Cenotaph/Memorial Vandalism/Solutions-Laws (merged)

[Danjanou]

Just as an update on the defaced mural

http://www.citynews.ca/2013/09/22/artists-help-repaint-vandalized-highway-of-heroes-mural/

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/09/24/defaced_highway_of_heroes_mural_reimagined_by_artists.html

 

[the 48th regulator]

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/national/jail+cenotaph+vandals+educate+them+says+retired+general/9491135/story.html


Don’t jail cenotaph vandals – educate them, says retired general Romeo Dallaire


By Jordan Press, Postmedia News February 10, 2014 2:00 PM

OTTAWA – A high-profile soldier-turned-senator is speaking against a Conservative MP’s bill to enact strict punishments for anyone caught vandalizing statues dedicated to Canada’s soldiers and veterans.

Independent Liberal Sen. Romeo Dallaire says he’d rather see some vandals ordered to spend a few hours listening to the tales of Afghanistan veterans than have them tossed in jail for vandalism. Hearing war stories from vets might turn a teenager who made a bad decision into an evangelist who will preach against defacing any of the almost 6,700 local monuments in Canada, Dallaire said.

The retired general, best-known to Canadians for his role as commander of the ill-fated UN peacekeeping mission during the 1994 Rwanda genocide, also guarded the Vimy Ridge memorial in France as a young soldier in the 1970s.

“A fundamental element of the (military) profession is to discipline within,” Dallaire said in a telephone interview Monday. ”You don’t use the hammer unless (wrongdoing) is wilfully or repetitively performed. I’ve commanded troops for 36 years … and I’ve kept that up in wartime.”

Bill C-217 is a private member’s bill from Conservative MP David Tilson. Under its terms, anyone caught desecrating a war memorial would face a minimum fine of $1,000 for a first offence; a second offence would bring at least 14 days in jail. Each subsequent offence would carry a minimum 30-day jail term.

Tilson introduced the bill after vandals tossed eggs at his community cenotaph in Orangeville, Ont., shortly before Remembrance Day in 2008. In a separate case, On Canada Day in 2006, three people were photographed urinating on the National War Memorial in Ottawa.

After failing to become law before Prime Minister Stephen Harper prorogued Parliament last summer, the revived bill passed second reading in the Senate last week, moments after Dallaire spoke against its mandatory sentences. A Senate committee will hear from Tilson on Wednesday afternoon as it begins studying C-217.

Unless someone repeatedly and wilfully targets and damages war memorials, Dallaire said, “this bill is going to be a very negative tool.”

“I don’t agree with these mandatory sentences,” he said. “You don’t educate a civilized society that way.”

If the bill passes the Senate, Canada will become one of the few countries in the world with a law specifically punishing war memorial vandals. Currently, such acts are covered by the mischief provisions of the Criminal Code.

The United States has a similar law, passed in 2003. In that time, there have been two convictions, according to Dallaire’s research. France and Great Britain – countries Dallaire describes as “replete with monuments” – don’t have such a law.

“The Brits don’t have a special sort of law,” Dallaire said. “None of those countries seemed to have felt it needed to have rules on mischief and social indecencies to places that we revere.”

Dallaire said he will ask the Senate’s legal and constitutional affairs committee to amend the bill, and sort through details about how the law, if enacted, would extend to overseas memorials, including those at Vimy Ridge and Juno Beach.

If the Senate makes any changes to the bill, it will be sent back to the House of Commons where MPs could accept or reject the changes.

jpress@postmedia.com

Twitter.com/jordan_press
© Copyright (c) Postmedia News

Read more: http://www.canada.com/jail+cenotaph+vandals+educate+them+says+retired+general+Romeo+Dallaire/9491135/story.html#ixzz2sxeINo6P

 

[PuckChaser]

A Liberal doesn't want someone in jail for breaking the law? Colour me shocked.  :facepalm:

 

[Container]

I hardly feel that someone who defaces anyone's memorial or tombstone is a member of civilized society.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Or even have Afghanistan vets apologize to the vandals and give the vandals $1000 for the cost of paint and their trouble.

 

[George Wallace]

......... France and Great Britain – countries Dallaire describes as “replete with monuments” – don’t have such a law.

“The Brits don’t have a special sort of law,” Dallaire said. “None of those countries seemed to have felt it needed to have rules on mischief and social indecencies to places that we revere.”

Since when did we become France or Great Britain.  Just because they don't have such a Law (yet), does not mean they may not contemplate one in the future if they see a rise in vandalism of National Monuments.  Just because they don't currently have such a Law, has no relevance on whether or not we should have one.

 

[Tibbson]

A Liberal doesn't want someone in jail for breaking the law? Colour me shocked.  :facepalm:

I agree that he missed the mark on this one but I think that on the one hand the retired General has a point, the education system failed these vandals as well as their own ethics and morals.  I have more then enough children that have gone through the education system of at least 4 provinces as we have moved around and regardless of where they were educated one thing was constant....we don't teach enough Canadian history and few Canadians get a full appreciation of it, especially our military history.

 

[George Wallace]

I agree that he missed the mark on this one but I think that on the one hand the retired General has a point, the education system failed these vandals as well as their own ethics and morals.  I have more then enough children that have gone through the education system of at least 4 provinces as we have moved around and regardless of where they were educated one thing was constant....we don't teach enough Canadian history and few Canadians get a full appreciation of it, especially our military history.

Don't lay all the blame on the "Education System" for these faults.  Where are/were their Parents?  Have we in this PC country removed all responsibilities from parents?

 

[brihard]

Mandatory minimums for vandalizing a war memorial? Bloody absurd. This is simply an attempt to 'legislate respect'- an idea that's ridiculous on its face.

There is a criminal code offense to cover this: S.430 C.C., Mischief. That comes with a maximum sentence of $5000 or six months if they go summary, or two years if they proceed by indictment. Courts have that option if merited. S.430 even has sections covering religious or cultural property that amplify potential sanctions.  This private member's bill purports that war memorials are somehow of such unique character as to necessitate mandatory minimums including jail time for a second offense. 14 days in jail for throwing a few eggs at a cenotaph? You wouldn't get that for damaging someone's personal property that an actual individual person ends up having to fix, clean, or replace.

War memorials are something that resonate hugely with us as a community. I get that. I really do. But making them unique in law like this is elevating them unreasonably above a whole bunch of other stuff. Someone convicted of a first offense for drunk driving won't get jail time (their life is screwed in other ways), but you get caught twice egging or pissing on a memorial and you go to jail? Entirely disproportionate.

The criminal justice system is very, very resource intensive. The time it would take to properly investigate and prosecute every offence that happens would exceed the capacity of the system massively. I'm not sure what the concepts are that some of you have of the system, but the vast majority of things done by people that are criminal offences are very trivial and minor, and don't merit prosecution, and police officers or crown attorneys will deal with them appropriately by other means. Throwing mandatory minimums are what are, really, quite trivial offences is a stupid waste of resource intended to pander to a certain political base. I think in the case of memorials the 'naming and shaming' response has been shown to work a lot better.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Mandatory minimums for vandalizing a war memorial? Bloody absurd. This is simply an attempt to 'legislate respect'- an idea that's ridiculous on its face.

There is a criminal code offense to cover this: S.430 C.C., Mischief. That comes with a maximum sentence of $5000 or six months if they go summary, or two years if they procede by indictment. Courts have that option if merited. S.430 even has sections covering religious or cultural property that amplify potential sanctions.  This private member's bill purports that war memorials are somehow of such unique character as to necessiate mandatory minimums including jail time for a second offense. 14 days in jail for throwing a few eggs at a cenotaph? You wouldn't get that for damaging someone's personal property that an actual individual person ends up having to fix, clean, or replace.

War memorials are something that resonate hugely with us as a community. I get that. I really do. But making them unique in law like this is elevating them unreasonably above a whole bunch of other stuff. Someone convicted of a first offense for drunk driving won't get jail time (their life is screwed in other ways), but you get caught twice egging or pissing on a memorial and you go to jail? Entirely disproportionate.

The criminal justice system is very, very resource intensive. The time it would take to properly investigate and prosecute every offence that happens would exceed the capacity of the system massively. I'm not sure what the concepts are that some of you have of the system, but the vast majority of things done by people that are criminal offences are very trivial and minor, and don't merit prosecution, and police officers or crown attorneys will deal with them appropriately by other means. Throwing mandatory minimums are what are, really, quite trivial offences is a stupid waste of resource intended to pander to a certain political base. I think in the case of memorials the 'naming and shaming' response has been shown to work a lot better.

:goodpost:

I agree completely, these new laws would end up not being worth the paper they are printed on.

 

[Tibbson]

Don't lay all the blame on the "Education System" for these faults.  Where are/were their Parents?  Have we in this PC country removed all responsibilities from parents?

Oh I'm certainly not laying the blame on our education system.  I've got a number of special needs children and the first thing I tell each one of their teachers (after I tell them I can be their best friend or their worst enemy ) is that it's not just their job to teach my children and that they had better involve my wife and I or we'll involve ourselves.  We've always had a very positive relationship with all of the teachers, even when the system sucked.

At the same time though, my core comment still stands in my mind.  These days most Canadian kids can tell you more American history then they can Canadian since they don't learn much in school.

 

[George Wallace]

Oh I'm certainly not laying the blame on our education system.  I've got a number of special needs children and the first thing I tell each one of their teachers (after I tell them I can be their best friend or their worst enemy ) is that it's not just their job to teach my children and that they had better involve my wife and I or we'll involve ourselves.  We've always had a very positive relationship with all of the teachers, even when the system sucked.

At the same time though, my core comment still stands in my mind.  These days most Canadian kids can tell you more American history then they can Canadian since they don't learn much in school.

It is a "partnership", but many in today's society are not "teamplayers"; placing self before all others.

 

[pbi]

Mandatory minimums for vandalizing a war memorial? Bloody absurd. This is simply an attempt to 'legislate respect'- an idea that's ridiculous on its face.

There is a criminal code offense to cover this: S.430 C.C., Mischief.
The criminal justice system is very, very resource intensive. The time it would take to properly investigate and prosecute every offence that happens would exceed the capacity of the system massively. I'm not sure what the concepts are that some of you have of the system, but the vast majority of things done by people that are criminal offences are very trivial and minor, and don't merit prosecution, and police officers or crown attorneys will deal with them appropriately by other means. Throwing mandatory minimums are what are, really, quite trivial offences is a stupid waste of resource intended to pander to a certain political base. I think in the case of memorials the 'naming and shaming' response has been shown to work a lot better.

:goodpost:

We don't need more laws. We have stacks of laws covering everything under the sun. We just need to enforce the ones we've already got.  What would have happened to somebody caught pissing on a war memorial in 1950, or '70, or '90?  A public mischief charge. Good enough. You can consider the gravity and impact of the offence when you do the sentencing, which is a pretty standard judicial practice.

 

[George Wallace]

We don't need more laws. We have stacks of laws covering everything under the sun. We just need to enforce the ones we've already got.  What would have happened to somebody caught pissing on a war memorial in 1950, or '70, or '90?  A public mischief charge. Good enough. You can consider the gravity and impact of the offence when you do the sentencing, which is a pretty standard judicial practice.

Agreed.  What we are facing today is not the lack of Laws or Regulations, but the complacency in not enforcing already existing Laws and Regulations, both in 'enforcement' and in the Courts.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Mandatory minimums for vandalizing a war memorial? Bloody absurd. This is simply an attempt to 'legislate respect'- an idea that's ridiculous on its face.

There is a criminal code offense to cover this: S.430 C.C., Mischief. That comes with a maximum sentence of $5000 or six months if they go summary, or two years if they proceed by indictment. Courts have that option if merited. S.430 even has sections covering religious or cultural property that amplify potential sanctions.  This private member's bill purports that war memorials are somehow of such unique character as to necessitate mandatory minimums ...

:goodpost:

+300 Milpoints, too

 

[Journeyman]

On a separate note.......

Independent Liberal Sen. Romeo Dallaire.....

So that's how it's currently phrased, now that Justin 2 (the non-Bieber one) revoked the Senators' Liberal status.


edit: punctuation  :facepalm:

 

[pbi]

Agreed.  What we are facing today is not the lack of Laws or Regulations, but the complacency in not enforcing already existing Laws and Regulations, both in 'enforcement' and in the Courts.

It might also be fair to admit that we are facing both Crowns and police services that are so overborne now that they can't handle the existing load of indictable offences, never mind summary or lesser offences that result in minor punishments.

A police constable today spends much of their life filling out forms, either on the road or in the station. The Crown faces a similar situation. Then the defence has the right to review everything (Which is certainly a right I would want if I was ever charged with anything serious).

As an example of how bad this can get, when I brought (then Commissioner) Fantino in to CFC to speak about LEA/CAF cooperation, he mentioned that the Crown was about to turn over a semi-trailer full of documents to the defence team of the Toronto Eighteen.

Making up more laws will just add to this mess.

 

[ModlrMike]

Three comments:

1. It's a private member's bill, the likelihood of passage remains slim for the moment.

2. "Educating" these vandals will be a wasted effort.

3. Enforcement of existing laws would be better, if not best. Creative sentencing like having them work in a Veteran's facility would be more effective than lecturing.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Mandatory minimums for vandalizing a war memorial? Bloody absurd. This is simply an attempt to 'legislate respect'- an idea that's ridiculous on its face.

There is a criminal code offense to cover this: S.430 C.C., Mischief ....

+1000  :goodpost:

1. It's a private member's bill, the likelihood of passage remains slim for the moment.

True - FYI, it's now with the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee according to the "where's this bill at?" page for Bill C-217, set to be discussed tomorrow and Thursday - list of witnesses include:

- David Tilson, MP, Dufferin-Caledon, Sponsor of the Bill

Royal Canadian Legion
- Gordon Moore, Dominion President
- Steven Clark, Director of National Ceremonies

Commonwealth War Graves Commission
- Brigadier-General (ret) David Kettle, Secretary General, Canadian Agency

Criminal Lawyers' Association
- Leo Russomanno, Representative
- Michael Spratt, Representative

Canadian Council of Criminal Defence Lawyers
- Graeme Hamilton, Representative

John Howard Society of Canada
- Catherine Latimer, Executive Director

As Individuals
- Colonel (ret) Andrew Nellestyn
- Chris Skalozub

3. Enforcement of existing laws would be better, if not best. Creative sentencing like having them work in a Veteran's facility would be more effective than lecturing.

:nod:

BTW, standby for a merge with all sorts of other discussion of Bill C-217 & other cenotaph defacement issues....

 

[kratz]

On a separate note.......
So that's how it's currently phrased, now that Justin 2 (the non-Bieber one)

[derail]
Thank you for the clarification, I thought you were using the post-nominal for the bar that is planned to go with the medal.  >
[/derail]