2 Edmonton police officers shot and killed

[Halifax Tar]

100% this. While some people may be morally deserving of death, the only way the power to issue that sentence could be ethically held by the state would be if the state could 100% flawlessly convict only people who actually did the thing they’re accused of doing. Any system with a less than 1.000 batting average for correct convictions is not a system that can be entrusted with the utterly irreversible power to lawfully execute someone safely in custody and convicted.

The system has flaws, and those flaws can result in false convictions. An execution must never occur based on a false conviction. Therefore, the state must not have execution.

I heard this on the news today:

Most Canadians support death penalty for murderers, poll shows

A new poll conducted by Research Co. has found that the majority of Canadians support reinstating the death penalty for murder.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[brihard]

And the special rules for YO's who move to adult facilities are absolutely hilarious. No using their last names, child advocates up the hoop, special privileges, etc...

And very seldom do they move to an adult facilitiy until they are at least 20, unless a judge signs off to move them earlier.

Yup. Back in school I did a co-op placement at a youth secure custody facility. We had one youth in there for a first degree murder committed when he was 17. He was sentenced to life, with possibility of parole after ten years. He was transferred to an adult prison when he turned twenty.

I heard this on the news today:

Most Canadians support death penalty for murderers, poll shows

A new poll conducted by Research Co. has found that the majority of Canadians support reinstating the death penalty for murder.

www.ctvnews.ca

To be perfectly blunt, I don’t care how many Canadians support capital punishment. If 99.9% of Canadians supported the death penalty and were willing to accept a small chance of someone being wrongfully executed, I would still hold to my opinion that those Canadians, regrettably, don’t know what they’re talking about on this one, and that public policy should not heed their opinion. It’s unacceptable for the state to get that one wrong. The state and its criminal justice system are incapable of never, ever getting it wrong.

 

[OldSolduer]

I suspect the reasons go deeper than just a ridiculously flawed legal "catch-and-release" legal system. Young people are also growing up in a world where the "Canadian Dream" is hopelessly out of reach, and seeing no real hope on the horizon, they decide to take a darker path.

I disagree - the vast majority of young people are doing what we did. Grew up, got a job and went on with life.

The ones that take a darker path make a very conscious decision to do so and adding this - many of those have a darker personality to start with.

How many times have you heard "He/she was always a little weird".

ADDING THIS: My Niner Domestic went to school with a man who was later convicted as a serial rapist. He may have been a murderer.

Niner Domestic's words "he was always a bit weird".

 

[OldSolduer]

Yup. Back in school I did a co-op placement at a youth secure custody facility. We had one youth in there for a first degree murder committed when he was 17. He was sentenced to life, with possibility of parole after ten years. He was transferred to an adult prison when he turned twenty.



To be perfectly blunt, I don’t care how many Canadians support capital punishment. If 99.9% of Canadians supported the death penalty and were willing to accept a small chance of someone being wrongfully executed, I would still hold to my opinion that those Canadians, regrettably, don’t know what they’re talking about on this one, and that public policy should not heed their opinion. It’s unacceptable for the state to get that one wrong. The state and its criminal justice system are incapable of never, ever getting it wrong.

Especially when its found you have a number of "murderers" released on wrongful convictions. Kyle Unger, Thomas Sophonow, and many many others were convicted of murder but were ultimately proven innocent.

 

[Furniture]

I disagree - the vast majority of young people are doing what we did. Grew up, got a job and went on with life.

The ones that take a darker path make a very conscious decision to do so and adding this - many of those have a darker personality to start with.

How many times have you heard "He/she was always a little weird".

ADDING THIS: My Niner Domestic went to school with a man who was later convicted as a serial rapist. He may have been a murderer.

Niner Domestic's words "he was always a bit weird".

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my other post.

I'm not denying the existence of the "weird" people who go on to do bad things, or even claiming that most people will go down a more violent path. I'm simply stating that times are getting harder, and a lot of young people seem to be checking out of the "system". When societies get too many listless young men, things get more violent. In the age of internet fame, and headline hungry 24/7 news media, I expect we will see a continuing trend of showy violence.

 

[mariomike]

I heard this on the news today:

Most Canadians support death penalty for murderers, poll shows

A new poll conducted by Research Co. has found that the majority of Canadians support reinstating the death penalty for murder.

www.ctvnews.ca

Probably some of us were influenced by what we remember from adults when growing up.

When they hanged the last two back-to-back at the Don, my uncle who was a Metro police officer didn't seem too bothered. I remember that.

One was a contract killer from Detroit. He claimed to be innocent of a double homicide in the Annex. Conviction was based on circumstantial evidence.

https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1962/1962canlii625/1962canlii625.html

The other shot a Metro officer on the Danforth. He was hanged 10 months after pulling the trigger.

Not to suggest 60 years ago was better, or worse, than now. Just different.

Maybe it's a deterent. Maybe not.

If we execute murderers and there is in fact no deterrent effect, we have killed a bunch of murderers. If we fail to execute murderers, and doing so would in fact have deterred other murders, we have allowed the killing of a bunch of innocent victims. I would much rather risk the former. This, to me, is not a tough call." John McAdams - Marquette University/Department of Political Science

I remember reading about men stealing bread during the Great Depression of the 1930's.
But, they weren't psychopaths or sociopaths ( always get the two mixed up. )

I understand politics and the judicial system have changed since then.

I wonder if they had the same number, or more, or less, of "senseless" crimes in decades past as we read about in the papers now?

 

[Haggis]

I wonder if they had the same number, or more, or less, of "senseless" crimes in decades past as we read about in the papers now?

Humanity has always had "senseless" and "sensationalistic" crimes. Today, with 24/7 near-real-time media coverage and global connectivity to that media, we're far more exposed to the lurid details on an ongoing basis.

 

[mariomike]

Humanity has always had "senseless" and "sensationalistic" crimes.

I am sure you are correct.

Just wondering if any experts were keeping scorecard.

 

[lenaitch]

I heard this on the news today:

Most Canadians support death penalty for murderers, poll shows

A new poll conducted by Research Co. has found that the majority of Canadians support reinstating the death penalty for murder.

www.ctvnews.ca

Comfortable in the knowledge that they will never have to push the plunger/pull the lever/flip the switch. I'll bet that, depending on the wording and timing of the question, a majority of Canadian would think we should go into Haiti.

I'm quite happy to commit my tax dollars to keeping 'the worst of the worst' locked up for a very - very - long time. Perhaps a government can revisit the 'consecutive sentence' issue in a manner that is Charter-proof. I didn't follow the SCC decision that closely but I got the sense that the original Quebec court mis-applied it.

Niner Domestic's words "he was always a bit weird".

I think many of us have know people like that from earlier times but we often lose track of them until something pops up in the news. A fellow I used to work with had a young lad around 12 when I knew him and I was convinced that he was going to end up in jail one day; he was just an out-of-control kid. Turns out I was sort of right - he works in Corrections.

 

[BrianWL]

Worst I can remember, though you have much more service than I.

my first cruiser had no motor, just stone wheels.

 

[Eaglelord17]

To be perfectly blunt, I don’t care how many Canadians support capital punishment. If 99.9% of Canadians supported the death penalty and were willing to accept a small chance of someone being wrongfully executed, I would still hold to my opinion that those Canadians, regrettably, don’t know what they’re talking about on this one, and that public policy should not heed their opinion. It’s unacceptable for the state to get that one wrong. The state and its criminal justice system are incapable of never, ever getting it wrong.

We already have the death penalty, its called 'life in prison' which is code for caged death by age. Stating that we don't and can't trust the state with that power is false as we already do. We just don't do it as quickly as it could be done. I would argue locking someone in a cage for the rest of their miserable life is crueler than executing them.

We don't need a 100% accuracy rate, we need to be fairly certain that person committed the crime (and in many cases we can 100% ensure it was this person thanks to modern technology) and then we need to deal with the problem once and for all. There are monsters in this world, and only by getting rid of them do we truly ensure our collective safety. When you have a aggressive dog attack people you don't argue about how that dog deserves to live and who are we to put it down.

 

[KevinB]

We already have the death penalty, its called 'life in prison' which is code for caged death by age. Stating that we don't and can't trust the state with that power is false as we already do. We just don't do it as quickly as it could be done. I would argue locking someone in a cage for the rest of their miserable life is crueler than executing them.

I would beg to differ, 25 years with potential parole at 10, is most definitely not the same.

We don't need a 100% accuracy rate, we need to be fairly certain that person committed the crime (and in many cases we can 100% ensure it was this person thanks to modern technology) and then we need to deal with the problem once and for all. There are monsters in this world, and only by getting rid of them do we truly ensure our collective safety. When you have an aggressive dog attack people you don't argue about how that dog deserves to live and who are we to put it down.

I’m pro Capital Punishment, but I’m also not in agreement that we shouldn’t demand a 100% Burden of Proof on the State for it.

Life should be sacred, and only taken when it is a very serious crime, and there is no doubt at all about the conviction.

 

[mariomike]

Maybe prosecutors in states with the death penalty can use it as a tool to negotiate a plea bargain.

I would argue locking someone in a cage for the rest of their miserable life is crueler than executing them.

I think I would prefer to live, if they offered a choice. Read about too many botched executions.

Also read Texas doesn't even give them a Last Meal anymore.

 

[brihard]

We already have the death penalty, its called 'life in prison' which is code for caged death by age. Stating that we don't and can't trust the state with that power is false as we already do. We just don't do it as quickly as it could be done. I would argue locking someone in a cage for the rest of their miserable life is crueler than executing them.

We don't need a 100% accuracy rate, we need to be fairly certain that person committed the crime (and in many cases we can 100% ensure it was this person thanks to modern technology) and then we need to deal with the problem once and for all. There are monsters in this world, and only by getting rid of them do we truly ensure our collective safety. When you have a aggressive dog attack people you don't argue about how that dog deserves to live and who are we to put it down.

That’s absurd. How can you possibly fail to grasp the difference between being in custody and being dead? The one can be reversed, and at least some compensation offered. The other is irreversible. I’ve released plenty of people from cells and they walked out. I’ve yet to bring anyone back from the dead outside of a pretty short CPR period that I’m sure would not last as long as an appeal. A wrongful execution is the state deliberately killing a factually innocent person.

There is no justifiable sentencing objective that cannot be adequately served with a true life without parole option. That’s within Parliament’s reach of the political will existed.

There is one and only one standard of proof for criminal matters: conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. Every single person in sentenced custody has had their guilt determined to that standard. Any yet the system is still fallible and mistakes happen.

I’m not the best cop, but I’m pretty decent. Same goes for most of my colleagues. Every single one of us makes mistakes. So does crown. We always will. Are you willing to bet the life of someone you care about on me and everyone like me or who works like be getting it absolutely perfect? I’m not. You have some sort of awestruck reverence for modern investigative technology. I’ll let you in on something: we have some good stuff, but none of it’s perfect.

Capital punishment satisfies some sort of primal need for revenge. I sympathize with that. I’ve had to see some horrible shit that I would love to see result in death for those responsible. But that vengeful desire does not justify the risk of screwing it up and taking an innocent life through judicial process.

If we have the ability to peer into an accused’s mind and know with utter certainty whether they did the deed, that would be different, but we don’t.

 

[mariomike]

I remember years ago when the death penalty was a hot topic of debate in Ottawa.

A guy at work wondered aloud, " What if they make a mistake and hang the wrong guy?"

Another said, "That's why we have a life insurance policy."

Some have argued the death penalty prevents murderers from murdering again, either in prison, or in society if they should get out.

 

[Eaglelord17]

It is less cruel to simply execute someone than to lock them away for the rest of their life.

It isn’t a revenge thing, it is a justice thing. It is the most fair punishment that can be applied, other than doing exactly what the scumbag did back to them.

I get you get caught up on semantics of what if they are innocent, but if we are that caught up on it why jail someone? Why arm cops or the military? They could get it wrong and kill the wrong person.

Some actions deserve death as a punishment. Our system well not perfect is about as good if not better than any that has ever been created.

Examples such as the Mosque shooter in Quebec where there is no doubt who did it is a perfect candidate for execution.

I would also include drug dealers, rapists, and the habitual serious offenders who have no interest in being part of civilized society.

 

[GK .Dundas]

At the moment I am writing parking tickets for a living .If I were to take Eaglelord 1's words at face value I have of this morning at least two candidates for immediate execution.
Although I seriously doubt that was his intent.

 

[Halifax Tar]

At the moment I am writing parking tickets for a living .If I were to take Eaglelord 1's words at face value I have of this morning at least two candidates for immediate execution.
Although I seriously doubt that was his intent.

You take your job way too serious if you think parking tickets equate to "habitual serious offenses".

 

[lenaitch]

We already have the death penalty, its called 'life in prison' which is code for caged death by age. Stating that we don't and can't trust the state with that power is false as we already do. We just don't do it as quickly as it could be done. I would argue locking someone in a cage for the rest of their miserable life is crueler than executing them.

We don't need a 100% accuracy rate, we need to be fairly certain that person committed the crime (and in many cases we can 100% ensure it was this person thanks to modern technology) and then we need to deal with the problem once and for all. There are monsters in this world, and only by getting rid of them do we truly ensure our collective safety. When you have a aggressive dog attack people you don't argue about how that dog deserves to live and who are we to put it down.

I'm not sure "fairly certain" is a bar that our common law system, or the system of any modern functioning democracy, should be satisfied with. Maybe despots sitting on their thrones were happy to wave their hand and dismiss somebody to their fate with 'fairly certain' (or they were bored that day).

We can't have 100% accuracy, but that's what we should aspire to. People get all excited about modern forensic technology - and it is marvelous - but it isn't perfect and neither are the people using it. Recent cold cases in Ontario have both implicated and exonerated persons through the use of technology which, at the time, was felt to be state-of-the-art. What unknown future technology will find our current latest-and greatest wanting?

 

[mariomike]

It is less cruel to simply execute someone than to lock them away for the rest of their life.

Interesting question to ask someone actually close to their date of execution.