@ Pondering
I didn't say that anyone made that claim about all murderers.
I questioned the idea that one can make that judgement based solely on the initial crime.
And this nonsense about wanting William Pickton to live next to me, or what I would say to family of victims? Never mind that that is not too far removed from the "with us or with the pedophiles" argument our former justice minister used. One thing I would say is they should not be determining how a convicted person is sentenced, or ultimately decide when the right time is for release.
I saw some people making just this complaint yesterday on FB about a newly-paroled killer still being alive while his victim is dead. The killer had served 18 years, and while that will never be enough for some, it is not up to them, nor should it be.
Your argument, and your question is a reactionary one, and as I said in my last post, it makes no sense because victims do not all react the same way to tragedy. If you really want me to indulge your personal request I could pose that question to a family member - who did have a close relative murdered - at supper this evening. I'm not going to, just as I saw no point of calling down people's expressions of grief and outrage in that facebook thread, but I can tell you I have never heard my relative railing about tougher crime and parole.
Having sympathy and respect for the grief of victims is one thing; making it the basis for justice policy is completely unworkable.
You misunderstand me. I am not talking about the victims that are already dead. I am talking about the next victims. The ones who would have lived if we didn't release a Pickton or Magnotta back into the public because they deserve a second chance.
Nor are we referring to run of the mill murderers. No one is claiming all murderers should serve life without parole. The goal isn't punishment, it's safety. It's to prevent stacking up more victims.