More Prisons More Prisoners
March 9, 2010 - 12:49pm
Prison Building Spree Expected
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Prison+building+spree+expected/2659425...
"The head of Canada's prison system says there will be 'major construction initiatives' in the coming years to cope with the impact of federal legislation to imprison more offenders longer.."
Goddamn I hate the Cons. Pure unadultered hate. Backwards thinking asshats.
This is a golden opportunity to make them look like FOOLS.
Let them build all their big fancy prisons, then NOBODY COMMIT ANY CRIMES! Think of how stupid they'll look!
Who's in?
Dude...totally.I'm in.
But.....does this mean I have to give up the embezzlement? Damn!
Got shares in the industrial prison complex boys?
Crime rates, for the most part, have been decreasing for decades.
Then we see people like your Jaffer get off, so we know white collar criminals are going to get their usual pass by their peers.
Uh, "my" Jaffer??
I think his kid gloves treatment is an abomination. And I thought so two hours ago too, when I made that post.
...read that post snert, and what I read was your stating the white powder was baking soda, and the breath analysis was wrong, making it appear as if it was sarcastic, means little. Plausible denability was just added to by you....in that thread.
Having said that, I was more indicating hyprocritical heywood, than you, as we kbow for sure, he is directly connected to them all, and of course was/is completely abscent in the Jaffer thread.
Management went to my partners union a few years back to ask for marijuanna piss tests, the union said "sure, as long as we get to do coke tests on the management." The whole thing was dropped......
...read that post snert, and what I read was your stating the white powder was baking soda, and the breath analysis was wrong, making it appear as if it was sarcastic, means little. Plausible denability was just added to by you....in that thread.
Good lord. Just learn to read.
Okay Remind, I've tried to clarify for you in the new Jaffer thread.
There's also the original Jaffer thread in which I said:
But in this case, Jaffer was toting around some blow, and it's not at all impossible that she was going to be honking on some of that, had the po-po not taken it away from him. Wasn't he stopped on his way home?
I think that in keeping with the strong moral fibre of the Conservative party, she should take a voluntary urine test, to assure her constituents that she's not too high to represent them. Then I think she should set a good example by applying a "Zero tolerance" policy and kicking Jaffer to the curb. :)
and
I genuinely don't believe that this is the first time that a party animal like Jaffer has driven drunk, nor the first time he's purchased illegal narcotics.
And it's my opinion that you don't get your "second chance" after you (eventually) get caught. You get your second chance the day you wake up after driving home drunk, and have the opportunity to make a different choice next time. In that context, I believe he will have had more than just a second chance; he will have had many chances.
... among other comments.
Good grief, just learn how to stop being "sarcastic" and write directly what it is you meant.....
Good grief, just learn how to stop being "sarcastic" and write directly what it is you meant.....
Sometimes your dreams verge on the impossible. Besides that would spoil his "fun" now wouldn't it?
What can I say? Sarcasm is endemic to this and every other discussion board. If yoiu can't understand it, you'll always be at a disadvantage.
But be honest, Remind, this didn't come about because my sarcasm was unintelligible to a normal adult. It came about because you wanted to believe that I had some kind of sympathy for Jaffer because he's a Conservative, and even when I pointed out that I had none, you really didn't want to believe that.
But be honest, Remind, this didn't come about because my sarcasm was unintelligible to a normal adult.
Maybe the problem is you think you are normal and anyone who doesn't understand your drivel isn't. You might want to think about whether you have that equation ass backwards.
To be fair to the conservatives, this seems to be a case of prudent planning. They're actively pursuing policies that will see a higher inmate population so they have to build more jails. Think of it as their way of lowering the unemployment rate. They know that anyone who points out that longer prison sentences don't lower crime rates can be dismissed as a "bleeding heart liberal". Apparently, we Canadians have a case of collective myopia because anyone who looks around the world (or even south of the border) will recognize instantly that the places with the harshest criminal systems don't necessarily have the lowest crime rates.
I think the Cons are playing to their bible-thumping base. When you know people are naturally evil beings who have to be "saved", it becomes entirely natural that more of them should be in jail. It makes perfect sense. But it goes beyond longer prison sentences.
The policies of lowering taxes, dismantling government services, and allowing "free markets" to generally do whatever the hell they want, will result in greater societal inequality. It's as natural and inevitable as water flowing downhill. And there is very good evidence to show that greater societal inequality is linked to all kinds of social problems including crime.
So by pursuing their policies, the Cons will help to reverse the disturbing downward trend in crime and restore their followers faith in the capacity of people for evil. Win-win, I say.
So by pursuing their policies, the Cons will help to reverse the disturbing downward trend in crime and restore their followers faith in the capacity of people for evil. Win-win, I say.
Some babblers cannot comprehend sarcasm, so in the interest of accessibility, please refrain from using it.
Maybe krops problem is he thinks hes normal and snert is not. Im pretty sure Im not normal and nor is anyone on this board.
And thats a good thing
So by pursuing their policies, the Cons will help to reverse the disturbing downward trend in crime and restore their followers faith in the capacity of people for evil. Win-win, I say.
Some babblers cannot comprehend sarcasm, so in the interest of accessibility, please refrain from using it.
Don't try to drag me into your debate with Remind - I've had my own. You're on your own, pal.
Being normal is quite overrated. The site below however is both the old and the new norml.
http://www.norml.ca/
But that norml would lead to less demand for prisons.
Can't have that, krop. It would violate the Conservatives core values on any number of fronts. Drug legalization would remove one of the leading tools in the war on poor people. It would generate untold wealth for governments - and the great unwashed might expect it to be spent on them. It would instantly lower the crime rate, making it much harder to instill fear in the population. And worst of all, if people had control over what substances they could put in their bodies, why they might get other crazy notions, like wanting to control the government.
krop, you've got some dangerous ideas. Best keep them locked up.
No mandatory minimums for pot in NL;-)
Holland rents jail space to Belgium
ReutersFebruary 6, 2010
Supplementing one's income by renting out a spare room is hardly a novel concept, but the Netherlands took it a big step further on Friday when, in a European first, it officially leased a prison to Belgium.
With plenty of prison cells to spare, the Netherlands has agreed to admit 500 Belgian inmates into its prison in the southern Dutch city of Tilburg. Belgium will pay the Dutch $44 million a year for the favour under a three-year deal.
Spearheaded last year by former Belgian prime minister Herman van Rompuy -- who is now president of the European Council -- the initiative should provide relief to Belgium's overcrowded prisons until new ones come into operation in 2012.
I don’t think people understand what is going on regarding prisons. It all has to do with conservative legislation that doubles or triples the amount of time a criminal spends in prison. Double bunking is the first step and as they are going to double or triple the time a criminal spends in them (excluding conservative criminals of course) …new prisons are required. It has nothing to do with crime.
So while conservatives are busy trying to keep their “tough on crime” supporters happy and the government cuts back on social spending etc. they will be spending billions of dollars they don’t have building prisons. I hope the conservatives that end up in the bread lines are happy when they have to resort to crime to pay their bills.
By then they should have privatized the entire corrections Canada to the American company “ super prison” and all the tough on crime workers that supported the conservatives will then become rent-a-cop waged minions of the conservatives.
I hope the conservatives have alloted money for all the riots that will occur due to overcrowding. Riots sometimes cost millions of dollars.
Oh, btw, I was being sarcastic about the money.
Gah! Please don't exclude some babblers by encrypting your thoughts in sarcasm!
Another factor if they go the privatization route is that prisons will become a business , much like the US. The name of the game will be stuffing prisons with prisoners for money and profit.
All the potheads might want to consider getting their heads out of the bong and vote these neocons out before they start stuffing prisons with them. I can see Mr conservative counting the money now ..say what ? $30,000 a head ..we got lots of potheads in Canaduh . Maybe that will be the motivating factor to get young people to vote and the crowd that doesn’t vote, that say while smoke is coming out their ears “ It doesn’t matter who you vote for , they are all the same ..(cough , cough, hack, hack)”
In the Excited States they like pot heads since they are often reasonably well educated and make great customer service employees for the corporations that use prison labour.
So which party to you think Dana should try to run for next time?
This is a golden opportunity to make them look like FOOLS.
Let them build all their big fancy prisons, then NOBODY COMMIT ANY CRIMES! Think of how stupid they'll look!
Who's in?
If they can't get enough prisoners legally, they will come up with some trumped up crimes and make them "stick". Like property/poverty crimes or (conspiracy to commit) 'acts of terrorism', for instance.
I think the Cons are playing to their bible-thumping base. When you know people are naturally evil beings who have to be "saved", it becomes entirely natural that more of them should be in jail.
[Sigh] Well, I've never accused the religious right of being intelligent. Prisons are not 'reformatories'. The current Canadian (and American) penitentiary system is not designed this way. If anyone serves their time and gets released "reformed", "rehabilitated" or "saved", it will be in spite of the system rather than because of it.
I hope the conservatives have alloted money for all the riots that will occur due to overcrowding. Riots sometimes cost millions of dollars.
Attica, anyone?
NDP: US-style mega-prisons wrong for Canada
The Conservative spending plan tabled this week shows a 43% increase in the budget for prison construction, from $230 million in 09/10 to $329 million in 10/11.
“At the same time as they are pouring money into prisons, they have failed to invest in priorities to keep communities safe,” said Davies. “There is not one new penny for crime prevention. There is nothing to put more officers on our streets, or to stop the closure of police detachments in rural areas.”
“This budget just goes to show that this government isn’t interested in the people and programs who are working to stop crime before it happens.”
American woman gonna mess your mind
American woman gonna mess your mind
American woman gonna mess your mind
Steve the lap poodle has to get an agenda of his own one of these days.
The Treasury Board President also faced questions about the Conservative government’s commitment to cutting the deficit while spending billions of dollars on new prisons while the crime rate is, in fact, declining.
Mr. Day doesn’t buy the view that crime rates are declining. Rather, he maintains crime is going unreported in Canada at “alarming” rates.
“It shows we can’t take a Liberal view to crime which is, some would suggest, that it is barely happening at all,” Mr. Day said. “Still, there are too many situations of criminal activity that are alarming to our citizens and we intend to deal with that.”
Reporters were left scratching their heads.
“I will follow up on that because I am baffled,” Sun Media’s Ottawa bureau chief David Akin said. “There is a statistic about unreported crimes? I mean if they are not reported by definition we have no idea about these crimes.
“You are just not making sense or I may be just a dolt and I don’t understand. Help me out on this one.”
More prisons needed to lock up perps of "unreported" crimes, says Stockie Day
considering he believes the world is only a few thousand years old, it's not surprising Stockwell doesn't think rationally when it comes to anything else.
obviously reality is not a factor when it comes to his decision making.
What a idiot day is and proves yet again who owns the Conservatives, they build prisons so they can then privatize them.
For unreported crimes nonetheless.
BTW the link is unstable using IE, perhaps they are trying to deter people from finding out just what idiots they are.
Seeing that Canada's crime rate has been on the decline year after year for the past 15 years,this has little to do with 'public security'
The Reform Party is not going to create new laws designed to fill new prison cells,the Reform Party will only revive out-dated,failed and proven unconstitutional laws.All one has to do is see the new ad campaigns making their way to our televisions,buses and metro systems..A Ronald Reagen style 'just say no to drugs' campaign that has nothing to do with rehabilitation and clearly the preventitive portion of this farce will be an iron fisted punishment approach.
This is something documented and PROVEN to be a collossal failure that wastes billions of tax payers dollars every year,destroys more lives than it saves,turns our neighbourhoods into police states ,protects organized crime and bolsters their profits and doesn't decrease drug use by even 1%..This is why some states in the U.S. have given up this approach...Massachusetts passed a law a little while back effectively decriminalizing possession of 30 grams or less of cannabis...'Offenders' are now subject to a fine..Ironically,Canada was going to pass the same law in 2003 but was bullied and threatened by the then Republican Party to back off of any idea of doing this.
California will be taking the issue to the electorate and have a referendum this Fall,not to decriminalize cannabis but to LEGALIZE cannabis.
The Harperites 'get tough on crime' bill is crystal clear when you read between the lines...Mark my words,it will be a full out assault on cannabis users,INCLUDING those who use it for medicinal purposes.
Certainly a waste of taxpayers' money and counter-productive to reducing crime but definitely a winfall for multi-national firms like Sodexho, Compass Group and perhaps Aramark who have all gotten on the prison services gravy train.
No, the reported rate of crime is declining. There are only 2 crimes for which the stats give an accurate reflection of what is happening: murder and car theft.
Having said that, I don't see how building more prisons is going to make more people report crimes, especially considering that sometimes when you report a crime the police won't even send anyone out and instead tell you to make a report at the station.
The majority of unreported crimes are crimes against women.
What are the Cons. going to do to reverse this problem?
What are the Cons. going to do to reverse this problem?
Put the women in prison! Problem solved.
I should run as a Conservative in the next election...
considering he believes the world is only a few thousand years old, it's not surprising Stockwell doesn't think rationally when it comes to anything else.
obviously reality is not a factor when it comes to his decision making.
Doris seems to be blissfully unaware that the entire country is laughing at him.
What are the Cons. going to do to reverse this problem?
Put the women in prison! Problem solved.
I should run as a Conservative in the next election...
Funny but brutal, funny but brutal.
Anyone who thinks Canada has a crime problem should visit Detroit,Chicago,DC,Philadelphia,Newark or Oakland..Doesn't really matter what time of the day or night.
Then come back to Canada and THEN complain about our supposed crime problem...Even the Cons are now scrambling to MAKE UP statistics to justify the police state they are planning to turn Canada into.
Canada = safest country in the world (a statement that will be very hard to argue against...unless you're Stockwell Day or a Harperite,ofcourse)
MAKE UP statistics to justify the police state they are planning to turn Canada into.
That is exactly what this prison building scheme is. This is the same bunch that dropped a billion of your tax dollars on the G8/20 piggie fest extravaganza don't forget...but don't worry - in the Canadian police state you'll get to keep your 'loyal' opposition parties....
@NoDifference...
You're right..Where are the opposition parties?
You'd figure someone in the opposition would be jumping all over this...But ofcourse they're not.
I guess we're now in the American political dilemma where the opposition will never do the right thing because they fear they will come across as 'soft on crime'...Which is absolute bullshit but that's the only thing that can explain their apparent approval of this.
So it looks like we're fucked.
This is not ONLY about the purpose of the prisons. There are three purposes to this policy:
1) build more prisons because they want them -- which everyone here understands well
2) build them because it is politically useful- motivate the base etc. Doesn't matter for this purpose if people actually are in them
3) Dump public money on this and other right-wing friendly initiatives so there won't be money left for the kinds of spending people actually want but that the Cons are opposed to. again for this it does not actually matter if people populate those prisons. The key is to break the ability of the government to deliver public services people want that the Cons are ideologically opposed to.
@Sean...I agree BUT if you follow what the Cons have been up to and that is delivering the policy to the letter of the Republican Party,clearly the next step will be to privatize these new prisons.
Once that happens,police and courts will become employees of this new industry and have quotas to meet.There will then be profits to be made by incarcerating as many Canadians as possible.
If there is a sharp drop in crime,the only alternative to protect the viability of this new industry will be to impose harsh sentences on victimless crimes...Hence a war on drugs in the carbon copy of the Reagen/Bush era of the 1980's and early 90's.
Also,watch out for a hefty increase of funding to our major cities 'morality squads'.
This translates into a police state and police states are generally defined by fascist governments. ..I know,people are uncomfortable with the 'F' word but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's most likely a duck.
@ Sean in Ottawa
There is a fourth reason.
How much do you want to bet they might include a factory floor in the plans for these new prisons?
Look at the situation in the U.S. Who wouldn't be jealous of a pool of 2.5 million workers guaranteed to show up on time and not quit, no union problem, no benefits, no pensions and all subsidized by the taxpayers?
@ Sean in Ottawa
There is a fourth reason.
How much do you want to bet they might include a factory floor in the plans for these new prisons?
Look at the situation in the U.S. Who wouldn't be jealous of a pool of 2.5 million workers guaranteed to show up on time and not quit, no union problem, no benefits, no pensions and all subsidized by the taxpayers?
Excellent point.
As much as I am horrified at the thought I am unable to disagree with either of you-- good points both of you!
@ Sean in Ottawa
I wish I could say I'm a visionary genius, but in fact I have read news reports about prision job fairs in the U.S. (basically prisons selling their slave labour to the highest corporate bidder). I expect it has been big business down there since the days of the chain gang... which, come to think of it wasn't too long after the days of slavery.
I've heard of this in the US-- just not here but I could see them doing it
I'm sure it's being replicated already.
Tories Roll Out First Stage of Prison Plan
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/todays-paper/Tories+roll+first+stage+p...
"600 new cells to accommodate influx from tough-on-crime agenda..."
This is a golden opportunity to make them look like FOOLS.
Let them build all their big fancy prisons, then NOBODY COMMIT ANY CRIMES! Think of how stupid they'll look!
Who's in?
If they can't get enough prisoners legally, they will come up with some trumped up crimes and make them "stick". Like property/poverty crimes or (conspiracy to commit) 'acts of terrorism', for instance.
Do other people here really believe this? because (no offence to frmsld) but this is some seriously crazy paranoid shit.
Do other people here really believe this? because (no offence to frmsld) but this is some seriously crazy paranoid shit.
Uh,yeah...Canada's crime rate has been steadily declining for the last 15 years.
Stage one will be potheads (including those who use it for medicinal purposes),property crimes and conspiracy (which would open the door to imprisoning people who thought about something aloud and never acted on it--ATTENTION: freedom of speech).
These prisons will become privatized and once that happens,the police,our courts--judges,prosecuters and even defense attorneys will become employees working to protect the new 'profit from crime' business that will make prisons money making corporations.
We'll be just like the U.S. and have a good 20% of the populous in jail,working for pennies a day,protecting the corporate powers that be profits and using this new tool to take care of the poor,the homeless and the sick.
A virtual win/win for the corporate cretins dictating policy and making laws...I can see the collective high fives being slapped around from the Fraser Institute to Canada Inc.,to Washington to the E.U.
Harper Government to Announce More Prison Expansions
http://www.canada.com/news/national/Tories+announce+more+prison+expansio...
"The number of penitentiaries listed for expansion in a $2Billion federal prison building boom will rise to more than 2 dozen Monday as Conservative MPs make announcements on 8 prisons in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario and Quebec..."
prisons and war - how much longer do we tolerate this?
Tories Won't Back Down From Tough-On-Crime Stance: Government Not Swayed By Crime-Rate Drop
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Canada/1229600.html
"The Harper government's plan to spend billions of dollars on lock-'em-up policies could be a defining issue in the federal election. They would also mean huge costs for provinces already dealing with overcrowded jails.."
So the jails are overcrowded? And building more, so they're not overcrowded, is wrongheaded for some reason?
If crime really is going down, and has been for a long time, I would kind of expect the prisons to gradually become LESS crowded. Is my math wrong?
I can see the right wing urges to criminalize more activities and increase the sentence lengths. However on the other side, there is a slow but steady societal move away from jailing people for using recreational drugs and for treating people medically for using harmful drugs. Perhaps they can hold off the building consensus for a few years, but it seems to be like King Alfred comanding the tide not to come in.
but it seems to be like King Alfred comanding the tide not to come in
Minor correction, but I think that was King Canute. And would you believe I was just thinking about that story about two minutes before I read your post?
Thanks
So the jails are overcrowded? And building more, so they're not overcrowded, is wrongheaded for some reason?
If crime really is going down, and has been for a long time, I would kind of expect the prisons to gradually become LESS crowded. Is my math wrong?
It is the Harper administration's bills that have been passed into law toughening existing laws and lengthening sentences over the past five years that has caused the increase in prison inmates and overcrowding.
For the ReformaTory Cons, this creates a nice self-fulfilling need.
.
Yeah it's not like they tried to enact US style three strikes law as soon as they were elected back in 2006 or anything.
It's like Simon Pegg kept saying in that horror flick, we should prolly all go to the Winchester, have a nice cold pint, and wait for all of this to blow over. How's that for a slice of fried gold?
An interesting article on Harper's new pet institute, the one that's been hyping rising crime:
Stuff like that is supposed to be illegal. More to the point, it's exactly the kind of "revolving door" activity - moving in and out of the public and private sectors for personal gain - that the Conservatives had promised to stamp out when they stamped out the Liberals.
Directly or through spokesminions, both Newark and Day consistently denied any impropriety, claiming that because, in the three months that he worked for Day's office, Newark hadn't got around to signing the papers that would have made him a public office holder.
If he wasn't a public office holder, the logic went, he wasn't subject to that hinky little part of the criminal code that prohibits a public office holder from tucking into government pork within a year of holding office.
Easy peasy!
So why does Newark's past matter right now? Because it's 2011, and despite his claims to be working for an "independent" think tank, he still appears to be backing his old government buddies on what remains a pretty controversial issue.
Let's take a moment to remember that it was over the issue of the crime bill that Prime Minister Harper was forced to prorogue Parliament just over a year ago.
It seems pretty clear that whatever the facts show, the Conservatives have remained steadfast in their desire to crack down on crime as a simple matter of political ideology.
If crime really is going down, and has been for a long time, I would kind of expect the prisons to gradually become LESS crowded. Is my math wrong?
There are two types of inmates in provincial jails: those who are sentenced, and remands, who are awaiting trial. For some reason, over the past ten or so years in Ontario, the remands have been lingering in pre-trial custody for much longer than they did previously. People with relatively simple charges seem to be staying incarcerated for months. So the overcrowding has less to do with legislation and more to do with the process of addressing the charges of people in custody, who are for the most part, people who stay in jail because they can't afford bail. One of my methadone clients spent 4 months in jail because of numerous charges of panhandling in the subway. His bail was very low, but he was destitute, so in jail he stayed until he managed to get in front of a judge, who released him immediately.
I don't know much about what happens in court, and if anybody has insight into why a couple of drug/theft charges takes weeks of multiple court visits, please share.
Certainly speeding up the process would help, and could ease crowding in jails. But until that happens (and we don't know that it will) I was merely suggesting that building more facilities is a fairly reasonable response to a shortage of facilities.
I'm wondering though: is there a difference between the provincial system you mention, and a federal system, or are they one and the same?
Certainly speeding up the process would help, and could ease crowding in jails. But until that happens (and we don't know that it will) I was merely suggesting that building more facilities is a fairly reasonable response to a shortage of facilities.
I'm wondering though: is there a difference between the provincial system you mention, and a federal system, or are they one and the same?
It's not a reasonable response when the intention is to PUT more people behind bars.
That's what the Reform Party has been saying for a few years now...Not once did they say this was just a response to taking care of prison over population.
And with the low crime rates we have in this country (if you don't believe it,kindly leave this country and go anywhere else and see how our crime rate REALLY is..I digress) new prisons are for those who will fall victim to the new anti-crime bill.
Hence,alot of victimless crime offenders and offenders of the new 'Morality'.
Afterall,King Stephen has publicly stated that he wants to police social norms and values.
Gimme an 'F'...you know the rest.
It's not a reasonable response when the intention is to PUT more people behind bars.
If the current facilities are overloaded with prisoners we have to house RIGHT NOW then it's still reasonable, regardless of future plans.
Or, let me ask you: if the Cons decided, suddenly, to drop all new legislation initiatives -- so, no new laws, no mandatory minimums, etc. -- would that provide space for the prisoners we've already got, or would they still be overcrowded? It's my thinking that they'd still be overcrowded.
Well, the provincial system is funded by the provinces while the federal system is under Correctional Services Canada. The feds take inmates who have been sentenced to two years or more, while the provincial system houses both remands and people sentenced up to two years less a day. So overcrowding in provincial jails should, IMV, address the speed with which the justice system brings people to trial. After all, they're innocent until proven guilty, but in the meantime, if they can't afford bail, they sit in jail, sometimes for months.
Currently, the majority of people in jail are in the provincial system.
Question: if overcrowding is mostly due to backlogs in the justice system, but instead of taking steps to streamline the justice system, instead the government wants to build more jails, who benefits?
Without knowing the actual costs of each (building a jail vs. building another courthouse, hiring justices, bailiffs, etc.) then I can't really say. And even that assumes that the delays are solely due to a shortage of staff.
I suppose it's too much to ask you to consider whether justice is actually being served....
Funny snert, that you would think about it in building and staffing costs, as opposed to people being incarcerated at length, because they can't afford even small bail conditions, when those who can get out immediately.
Especially given it costs more to house, for 4 months as in sineed's example, than the financial gains of minor bail receipts.
Thus it would seem the easiest and most cost effective solution would be not to impose minor bail conditions upon those wiith minor crimes especially those that are poverty related, and thus tax payers incur benifits in both savings from the unnecessary housing costs and the lowering the over crowded jail situations thereby garnering a savings of billions, on not building unneeded jails.
It would seem the right would like to continue to state that socialist thinking around jail incarceration has not worked and would like to go to great lengths trying to prove it doesn't. even if it means erroneously making more jails and more criminals.
Fact is crime rates have been decreasing for years based upon social programs and social conduct laws.
Recently, small crime rates have been going up as they are poverty related, which interestingly also proves socialist thought has decreased crimes against society. When we had full social programs and poverty rates were lower, there was less crime, now that social programs have been gutted crimes because of poverty are again on the increase.
It is not unreasonable to say that non-socialist thought increases crime rates and our social history of the last 30 years shows that clearly.
I suppose it's too much to ask you to consider whether justice is actually being served....
I am. *If* delays aren't caused solely by understaffing or lack of facilities (courthouses, etc.) then I would assume that delays would be procedural and that at least some of these would be to an accused's benefit (remand notwithstanding). I'm certainly not saying that it's OK to keep someone in remand for an undue amount of time, but I just don't have the facts on why.
ed'd to add, and to be clear: if the delays to trial are due to lack of courthouses, justices, counsel, or similar then I would absolutely say that money should be rerouted from building new prisons to ensuring sufficient courthouses, justices, counsel, etc. Absolutely.
That said, would the money for this actually come out of *Provincial* coffers?? Is the fact that provincial jails are used for federal remand a snafu? Is the federal budget for federal penitentiaries only, which would not ease any burdens on jails used for remand?
Especially given it costs more to house them, for 4 months as in sineed's example, than the gains of minor bail receipts.
Bail is a surety, not a means of revenue generation. Bail is to ensure that you show up for trial, and in some cases (accused is deemed a flight risk, for example) bail is not granted. And, as noted, others cannot raise the funds. What would you suggest, in lieu of a surety, to ensure that an accused shows up for trial?
Small bail conditions are no assurity for those showing up for court, suggesting such is ludicrous. Hell, large bail conditions are no assurity either.
Moreover, as a society we know, or should, that jail does not rehabilitate people and that we need to move beyond such right wing sociopathic thinking that it does, and into stronger social programs and anti-poverty strategies and stop wasting money on a system that does not work to benefit individuals, nor society at large.
Small bail conditions are no assurity for those showing up for court, suggesting such is ludicrous. Hell, large bail conditions are no assurity either.
Do you mean that they're not an absolute guarantee? Yes, of course they're not. Nor are speeding fines.
No; just to clarify, the feds incarcerate people sentenced to two years or more. You can deduce that some inmates will end up getting federal time (ie, a murder charge), but everybody is innocent until proven guilty. The sentence isn't predetermined, and it's the length of the sentence that is the entire criterion for determining whether the sentence is served federally or provincially. This is different from the USian system, where they have federal charges and state charges - and sometimes the same crime may be federal or state depending on (I think) jurisdictional matters (to be honest I don't know all the details of the USian system. Sometimes homicide is a federal crime and sometimes it is a state crime and I don't understand why).
Bingo!
Besides this, my beef with the current system is the role of the accused's personal financial situation on the outcome of the case. Nasty psychopathic gangsters with lots of ill-gotten gains have the funds to hire attack dog lawyers that get them off the hook - there was a recent shameful case in Toronto where two of these walked free from a murder charge despite a credible witness because the lawyers were able to successfully cast aspersions on the credibility of this witness, a woman who suffered death threats and community ostracism in order to testify. The sight of two well-dressed white men haranguing and humiliating a young black woman was surely a red-letter day for Canadian justice.
Then there are my patients, the destitute and drug addicted, who steal bicycles, shoplift and sell small quantities of drugs to support their habits. And they spent months in jail.
Then there's the two doctors who are charged with drugging a young woman and raping her. Two more women have come forward since this charge was made public. They are out on bail, $100,000 each, which they easily met after about 24 hours of incarceration.
It seems that the current system doesn't use available resources to maximize community protection.
You know if our prisons are over populated maybe REVIEWING current policy makes more sense...It would also be a hell of alot cheaper.
Again,the Cons have made it clear that they want to put more Canadians behind bars..Hence,we're looking at MORE prison over population AFTER spending billions on building more.
And,again,this legislation and plan to build more prisons has NOTHING to do with prison over population or making prisons safer for inmates and those who work inn the prison system.
It's all about putting more Canadians behind bars...Which part of it do you not understand?
And the FACT that Harper has already said he wants to police social norms and values is ideological and flirting with fascism.
You know the saying...'First they came for them....Then they came for me'
It's all about putting more Canadians behind bars...Which part of it do you not understand?
I understand your opinion, but it's an opinion, not a fact. If I don't agree with one of your opinions, it's not a given that it's somehow beyond my abilities of reason.
Anyone who dismisses the fact that the Reform Party who HAS SAID again and again and again that the whole purpose of building new prisons is to accomadate all the new arrests and criminals that their anti-crime bill will produce certainly has their heads planted firmly in their ass.
The Reform Party have been explicit about this and it's an agenda they are not hiding.
Also,Harper has said..Let me repeat this again...That he wants to police social norms and values.
A social 'norm' is a lifestyle...A 'value' is a belief.
Anyone who thinks individuals should be incriminated for leading a lifestyle or having different values than King Stephen's idea of 'proper' norms and values is NOT a progressive.
Stephen Harper is an Albertan seperatist...Not an opinion.
The Reform Party has stated over and over again..and in this issue they are so transparent that they are translucent...that the need for more prisons are for what they anticipate from their anti crime legislation....MORE arrests,more arraignments and more prisoners...Not an opinion.
Find ONE quote from Harper,Nicholson,Day or any other Reform Party henchman that the idea of building more prisons is to address over population..You're not going to find one...Not an opinion.
If you are so on side with Harper's hard on for imprisoning more Canadians,what are you doing on rabble?...You're not a progressive.
Why don't you phone a porcine Harper cheerleader like Charles Adler and maybe you could meet afterwards for a pint of hobo blood and a hippie sandwich.
This dude doesn't need jail?
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2011/02/24/17400116.html
Macleod said while Cheng's infidelity didn't justify An's attack on her, it explained the Calgary researcher's angry outburst.
"Dr. An was unable to control his emotions and his obsession with his wife's infidelity caused him to act in a brutish manner, which was totally out of character for him," the judge said.
"That he was unable to control his emotions in not excusable, but at some level it is sadly understandable."
The judge found An was extremely remorseful for his actions, quoting extensively from a statement from the killer read in court in which he expressed profound guilt for his conduct.
"He too was a victim of his own crime," Macleod said of An, who holds a medical degree and PhD.
"Never before have I witnessed a person convicted of a crime with such a sense of responsibility and guilt and recognition of the harm done."
Outside court, defence counsel Alain Hepner, who had proposed a five-year term, said he didn't believe such a punishment would send out the wrong message to potential domestic abusers.
Why don't you phone a porcine Harper cheerleader like Charles Adler and maybe you could meet afterwards for a pint of hobo blood and a hippie sandwich.
OMG!! Hobo Blood Libel!
LOL!!!
OMG!! Hobo Blood Libel!
LOL!!!
Seeing that you toe the Reform Party line of dismissing facts as 'opinions' , are you sure your name isn't Dimitri?
The Reform Party ceased to exist in 2000. That's Wikipedia's opinion, anyway.
You're right...They aren't the Reform Party..lol
Maybe you feel better being known as a Conservative but your buddy Harper is NOT a conservative..He's an ideologue and a fascist.
When the Reform Party and the Progressive Conservative party merged,the PCC ceased to exist.
But,in any case,Dimitri..Your esteemed leader is a Reform Party ideologue and since he calls all the shots,you can label yourselves anything you like but you are still and always will be the Reform Party.
But,in any case,Dimitri..Your esteemed leader is a Reform Party ideologue and since he calls all the shots,you can label yourselves anything you like but you are still and always will be the Reform Party.
I vote NDP provincially and federally. And the sting of being called Dimitri is blunted by my not knowing who this Dimitri fellow even is. But otherwise, carry on.
Dimitri Soudas..
And what self respecting NDPer would sit there with a straight face and defend Harper's wet dream of a police state?
Maybe the rumours that the NDP are right wing sympathizers is true.
Meanwhile, in the US: Private Prisons Spend Millions to Put More People in Jail
excerpt:
Wednesday, the Justice Policy Institute (JPI) released a report chronicling the political strategies of private prison companies “working to make money through harsh policies and longer sentences.”
excerpt:
The impact that the private prison industry has had is hard to deny. In Arizona, 30 of the 36 legislators who co-sponsored the state’s controversial immigration law that would undoubtedly put more immigrants behind bars received campaign contributions from private prison lobbyists or companies. Private prison businesses been involved in lobbying efforts related to a bill in Florida that would require privatizing all of the prisons in South Florida and have been heavily involved in appropriations bills on the federal level.
You guys must have heard about this, eh?
http://articles.boston.com/2011-02-19/news/29336111_1_youth-lockups-dete...
"A former juvenile court judge was convicted yesterday of racketeering in a case that accused him of sending youth offenders to for-profit detention centers in exchange for millions of dollars in illicit payments from the builder and owner of the lockups."
Cross posted to BNR: Stephen Harper opens door to prison privatization (2007 article)
The Economist: The perverse incentives of private prisons
excerpt:
The great hazard of contracting out incarceration "services" is that private firms may well turn out to be even more efficient and effective than unions in lobbying for policies that would increase prison populations.
When we add to the mix the observations that America already puts a larger proportion of its population behind bars than does any other country (often for acts that ought to be legal), and that the US already spends an insane portion of national income on the largely non-productive garrison state, it is hard to see the expansion of a for-profit industry with a permanent interest in putting ever more people in cages as consistent with either efficiency or justice.
Comparing present-day USA with Stalinist Russia ... finds that the US is the country with the larger (%age and absolutely) prison population. This, from US sources BTW.
It's a very unusual country. And the Conservatives in our own country can't emulate them enough.
And the Conservatives in our own country can't emulate them enough.
Give them time. They have four years to undo everything progressive about this country, and take us to the Dark Ages.
Conrad Black's Broadside Against Canada's Prison Plan
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1049439--conrad-black-s-broad...
"Black - who returns to prison Tuesday for another eight months after exhausting his appeals - has launched yet another broadside agaisnt the government's tougher sentencing bills, prison expansion plans, and prisoner control programs.
To Black, Canada is about to model the US prison system - which he describes as an inhumane and unjust factory farm that dehumanizes inmates, breeds an underclass that can never reintegrate and will exact a long term toll on society. Black says the penal system isolates and punishes for life 'a very large number of people who have been for the most part socioeconomically comparatively disadvantaged.'
Black said prisoners, packed like sardines and ignored by all except 'corrupt' prison guards, are 'bound to be relatively despised and underutilized by society. Black told the Globe and Mail the Harper government approach is 'sadistic and malicious'. He told the CBC it is 'barbarous'."
experience teaches like nothing else can...it is 'sadistic, malicious and barbarous' - and the PTB like it that way..
Coming from Black, maybe this will force the Cons to sit up and take notice?
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/preacher+urges+forgiveness+toddler+abd...
IIRC, the U.S. prison corporation is called Wackenhut. I'm having a brain cramp here, perhaps someone else can recall details: when Harris brought in his "boot camp" detention centre for young offenders, wasn't that contracted out to some private outfit? I don't think it was Wackenhut, but somebody. Or I may be confusing that failed venture with some other one. I knew someone who worked there, it was a screw-up from start to finish.
The boot camp models don't work ..they end up teaching the prisoners good fighting techniques ..physical fitness and training that they end up using against newly trained officers when they get out....
What does work is the quota system, especially when you have lots of prison beds to fill for profit.. Here is how one juisdiction handles quotas..
Quot
Wake up Occupy Canada or you will be occupying Harpers prison colony's making the 1% of investors even richer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0eQgUpkJ1Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ns8LD5Q8ecc
Just read this on Facebook: "jails are the Conservative version of social programs".
Just read this on Facebook: "jails are the Conservative version of social programs".
Like!
When the austerity comes to Canada within a few years, there will be a lot of social unrest. The majority of Canadians will be made to believe in austerity through the media and tax cuts. The agitators and protestors will be depicted as criminally unpatriotic terrorists, and will be locked down for an indefinite period.
The joke above is cute, but the provinces are already equipped to deal with homelessness (allow it to keep the working poor working and the rest in fear of poverty) and with mental health (through CTOs, medications, psych assessments, etc.)
The prisons will be there for political reasons.
U HAD BETTR B KAREFUL WITH A DIPPERLOL LIKE THAT CUZ SOME KONSERVATROLLZ MIGHT COME UP WID SOMEFINK LIKE DIS!
Closing for length.