Statistically, 78% of people convicted of a crime NEVER RE-OFFEND.  The 22% that do, tend to over and over again.  Ergo, I disagree that imprisonment isn't effective.  It's effective 78% of the time...  The other 22%...  Are they the type of criminals that will continually re-offend until they become too old or get too long a sentence?  Probably.  Would corporal punishment work for them?  Perhaps, but only if instituted at a young age.  Most young offenders NEVER RE-OFFEND, so it doesn't seem right to beat all children who make mistakes in hopes of weeding out a few chronic re-offenders.  Are we looking to rehabilitation, or punishment?  

   I think that many comments on this thread are focused more on the victim's desire for retribution, and not necessarily the rehabilitation of an offender.  Retribution is all well and good, but when it approaches vengeance, we border on becoming criminal ourselves in metting out our punishment. 

   Don't get me wrong...  Some bastard robs my house, steals my car, etc. you're damned right I want to be the one holding the cane.  But that's my desire for vengeance, not any real desire to see the perpetrator removed from the ranks of the offenders.  All that would do would be to make me a worse offender than the bad guy, because my crime would have been willful, focused, and intentional...

 B.N.S.


----------



## NavyGrunt (5 Sep 2004)

I suggest you read a book called "Con Game" and you'll realize that the rates released by CorCan are skewed in their favor. Most times they only count federal time as "reoffending", so if they do 2 less a day in a provincial facility its not considered "reoffending". Then consider the fact that I observed a man get sentenced to 2 less a day when he beat a man to death but said he "was only trying to hurt him". That to me is reoffending. As for most not slipping back Id love to say that was true. But I've watched the system work and I know that 4 out of 5 times when I arrested somebody they were going to have a history. The man who wrote those stats has some rose colored glasses for you..... ;D


----------



## Torlyn (5 Sep 2004)

Released by statistics canada...  And they use the term recidivism as anyone who is convicted under the criminal code who has previously been convicted.  Period.  Doesn't matter if it's a summary or indictable offnce.  I would suggest that Con Game may have coloured your glasses, in this regard.  Con Game is worried about sales.  The Juristat is not.   

B.N.S.


----------



## NavyGrunt (5 Sep 2004)

I believe what I've read combined with my experience. He address stats canada directly in the book. Not starting a fight, its another point of view in that book.

Corrections Canada is the same group that gave the offenders the last word on the "new uniforms" the officers would get. (Which I believe they are still waiting for) The designs were turned down because offenders thought the uniforms were to "authoritarian". The uniforms were dark blue like a police uniform without the stripe.....anywise. 

 :dontpanic:They day after I learned of this myself and another officer had semen thrown on us.....believe me.....I do not believe in our current system.


----------



## Torlyn (5 Sep 2004)

Have to respond...  Look, Con Game (as per my local library) is an extremely biased book.  While it quotes the same sources of statistics, he ignores anything contradictory, and sneers at them.  He lambasts a policy written by someone infinitely more involved in the process...  Look, Con Game even by its very title is biased.  I'm not questioning your experience (I'm assumng you are either a peace officer or you work in corrections, as have I) just that book, and it's relevance.  IT's a very emotional book with no real basis in fact.  Further, I suggest you read the following link.:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0LVZ/is_11_17/ai_88998531

I think you may want to re-read that book, and realize that it's an appeal to emotions only, and not really intended to be taken as factual.

B.N.S.


----------



## NavyGrunt (5 Sep 2004)

Thanks for the link and I'll look into it. For me its the fact that the jails are zoo's now and the offenders are writing the rules. My buddies retiring from the service tell me of days when the jails ran like clockwork. Man that would be nice. And they thank corporal punishment for that. Spank the baddest asshole in the jail and he'd be quiet for 6mos. Alas I've never seen that system in action.

I think you to quickly dismiss the book though. I don't take it as gospel and I appreciate what your saying but I believe that the truth and right system is somewhere in the middle. If an offender is behaving properly and conforming and rehabilitating than he should have plenty of opportunity. If he's an ass he should be made to pay like you do with children. Eh. Thats why i'm glad im not in charge. I dont have to decide things like this.


----------



## Torlyn (5 Sep 2004)

Either way, somebody hurts my own, (and I'm sure you're the same way ) to hell with the books, get the tar and feathers.  It's time for a lynching!  

B.N.S.


----------



## Jarnhamar (5 Sep 2004)

> Corrections Canada is the same group that gave the offenders the last word on the "new uniforms" the officers would get.


WTF is wrong with these people?
My heart goes out to all the police officers and corrections officers who have to deal with not only the stupidity of criminals but the government too!
Whats next, are we going to have inmates interview which jail guards they would like to have? If an inmate doesn't like you then tough shit, your out of a job.
 :threat:


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (5 Sep 2004)

I've seen a number of reports on the Canada Corrections and as per Aaron, everything points to the fact that the inmates are running the asylum and CanCon Leadership is doing it's best to bury the real numbers because if they incarcerated everyone they were supposed to, the costs would jump exponentially.

In short, they are have done some sort of calculation that says "We're willing to accept XXX number of murders, rapes, assaults, etc. by individuals on parole and early parole per annum in order to save $XXX million required to keep offenders for their full terms."

The latest scandal that came out just this weekend was Police Chief Julian Fantino of Toronto threw a fit because he found out the Corrections Canada had paid for a "Spa Day" at the one of the women's prisons located in Kitchener.

Bottom Line:   I think Canada Corrections is composed of the same political hacks that populate a majority of the crown corporations and they filter information to suit the PM's office and the Liberal Party of Canada.

Truly pathetic....



Matthew.


----------



## NavyGrunt (5 Sep 2004)

Its a management issue. There is still alot of good work being done on the front lines. I will concede that its not the fire and brimstone scenario that "Con Game" portrays, I do believe that offenders have rights. They have rights to protection, food and shelter, and (offense relative of course) a shot at rehab, healthcare as well and education. I know that might not be what everyone wants to hear but I do believe it. I also recall an incident where the Screws at an institution asked for a dog to conduct some drug sniffing and it was shot down because the prisoners reps found it to "intimidating", Im quite torn on this issue....


----------



## brin11 (5 Sep 2004)

I agree with pbi that a Boot Camp type atmosphere is probably useless for the hardened criminal types.   Perhaps this might be useful though for first time offenders or young offenders.   Don't forget what this type of training can do for individuals whether they stay as members of the military or not.   I think that many of us can say that we learned many things in basic training such as the ability to work in a team atmosphere effectively, the exhilaration when you complete certain physical training, the pride when completing some task or graduating with your peers, and last but not least, the sense of camaraderie amongst the members when faced with hardship.   I think that many of us had never experienced much of anything like this before joining and they are great lessons of life to learn.   This may have been the first time, as well, that someone had felt that they could possibly belong in some way or that they could actually work with other people toward a common goal and have a sense of accomplishment toward themselves.

To respond to something Torlyn said; I think most people are looking for rehabilitation AND punishment.   I know that I don't see anything wrong with punishing someone for their behaviour.   It's all well and good to try and examine why someone does what they do and change that behaviour but I believe people need to be punished as well for something that society, as a whole, agrees is wrong.   

I also think we are being a bit holy on the vengeance issue.   I've noticed a poster state that they feel that when punishment borders on vengeance that we border on becoming criminal ourselves yet states later that they would certainly feel vengeful toward someone that had wronged them.   I believe this is an opinion that many people have...Let's rehabilitate them as long as I haven't been wronged, then have at 'er!   I really don't see what's so wrong with vengeance.   It's a natural human emotion that we seem to be suppressing in this case.   That's not to say that we should be acting out every emotion we feel but vengeance and punishment seem to have become dirty words somehow.

Comments?


----------



## Torlyn (5 Sep 2004)

brin11 said:
			
		

> To respond to something Torlyn said; I think most people are looking for rehabilitation AND punishment.  I know that I don't see anything wrong with punishing someone for their behaviour.  It's all well and good to try and examine why someone does what they do and change that behaviour but I believe people need to be punished as well for something that society, as a whole, agrees is wrong.
> 
> I also think we are being a bit holy on the vengeance issue.  I've noticed a poster state that they feel that when punishment borders on vengeance that we border on becoming criminal ourselves yet states later that they would certainly feel vengeful toward someone that had wronged them.  I believe this is an opinion that many people have...Let's rehabilitate them as long as I haven't been wronged, then have at 'er!  I really don't see what's so wrong with vengeance.  It's a natural human emotion that we seem to be suppressing in this case.  That's not to say that we should be acting out every emotion we feel but vengeance and punishment seem to have become dirty words somehow.



Well said.  I think that what we are seeing is the extension of the desire to be policially correct.  It's the holier than thou attitude that many of our elected officials and "experts" in the field of criminology seem to be following.  I agree that vengance is not necessarily a bad thing.  There seems to be a basis that we are trying to be morally "pure" by taking the higher road.  ie. Sure, we COULD wreak some vengance upon them, but really, wouldn't we just becoming them?"  The argument that we cannot resort to "their" methods of response, for if we do so, we are degrading ourselves down to their level.

All this tripe, taken with a grain of salt, still tastes like tripe to me.  Vengeance and the like have been deemed to be negative owing to their overly emotional connotation, but as you've said, this is ridiculous.  If that's the case, then pity, sympathy and empathy are also emotions.  LEt's take THAT out of the justice system, and see how our prisoners feel then.  I'm still disgusted that the liberal government has fought so hard to give time-serving criminals the right to vote.  I mean, any government that is going to advocate give a rapist or a child-molester (IMO, both are the worst of the worst) the same right that I have, that men and women in our services have spent decades fighting and dying for, I can't help but feel sick to my stomach.  My great-grandfather was the first peace-keeping casualty in Canada. (Brigadier H. Angle)  It sickens me to think that the country that he fought and died for can do things like this, and say that they are making this country better...  Sorry about the tirade.  Spent some time at the memorial in garrison green today...  Feeling a bit disillusioned with Canada right now.  Few pints, all will be better.    (Molson Canadian.  Gotta be somewhat patriotic, right?) 

B.N.S.


----------



## Tach9 (5 Sep 2004)

"All this tripe, taken with a grain of salt, still tastes like tripe to me.  Vengeance and the like have been deemed to be negative owing to their overly emotional connotation, but as you've said, this is ridiculous.  If that's the case, then pity, sympathy and empathy are also emotions.  LEt's take THAT out of the justice system, and see how our prisoners feel then.  I'm still disgusted that the liberal government has fought so hard to give time-serving criminals the right to vote."

Excellent post. Does the government ever read whats on this site? Maybe they should!

Mike


----------



## NavyGrunt (5 Sep 2004)

Vengeance:

Infliction of punishment in return for a wrong committed; retribution.

with a vengeance
With great violence or force. 
To an extreme degree: December has turned cold with a vengeance.

I don't think thats the goal of a corrections system. Its to correct not punish. Now if they don't submit to rehab then yes punish away.


----------



## pbi (6 Sep 2004)

TorLyn has produced some statistics which appear to demolish me: I guess I stand corrected. More importantly, if the recidivism rates are that low, then as a society we should be thankful. While I have done absolutely no stat research at all on this (and must therefore bow to those who have...) I will offer a perspective on Corrections Canada, albeit a dated one.

During my visits, we spoke with both the "suits" in the "front office" of each institution as well as various uniformed officers. The difference in assessments of the situation was disturbing. I had the distinct impression that the suits were toeing the CSC party line, while we were getting more accurate (certainly more depressing) info from the uniforms. This experience tends to make me doubt what CSC is representing. However, I would appreciate hearing from anybody who is CSC, whether a "suit" or a "uniform".

OK-having more or less abandoned that battle position, I will dig in on the relative uselessness of boot camp. My military experience tells me that while boot camp prepares the recruits' mind for military life, it is military life itself that really shapes him and keeps him in line once he levs the depot. The proof I offer is what happens in a well-run unit in which leaders are not afraid to demand standards of peformance and discipline, while rewarding group-oriented behaviour and buildng cohesion, as opposed to a poorly run unit in which none of these things happen and other, negative, motivators are at work. In my experience the "magic spell" of  recruit depot will wear off in the second unit, until such time as new leadership comes in an cleans house.

To me these two types of units approximate (in a very simplistic way) "good" civil society and the sort of dysfunctional environment many of our offenders come from and return to. It is really in these environments that the critical decisions that will lead to jail time (or avoiding it...)are taken. I would be very interested to see some stats on the success of these programs; "success" being defined not by how many graduate but rather by how many are productive citizens one, two, or three years later. Of course, I might get blown up again...

As for the very silly business about the CSC uniforms, this type of lame PC thinking is typical of the fuzzy-minded nits who populate some posts in our civil service, particularly where social issues are involved. Many of them have an almost instinctive reaction that anything "authoritarian" is bad: uniforms, giving orders, forcing people to be accountable, etc. In my opinion, what some of these inmates require is more exposure to an environment of order and discipline. A uniform is worn because it sends a message. In a prison the message should be: "we are in charge-do what we say".  Now, uniforms alone will not fix things by themselves any more than boot camps will by themselves, but we should be doing things that contribute to a disciplined environment. My impression (we have a few corrections guys in our Brigade who I believe would back me on this...) is that this is not the case in our institutions: it is questionable who is really running things. Cheers.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (6 Sep 2004)

PBI, 
You wil lNEVER get a look at CorrCan's real numbers or how good the "residents" have it. Most decent hard-working people would probably rebel in anger if they knew just how good they have it in the fed. system. Go to Beaver Creek up by Bracebridge and play one of the golf course or sit out on one the patio's and have tea, squash? tennis? or maybe just go away for a walk since there are no fences.
Torlyn,
The numbers you have are the same  number-type shell games the treasury people make up. I have been doing this for16 years and the" rate of return" would make any invester want a piece of that. :-[
How they get to arrive at the numbers you quoted is very simple, anyone who is out on parole[which is almost everybody] and committs a crime and is convicted and returns to jail is still consider a non re-offender as he NEVER left the correctional system. 
EXAMPLE:Mr. Scroat gets out of his 10 year sentence in 3 years, on parole for the rest...deals drugs to your kids and shoots a cop trying to arrest him.... goes back to jail but doesn't count as a failure.  "Good system", hard to look bad, no?


----------



## Lexi (6 Sep 2004)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Does anyone feel an expedited system of punishment for petty youth offenders is needed?


Well I just thought I'd put my two cents in.. yeah, infact I do.
Today's youth, (and I can say this out of experience... being a youth myself,) has this idea that because they're young they can get away with anything. They think, "I'm young. My body is tough. I can smoke, do drugs, beat up some little kids at the park and get away with it." 

And they usually do get away with it.
Parents don't believe that it's their little angel who's doing these terrible things, they kinda just say, "Well you know, that was wrong. Don't do it again." There's no lesson learned in that.

Teens get away with bullying classmates and stealing candy bars out of convenience stores. 
That gets boring, they get a little more daring, and move onto bigger things.
Murder, rape, identity theft.
Anything for thrill.

Today's youth gets away with far too much. If the "do"'s and "don't"'s aren't set at an early age, it takes a little more than reminders to help it set in.
A good whack over the head always reminded me of where my place was.
I say, give em a week or so in the slammer. Scare the bejeebies out of them at 13 or 14, so they don't go and pull off some other crap later down the line.

More comments from the peanut gallery,
Lex


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Sep 2004)

Good post lexi. Considering your age and your peers/friends you probably have one of the best insights to the mentality of young offenders from their level. (Not to say your one of them of course)



> I do believe that offenders have rights. They have rights to protection, food and shelter, and (offense relative of course) a shot at rehab, healthcare as well and education.



With the exception of education (Why should criminals get a free education and *I* have to pay for it?) i don't think many people will disagree with what prisoners should get. Everyone deserves protection, food, shelter and health care.

That said how many of us enjoyed a 'Spa day' at work recently?
Prisons with golf courses, tennis and squash?
Come on. When someone breaks the law they should be sent to jail to be punished.Going to jail IS the punishment. Were out here living out life and their behind bars. The punishment should be them sitting behind bars while the rest of the world gets to spend time golfing or playing tennis or doing whatever.   They shouldn't have access to this stuff (probably for free) while in jail. Thats not punishment OR rehabilitation.

Dogs intimidate the prisoners? Big deal. How about the PEOPLE that these criminals intimidated while breaking into their homes, robbing them, raping them or murdering their family.   

I just don't think i'll be able to sleep at night knowing a murderer or rapist is being intimidated by a dog searching for drugs. Thats inhumane.


----------



## Tach9 (6 Sep 2004)

Wow, I didn't realize things were that cushy for prisoners in the Federal system. It would be nice to think that if they put criminals into this sort of enviorment they would re-rehabilitate. I doubt it though. And as for rights? I'll save my sympathy for their victims.

Mike


----------



## NavyGrunt (6 Sep 2004)

Ghost778 said:
			
		

> Good post lexi. Considering your age and your peers/friends you probably have one of the best insights to the mentality of young offenders from their level. (Not to say your one of them of course)
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Because lack of education is one of larger reasons that people commit crimes in the first place. There is a book called "Men of Blood" that covers this point. So if we just punish and kick them out we become the cause for them to reoffend. Its a catch .22........as for spa days......well those can't be justified.

Heres ANOTHER good story.

There was a certain institution in southeren Alberta where the officers had a BBQ on the roof and would BBQ during their shifts. The offender reps complained that this was cruel and unusual punishment and tortured the offenders, SO the suits quickly seized the BBQ and told the officers that they had to eat from the offender run kitchen or pack a lunch. Unfortunately the lunch room was not equiped with a microwave so for several mos the officers ate cold lunches while the offenders enjoyed hot meals.......really the stories are endless..... one institution the offenders were provided a beer each if they didnt riot....to be fair though they were in plastic bottles and that warden did lose her job.......

Jail isnt sunshine there is an ass load of violence and rape and drugs...so to be fair its not worth the "free education"


----------



## Tach9 (6 Sep 2004)

Jail isnt sunshine there is an ass load of violence and rape and drugs...so to be fair its not worth the "free education"

I sure hope not!!

Mike


----------



## Infanteer (7 Sep 2004)

As far as I see it, the Law is the system of rules that guarantees the safety of the Tribe.

If one violates the Law, then he has violated the foundation of the social ties between members of the Tribe.  He has forfeited his rights to this guarantees and is no longer one of the Tribe until retribution has been meted out (jail time, corporal punishment, whatever...as long as it is seen to be just and fair) or he is exiled.

If any of you have a different philosophy on the notion of Crime and Punishment, I'm all ears....


----------



## NavyGrunt (7 Sep 2004)

The system of punishment has been abandoned for some time. Its not even uttered in courts or even in the correctional system any more. Everything from the moment an offender steps into an institution is designed to rehabilitate not punish. The worst the system does is "prison charges" for crimes commited in house. And sometimes these are some very serious crimes. In these incidents the ramifications most certainly do not suit the crime. 

However the system of punishment has been abandoned for good reason. It never corrected any of its subjects. It was a place for them to get various illnesses and die. Unless they survived long enough to get out and offend again because they had no skills and no hope. 

The only successful path I can see is penal colonies. I know it sounds absolutely medival but the only positive example of any correctional style is Austrailia. Although I have to admit I dont know much about the history of the country besides its former status as a colony for british criminals. 

Baffin Island anyone?


----------



## Marauder (7 Sep 2004)

My  big irritation with the current correctional system is that it seems that doing a stint up the river now-a-days is just an interlude between crimes on the outside. That interlude gives not just three hots and cot but also the usual outrages like spa days and free rec/entertainment. On top of that, it seems to me that this time also gives them a chance to compare notes and share stories of how they have aggravated/offended/terrorized/assaulted society and it's regular members. It's like giving them one big "professional conference", with ALL EXPENSES PAID. Think about it, it's like a hospital sending some of it's surgeons to a big health care conference, where they can mingle and learn from each other to make them better surgeons. The way "corrections" (and I have some heartburn over that nomenclature) works today, is building a better criminal. Not only do they learn to be more proficient, they also get to network, to better connect and build on to exisiting criminal enterprises.
Looking at all the amenities given these scum, you have to come to realize that the senior management at CSC considers crime and the resultant prison time as a vocational and lifestyle choice. We have already lost the battle on this one folks.
The only real remedy to this travesty is one that no pussy liberal is willing to swallow. Complete and utter isolation, with the only human contact being for delivery of basic sustenance nutrition. If they don't have a high school education, then fine, give them the books and the ciriculum, let them teach themselves. Deprivation of human contact is one of the worst things we ever so social monkeys can endure, so let's use it in our favour when dealing with those who willfully and braggingly not just break but destroy the social contract. Thirty plus years of "correction" have failed miserably, so let's go back to shock and awe, fear and terror. And for the worst of the lot, the kiddie molestors and remorseless predators and drug kingpins, then by all means, let's use some of that empty northern real estate, after it's been stocked full of polar bears and wolves, and all other manner of hungry meat eater. If some members of society are incapable of living by the most basic tenant of suffer not unto the children, then back to the cold embrace of that bitch Mother Nature and good old Darwinian survival of the biggest and baddest you go.

Oh and Infanteer, for the roof, I say a catapult. A really big catauplt.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (7 Sep 2004)

Marauder,

You must be wearing the shirt right now.  Your analogy on what jail is now to the common criminal is dead on!  Its just part of the life-style and like you said live free and let the interest accrue. :rage:


----------



## Danjanou (7 Sep 2004)

Ok Hands up who wants to see Marauder as head of CSC or better yet Minister of justice with Bruce as Head of CSC.

Good points there. Our present system is kind of like the little wheel in the cage. The hamster died a long time ago and no one noticed so the wheel just keeps on going round and round to no purpose.


----------



## NavyGrunt (7 Sep 2004)

Then shoot em' all. Prisons were run like that in the past and the men just sat around died slowly. Caught disease and went mad. I can't believe that me of all people has to defend CSC. I cant stand them but what your suggesting is wrong as well. Middle ground people. Or saomeday you may find yourself at the mercy of a system without exactly that....mercy.

I agree there has to be "punishment" brought back to the system. I agree that we arent hard enough. I think they should all be working in chain gangs working on highways and picking up litter. Or like in the old days where they would sew the north west mounted police uniforms. They cant have everything for free like they do now.......

Secondly they arent taking Joe Murder to the spa. There are different levels of offenders. And rec is encouraged becuase its an energy release.

Id love to see you guys run an institution as well. It would be intresting to see the well being of the correctional officers after years of treating human beings like that. I can see all kinds of conditions steming from watching indivduals waste away like that, and for the record while the new "correction style" doesnt seem effective the "shock and awe" style was an even bigger failure.....thats why we have the system we have now.


----------



## George Wallace (7 Sep 2004)

Aaron White said:



> Secondly they arent taking Joe Murder to the spa. There are different levels of offenders. And rec is encouraged becuase its an energy release.




Sorry....It was Jill Murder.

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/Editorial/home.html

"Nail files for inmates? Great idea
So, Corrections Canada officials are now complaining about "confusion" in shocking reports about a "spa day" held at an Ontario women's prison, to which some of our most notorious female criminals were invited. 

Their complaints are staggeringly beside the point. 

As the Sun's Kim Bradley and Brett Clarkson reported yesterday, the feds insist murderers Marcia Dooley (who helped her husband kill his young son Randall in a horrendous case of child abuse) and Mary Taylor (co-killer, with a girlfriend, of Toronto Police Const. Bill Hancox) did not sign up for the special event at their prison, as originally reported by the National Post. 

What's more, Corrections staff maintain that the day, which reportedly included a harpist, tea on fine china, pedicures, manicures and aromatherapy, was not about "pampering," but about boosting the inmates' hygeine and self-esteem. 

Again, they simply don't get it. 

First of all, it matters little that Dooley and Taylor didn't attend -- what's galling is that they had the chance. 

Second, however Corrections spins the details of this particular event, it's hardly the first case of hardened criminals being awarded offensive perks behind bars. 

Indeed, the "spa day" at Grand Valley Institution reportedly coincided with an inmate barbecue. The Sun has reported numerous scandalous inmate parties at institutions across the country -- which included likes of Karla Homolka and other sex offenders. Each time, the public is outraged, politicians promise a probe -- and Corrections merely sticks to its line that such perks are all about rehabilitation and preparing criminals for normal life. 

Well, the public isn't stupid. But the feds don't get that either. Nor do they seem to get the basic problem here: 

Dooley and Taylor are vicious killers. They've been sentenced to "life" in prison with no parole for more than a decade. This is their punishment, such as it is. It's bad enough that the price of a child's or a cop's life is so cheap -- but Corrections' rush to buff and polish these women and push them back into society is simply sickening. 

Over the weekend, Toronto Police Chief Julian Fantino rightly called for a meeting with Deputy PM and Public Safety Minister Anne McLellan for an explanation. 

But just last month, when cops from across the country confronted McLellan on similar concerns about our "Club Fed" prisons, she retorted: "I do not accept the 'Club Fed' designation," adding that time in prison is never pleasant. 

We're sure. All that harp music can be downright painful. 

And another thing ... "


----------



## NavyGrunt (7 Sep 2004)

Can't dispute that as being ridiculous. But its all in CSC's attitude towards women offenders. Anyone ever wonder why women offenders cost twice what male offenders do? 

Again though the blame also rests with the supremem court of canada and what rights they guarntee prisoners. Such as the right for an inmate to have a shiv when he feels his life is in danger......I won't dipute what you just read but I do feel ,and anyone who is objective about this issue will as well, that the tone of that article was inflamatory. I'd really need a more detailed explanation of what went on. Womens institutions run from min to max offenders so I would be willing to bet that 90% of those who attended the so called spa day were min-med offenders. Again Im not on CSC side.I cant stand them. And that article does upset me but "kill em all" isnt the answer.

Although I do believe in capital punishment. Im not panty-waisted-lilly wagger,


----------



## brin11 (7 Sep 2004)

> Can't dispute that as being ridiculous. But its all in CSC's attitude towards women offenders. Anyone ever wonder why women offenders cost twice what male offenders do?



Please enlighten us.


----------



## NavyGrunt (7 Sep 2004)

It has to do with the amount of programs offered. I was actually wondering if one of the guys here knew. I know only a small amount regarding it. But I know that a male costs about 60000 and a female costs about 110000. Im sure someone will be very forthcoming about the exact numbers, This is a large difference and sure would like to have someone justify that to me.....


----------



## Jungle (7 Sep 2004)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Aaron White said:
> 
> 
> First of all, it matters little that Dooley and Taylor didn't attend -- what's galling is that they had the chance.


What the fuck is this ?? You're in JAIL. If I say it's spa day, YOU WILL GO AND ENJOY IT !!! Geez... there are too many liberties in those jails.   
As for some of the nut-cases mentionned on this thread: the solution is retro-active abortion.


----------



## Scott (7 Sep 2004)

Jungle said:
			
		

> What the fuck is this ?? You're in JAIL. If I say it's spa day, YOU WILL GO AND ENJOY IT !!! Geez... there are too many liberties in those jails.
> As for some of the nut-cases mentionned on this thread: the solution is retro-active abortion.



ROTFLMFAO!!!!!


----------



## Torlyn (7 Sep 2004)

Aaron White said:
			
		

> It has to do with the amount of programs offered. I was actually wondering if one of the guys here knew. I know only a small amount regarding it. But I know that a male costs about 60000 and a female costs about 110000. Im sure someone will be very forthcoming about the exact numbers, This is a large difference and sure would like to have someone justify that to me.....



Hate to pull ye ol' Juristat, but you are correct.  Reasons are plentiful, one of them being that because there are drastically less female inmates than male, the prisons are more costly to run, and don't remain full, thus increasing costs...  I'm not sure about the programs offered, or if there are any "other" costs, but I'll check with some old crim teachers and see what I can find, if you'd like.

B.N.S.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (7 Sep 2004)

Marauder, outstanding post.   

I hope you consider emailing it to your local paper at the very least.

Cheers,


Matthew.


----------



## Infanteer (8 Sep 2004)

What is punishment but the *vengence* of society of a whole that is seen to be fair?


----------



## Marauder (8 Sep 2004)

Aaron, I don't think you read what I typed. Either that or you took a page out of the Democrat/Liberal page and just skimmed and then threw out your rightous indignation based on willfully ignorant understanding of what was actually said.
You have to understand, I believe everyone(with qualifiacation) deserves a second chance. Sometimes you just fuck up, sometimes you wind up in a crappy situation on some dark street in the middle of the night. Shit Happens. What offends me, and most other sane Canadians, is how second chances now give way to third, fourth, fifth, and on and on. Prison is no longer a deterrent, and it does not "correct" anyone. Serious and immediate reform is needed. Now let me spell this out. I do not believe that we should take anyone out back after a conviction and tell them to face the ditch and pray to whatever god they have. As much as the continued existence of some asshole rapist or drunken hillbilly who drove his truck into an oncoming family aggreves me to no particular end, I'm not down with the wholesale, systematic, and wanton erasure of human life. I'm no Hitler or Pappa Joe. At the same time, said rapist or drunk driver should not be given what is essentially a validation of their behaviour when they are given free room and board and the chance to socialize with their ilk. Todays prisons take away nothing. Yeah, maybe they can't go outside to interact with their prey anymore, but they can still connect with the outside world and their criminal compatriots via phone, internet, TV, newspaper, whatever. Hell, they are better connected to the outside world than I was when on contract in MEAFORD for fuck sake. It's especially vile for the Hell's Angels and other gangsters to have this access, since they can then still terrorise and victimise other from INSIDE, during what is ostenibly their payment to society for their LAST crime. I understand that nowadays they can pretty much get any drugs they want inside, and I'm sure some of them get conjugal visits. IT'S INSANE.
Any violation against another person, from robbery to homicide, constitutes a gross violation of the most basic of social contracts, You leave me alone and I'll leave you alone. If someone wants to rot their brain on drugs, hey, fill your fucking boots. But given the economics of the drug trade and those who most often engage in it, eventually someone in gonna rob, cheat, steal from, or assault a fellow human to get it. It's all about the spinoffs of human behaviour. My perrsonal belief is that if you in any way shape or form deprive someone else of their personal safety or wellbeing (or human rights to use the new liberal buzzword), you should be punished by society by losing yours, if for no other reason to discourage you from doing it again.
But here's the kicker. Today's socially acceptable form of collective (society's) punishment is prison. But the 21st century prison in Canada does not punish, and worse, it does not deter further breaking of the law.

What I'm advocating, is making prison a deterrent once again. That doesn't involve lashes or starvation or hot pokers. I say deprive the turds of other human contact. As I said before, we're the most social of animals. Leave us alone long enough on our own, and our minds start to run around the inside walls of our psyche like a rat trying to escape a cage sinking into the water. All the personal shit inside out heads that we can normally block out with the white noise of modern society (other people, TV, internet, books, magazines, porn, alcohol, drugs, all that shit) comes to the forefront and demands to be dealt with. Now, the junkie that killed some random grandmother in a home invasion to score a couple of bucks to secure his next joint, or gram, or tab can drown out his feelings about his actions and himselfe for committing them inside the fantasy world of TV, or by sociallizing with other scum who have done the same thing or worse. Take that away, and his punishment is having to relive his actions and come to a full understanding of what a failure and sack of monkey shit he is. Prison should be deprivation of all things but three meals a day, a soft spot to rest on, and a hole in the floor to relieve oneself in.

There is one segment of these assholes that should simply be erased from society though. The Paul Bernardos and Clifford Olsons that society manages to produce need to simply be erased from the genestock and collective societal memory. These sick bastards have no conception of right and wrong, or the pain that another human can live through. Their world, their society, is only those things that can effect them and how they feel and perceive. To them, other humans are just part of the tableau, things to be used. There is no chance of correcting them or making them better. Serial killers and child molesters are simply better off dead. Society has no possible use for them. They are nothing more than AP mines littered through society. When you demine, you mark the mine, and then blow in place. These bastards should be the same way. Once it can be proven that they they are remoresless predators, there is no further recourse than to kill them and remove them as an ongoing threat to the rest of us. Somehow the socialists have steered us away from using common fucking sense with these people. THE BERNARDOES OF THE WORLD CANNOT BE REHABILITATED. Any first year psych student can grasp this, but somehow liberal gutlessness has overtaken our intelligence and basic understanding of the human mind.


Wow, now that should absolve me of the need to rant for a week or two. :evil:


----------



## Cloud Cover (8 Sep 2004)

Yep, that was a rant alright!! That was a good post with many salient points, and I don't disagree with most of what you say,   but might I suggest that the following part of the post sits dangerously close to the edge of violating some standards of tolerance for this site.   It is a public forum, not a personal "blog", and some people might get the wrong impression about CF members. 

I agree the individuals mentioned are predators, and should have faced the death penalty, but they are rotting in jail and in no way should that be construed as "socialist" or "liberal" tolerance of the crimes committed.     

        


			
				Marauder said:
			
		

> There is one segment of these assholes that should simply be erased from society though. The Paul Bernardos and Clifford Olsons that society manages to produce need to simply be erased from the genestock and collective societal memory. These sick bastards have no conception of right and wrong, or the pain that another human can live through. Their world, their society, is only those things that can effect them and how they feel and perceive. To them, other humans are just part of the tableau, things to be used. There is no chance of correcting them or making them better. Serial killers and child molesters are simply better off dead. Society has no possible use for them. They are nothing more than AP mines littered through society. When you demine, you mark the mine, and then blow in place. These bastards should be the same way. Once it can be proven that they they are remoresless predators, there is no further recourse than to kill them and remove them as an ongoing threat to the rest of us. Somehow the socialists have steered us away from using common ******* sense with these people. THE BERNARDOES OF THE WORLD CANNOT BE REHABILITATED. Any first year psych student can grasp this, but somehow liberal gutlessness has overtaken our intelligence and basic understanding of the human mind.
> Wow, now that should absolve me of the need to rant for a week or two. :evil:


----------



## Jungle (8 Sep 2004)

whiskey 601 said:
			
		

> I agree the individuals mentioned are predators, and should have faced the death penalty, but they are rotting in jail and in no way should that be construed as "socialist" or "liberal" tolerance of the crimes committed.


Rotting in today's Canadian jails is not enough for some of these people. I agree with Marauder, excellent post.


----------



## Cloud Cover (8 Sep 2004)

And ... when i say blog, i don't mean one like this: http://www.amyboyer.org/liamsite.htm.   Make sure you enter the site, and read all of it.

Nothing on the site is fake - see the disclaimer.   

What punishment should Liam recieve, if he was still alive? What about the SOB ISP provider who let him post the trash in the above website? Should the ISP be held liable, criminal or civi liability? What about the private detective/docusearch company who provided the victims information? How wide should the net be cast?


----------



## Marauder (8 Sep 2004)

If you have heartburn from reading any part of my posts, feel free to report them. If Mike wants it gone, it goes. Otherwise, it's my opinion, buyer beware, etc etc.


----------



## Infanteer (8 Sep 2004)

Marauder, no complaints from me.  Good post, couldn't of said it any better.


----------



## Cloud Cover (8 Sep 2004)

Got no heartburn what so ever ... I see worse than that every day. And again, while I agree with some of the substance of your post, the form is piss poor.   For example, your comment that society produced Clifford Olsen and Paul Bernardo is overbroad, and casts society into the same pot as those types of deviants with no elaboration   or sophistication what so ever. WTF?? You must be referring to a different society of "sane"   Canadians than most belong to...

As far as Mike etc., don't look to this call sign to jack you up on that, 'cause it would never happen. Then again, you took ownership for your post, so I agree that it is "buyer beware."


----------



## Infanteer (8 Sep 2004)

No one ever loved Marauder for his poetic abilites; that is my forte.   

To deflect any hard feelings, I'll put this one on track again with a question that a few of you may have a good answer for.

What has led to the state of the prison system that exists today?  Is the lighthanded nature that most average citizens seem to disapprove of wrapped up in various pieces of government legislation (tied to the Charter?) or is it due to a certain mindset that has overtaken senior officials with Corrections, one that has a strong aversion to any advocacy of tougher measures and those who would support them.

Or is it a completely different origin?  I'm interested to hear peoples ideas, and I got some of my own that I'll dig up from Robert Heinlein.


----------



## pbi (10 Sep 2004)

Good question. Here are a few random thoughts.


Prison reform, IMHO, has been going on fairly steadily in the English-speaking world since probably the end of the 19th century. The driving idea always seems to be that if we are somehow more "humane" with these people, they will indeed come to see the error of their ways and be rehabilitated. Believe it or not, the electric chair made its debut as a more "humane" way of executing people (Anybody here seen The Green Mile....??) so although the definition of the term has changed, the intent hasn't.  My opinion on this is that it will probably yield some success for those very early in their criminal lives, or those who are not suffering from the more advanced form of anti-social personality disorder or psycopathy, like the Bernardos and Olsons mentioned earlier. For the latter, it has probably never worked and probably never will.

Second, I believe that there is an abiding (if somewhat naive)  belief among most of us Canadians that people are all basically good, and will respond properly if dealt with from that premise. This, IMHO, is why we have difficulty dealing as strictly as we should with terrorists and their ilk, and why we get cold feet about things like Kosovo, OEF and OIF when it becomes necessary to whack/smack baddies.(Kosovo may be a bad example, as we led most of the Coalition non-US led air strike packages...) The epitome of this was the apocryphal story that when the events in Somalia were brought up in the House of Commons, one Hon Member stood up and righteously demanded to know why Canadian soldiers on a "peace-keeping" mission were carrying weapons. Once again, this fine and decent trait of ours runs smack into the reality of those who are simply not amenable to normal standards of behaviour, and for whom normal sanctions hold little or no fear.

Third, while I am reluctant to blame politicians for everything because it absolves us of responsibility, I have to say that IMHO  the social inclinations and beliefs of many who seem to gravitate to the party currently in power are distinctly woolly. These people are more than likely to be found in the various echelons of the Public Service, including Corrections. I have commented before on these pages about my perception of a few years ago that there was a fairly significant divergence in views between the "front office suits" and the "uniforms" in CSC.  In turn, they will apply what they believe to be "enlightened" methods, whether or not there is any empirical evidence to suggest that such measures will actually produce results. Further, I believe that these people would reject empirical evidence that "proved" that measures that they are uncomfortable with might actually be effective.

Just my take. Cheers.


----------



## NavyGrunt (11 Sep 2004)

I don't believe you can reform violent or sexual criminals. I'm all about hanging them high. Not leaving them to rot though. I know its societies fault that they offend that way. We didnt do enough when they were younger and their mothers didnt hug them enough. I understand. Doesnt mean that we have to live at their mercy- granting chances over and over. Hang 'em high and society try and learn what went wrong. Really I cant see any other way.

As for me being liberal. Well in Alberta you can kill a man legally for calling you that >

I just don't believe that anger should be the motive and the death penalty a punishment. I believe that justice and safety the motives and the death penalty is an instrument or insurance policy ensuring it doesnt happen again.


----------



## Torlyn (11 Sep 2004)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> To deflect any hard feelings, I'll put this one on track again with a question that a few of you may have a good answer for.
> 
> What has led to the state of the prison system that exists today?  Is the lighthanded nature that most average citizens seem to disapprove of wrapped up in various pieces of government legislation (tied to the Charter?) or is it due to a certain mindset that has overtaken senior officials with Corrections, one that has a strong aversion to any advocacy of tougher measures and those who would support them.
> 
> Or is it a completely different origin?  I'm interested to hear peoples ideas, and I got some of my own that I'll dig up from Robert Heinlein.



I'm wondering if it has anything to do with the historically recent rights revolution Canada has endured...  The charter is relatively new, and the Canadian Supreme Court has spent much of it's time over the last 22 years interpreting the charter. I can't help but wonder whether Canadian society, now that is has a codified system of rights, has perhaps begun to overuse the charter?  How many times have we heard from prisioners that their charter rights have been infringed upon?

I think one thing that needs to be done is the reduction of access to the prisons by the media.  No matter what, they ALWAYS paste the corrections systems as being staffed by goons, who routinely abuse prisoners.  That we're too tough on them..  Then, when they try to loosen up after getting political pressure, the media again goes after them for being too lenient.  I feel bad for corrections, because they are used as scapegoats on both sides of the argument.

So, to express my thoughts, I'd say that the current state of the prison system is such because the government has used it more as a political body, than as a system for punishment/rehabilitation.  We spend too much time defending the rights of the poor criminal, and not enough on the rights of the victim.

I wonder how much freedom the higher-ups in corrections have to dictate policy though...  I'd imagine the PMO tells them what the (current) policy is, demands that they both follow and endorse it, then change it again in a year or two to reflect the fickleness of our government's consistency.  Might be barking up the wrong tree, but those are my thoughts.

T


----------

