In a curious announcement the day before the throne speech, the Liberal Party has announced that it will get tough on conservative crime bills in the new session of Parliament. Many of these bills were previously approved by the Liberal's elected members before being filibustered and altered in the Liberal dominated Senate. Now that they have lost their Senate majority, their objective will shift to filibustering and gutting legislation in the lower house.
This is something that they insist must be done even if it means that they develop a reputation for being "soft on crime". It is just too important to keep criminals on the streets that it is worth the risk of a diminished reputation. You see, there are too many criminals in our prisons; therefore we must keep more criminals on the streets to avoid clogging prisons. "Free range criminals" are a much better alternative. As Craig Jones, the executive director of the John Howard Society of Canada "If you put people in jail, they get worse. We are going to create a cohort of harder persons."
Nice to see the Liberals setting their priorities for upcoming session of Parliament. Soft on crime, got it. It is better to put 1000 criminals back on the street than put one small time drug dealer in prison. Is that how the saying goes?
That single announcement justifies both all of Harper's Senate appointments as well as the prorogation to make them effective.
ReplyDeleteThe Liberals have just admitted they were using the Senate to block/gut legislation they didn't have the guts to oppose in public.
Request the bills begin where they left off last session.
ReplyDeleteLibs will refuse.
Bring back the bills, one at a time...then do the same as the Gun Registry, target specific LibDipper ridings.
The LPC has burned the candle at both ends for too long, they now must take a stand.
Crime can be eliminated if you narrow the gap between maximum allowed incomes and minimum guaranteed incomes. I support Bob Rae for Chancellor.
ReplyDelete"You should only go to jail for killing people or being a banker. If you put a person in jail, they will only become a worse criminal. Make banking and non unionized businesses illegal, but all other forms of crime should not carry a criminal offense. Otherwise you are only creating worser criminals."
ReplyDeleteFrom the link to Marx. Sorry M-a-M ,I figured you meant Groucho.Now I see why your site isn't on The Blogging Tories.
The Lib-Dips always scuttle any legislation that threatens to get tough on criminals, but when in power,they never seem to come up with an alternative that works,funny that.
There is and has been for along time, a criminal underclass in our society who wouldn't take a regular job if you gave then one. I worked for many years with "inmates"from the Provincial Correctional Facilities, a euphemism for Provincial Prisons, and got a real insight into the mind of the low-grade criminal.
Politicians can yap all they like about rehabilitation and victims, but the hard core of criminals will never opt out of the "good life",unless maybe the government gave them a $70,000 pension, as M-a-M mentions at his site.
Then they can sit on their lazy ass and smoke, drink and snort their life away, but most I know would go through the 70 grand in about three months and then what?
The Conservatives brought in one of the best pieces of legislation concerning crime only a couple of weeks ago, when they ended the 2 for one scam that saw a criminal get double credit for time served awaiting trial.
Hope it doesn't get reversed.
DMorris
Me too!
ReplyDelete..the 'ole red..
Your headline says it all. Liberals Get Tough on Crime Bill...not tough on crime.
ReplyDeleteConvicted criminals can vote. So can free ones. Now there is an untaped demographic.
ReplyDeleteFat Tony