Death Penalty Recommended for Man Accused of Setting CA fire

[Doc]

You pussy footing bunch of politically correct buffoons! If some scumbag did something unspeakable, ending in the murder of one of my kids, they would NEVER make it to a trial! And all I would need on MY jury, would be ONE parent!

[habit]

..

All valid points,

Do you agree with parole for a murderer?
....

Every case is individual.

I saw a report somewhere that there are about 3000 ex-murderers roaming the streets of Canada as parolees. I can't get my hands on it right now. And yes, a number of them re-offend, but there is no big epidemic of homicide in Canada caused by parolee ex-murderers. Across ALL of Canada, in the last 5 years, there has been an average of about 4 homicides per year by parolees. (What I don't have is the number of unsolved cases that more or may not be attributed to parolees)

Sure the Canadian system should be tightened up in places. Perhaps greater use of the "dangerous offender" provision for repeat offenders.

But blanket denial of parole is not productive:




I do not care about the effectiveness of parole on re-offending, how would you feel if some scumbag that killed a loved one was free walking the streets 10,15 or 20 years after the fact, would you be reassured by some study stating the chances of them killing again to be slim? Killers should not even be considered for rehabilitation, what is the point? Let them rot in prison for the remainder of their life.If you choose to take a life you should forfeit your own, being a FULL life term.

Why does a murder deserve freedom? I really do not understand the purpose of letting killers free, and the statistical chances of re-offending really should not be the issue. Some crimes warrant rehabilitation but NOT MURDER that is just nonsense, lock em up and throw away the key, no expenses spared.

[ottawa,kan]

Conservative as I am I don't believe in the death penalty. Too many mistakes. But one of the great things about living down here, as opposed to up there in La la liberal land, is we really do have life in prison. And other little tasties too, like hard 40. We've pretty much done away with parole for federal time. I think it's non existent for a capital crime. No time off for good behavior. If you get 40 years to life, you'll only get out after 40 years, and then only maybe. As for locking up 1% or 3% or whatever of our population, lets remember we have vastly different cultures. We're a pretty rough crowd down here. I'm all for more jails.

[Siddley Hawker]

The expression 'life sentence' in Canada is nothing but wince words. It was a sop thrown to those who thought a murderer should pay for his crime with his life when the law recinding the death penalty was being bandied about. It turns out a life sentence isn't really a life sentence. It's not more than 25 years and could be as little as 15 years if the cards fall the right way.

Another thing that pisses me off. A previous poster indicates there are about 4 murders per year for parolees, which is about what I seem to remember as correct. I believe since 1978 there have been 78 murderers released on parole and they have committed 36 murders. There has been great outrage about Paul Guy Morin, Donald Marshall and others who have been wrongly convicted, but there hasn't been a fucking peep out of the same people for the equally innocent victims of those who have been released after their "life" imprisonment.

[Icebound]

Conservative as I am I don't believe in the death penalty. Too many mistakes. But one of the great things about living down here, as opposed to up there in La la liberal land, is we really do have life in prison. And other little tasties too, like hard 40. We've pretty much done away with parole for federal time. I think it's non existent for a capital crime. No time off for good behavior. If you get 40 years to life, you'll only get out after 40 years, and then only maybe. As for locking up 1% or 3% or whatever of our population, lets remember we have vastly different cultures. We're a pretty rough crowd down here. I'm all for more jails.

Frist of all, this report suggests that you DO parole "so-called A1 felons — those convicted of murder, attempted murder, kidnapping or arson in the first degree."

http://www.pressrepublican.com/homepage ... 5137.html/

Second, you are locking up 1% of your population.... at any given moment of time. But they do get released, and that, in turn, means that in the near future perhaps as many as 1 in 15 of your citizens will have spent time in jail. If not already so.

You say you want more prisons... for which someone (you) has to pay. So I would think that you would want to be sure that you are getting a bang for your buck. I strongly suggest that a detailed study of data is required, and not a knee-jerk emotional decision.

You will continue to be an even rougher crowd down there, if you choose to remove parents from their children for extended periods for relatively minor offenses. Don't be surprised in sonny follows in daddy's footsteps.
...

[Icebound]

Why does a murder deserve freedom? I really do not understand the purpose of letting killers free, and the statistical chances of re-offending really should not be the issue. Some crimes warrant rehabilitation but NOT MURDER that is just nonsense, lock em up and throw away the key, no expenses spared.

LOL.

"No expenses spared". Yeah right, until YOU are the one footing the expenses.

Like anything else, the purpose of letting killers free is cost versus benefit. Turn that around: What is the purpose of keeping killers behind bars, if they are not going to re-offend, and are only going to cost us money?" (And remember that they are not completely "free". Parolees remain under supervision for the remainder of their sentence.)

The only answer for that is "revenge".... and I completely agree that victim compensation and victims' rights need serious examination.

But society is not well served spending money incarcerating low-risk offenders, when that money could better be spent preventing.


...

[pushyboss]

I don't give a rat's ass whether the death penalty deters anyone from commiting a crime. It is a punishmnet not a deterrent.

I am with Nark on this one. Nuke him.

[Just another canuck]

I am with Nark on this one. Nuke him.

Nuke him??? What the hell kind of response is that?

Not sure if you realize it, but comments like that make you sound very unintelligent, among other things.

[habit]

Why does a murder deserve freedom? I really do not understand the purpose of letting killers free, and the statistical chances of re-offending really should not be the issue. Some crimes warrant rehabilitation but NOT MURDER that is just nonsense, lock em up and throw away the key, no expenses spared.

LOL.

"No expenses spared". Yeah right, until YOU are the one footing the expenses.

Like anything else, the purpose of letting killers free is cost versus benefit. Turn that around: What is the purpose of keeping killers behind bars, if they are not going to re-offend, and are only going to cost us money?" (And remember that they are not completely "free". Parolees remain under supervision for the remainder of their sentence.)

The only answer for that is "revenge".... and I completely agree that victim compensation and victims' rights need serious examination.

But society is not well served spending money incarcerating low-risk offenders, when that money could better be spent preventing.


...

OHHHHH the BLEEDING HEART,

Letting killers free because it saves money!!!!!!!!!! are your for real?
And no not revenge it is called punishment.
Why are you such an advocate or parole? Are you or a loved one on parole?
So killers are low-risk offenders? If one of these low-risk scumbags murdered someone close to you would it not bother you to see them free 15 years later?
Would you move your family into a neighbourhood were there was a murderer out on parole?
You seem to forget the rights of the victim and their family for justice and are too considered with stats and cost effect, prison is not a business it is punishment for the low lifes of society.
You cannot give a valid argument why a killer should be set free in my opinion, they decide to kill so should suffer the consequences!

[AuxBatOn]

For those that say that parolees don't re-offend, especially not killers, here ya go:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/s ... TopStories

CTV.ca News Staff

Three police officers are dead and another is clinging to life in Oakland after a parolee opened fire during a traffic stop and later shot members of a SWAT team that were on his trail.

The gunman, identified as 26-year-old Lovelle Mixon of Oakland, was killed by police, ending the worst day of violence in the history of the Oakland Police Department.

Three officers had never been killed in the line of duty in a single day.

"It's in these moments that words are extraordinarily inadequate," Mayor Ron Dellums said during a news conference on Saturday night.

The shooting began on Saturday afternoon, when two officers on motorcycle patrol stopped a Buick in east Oakland, according to police spokesperson Jeff Thomason. The driver opened fire on the officers, killing Sgt. Mark Dunakin, 40, and wounding Officer John Hege, 41.

Hege has suffered brain damage, his family said, and may not survive.

After the shooting, the suspect fled the scene on foot, which led to a sweeping manhunt involving Oakland police officers, California Highway Patrol officers and Alameda County sheriff deputies.

Much of east Oakland was closed off to traffic during the search.

Two hours later, an anonymous tipster told officers that the gunman was inside an apartment building.

When a SWAT team entered the apartment, the suspect shot them with an assault rifle, according to police.

Sgt. Ervin Romans, 43, and Sgt. Daniel Sakai, 35, were killed. A third officer was grazed by a bullet.

Members of the SWAT team returned fire and killed the suspect, said Acting Oakland Police Chief Howard Jordan.

Police said Mixon carried two different weapons, one used during the first shooting and another used during the apartment shooting.

According to Jordan, Mixon had an "extensive criminal history" and was wanted on a no-bail warrant.

"(Mixon) was on parole and he had a warrant out for his arrest for violating that parole. And he was on parole for assault with a deadly weapon," said Oakland Police Deputy Chief Jeffery Israel.

Israel said it is unclear why officers initially stopped Mixon, but it appeared to be a routine traffic stop.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is expected to fly to Oakland no Sunday to meet with police and the mayor.

Mourners gathered near a granite memorial to fallen officers that is housed in the lobby of Oakland's main police station. The memorial lists 47 officers killed in the line of duty, the last in January of 1999.

Tension between Oakland officers and the community have been high since a transit police officer shot 22-year-old Oscar Grant, who was unarmed, on New Year's Day.

In that case, Bay Area Rapid Transit Officer Johannes Mehserle has pleaded not guilty on a murder charge. In the weeks after Grant's death, citizens took to the streets in violent protests.

With files from The Associated Press

[pushyboss]

jac,

Why the personal attack? Were you attacked by me? Typical bleeding heart response (aka liberal) is to attack the person and not the issue. My apparent level of intellectual coma not withstanding.....

Any person who intentionally starts a fire and people die, should suffer the same fate as ther intended or unintended victims. "Nuke him" was just a figure of speech. Get a grip.....

[Just another canuck]

jac,

Why the personal attack? Were you attacked by me? Typical bleeding heart response (aka liberal) is to attack the person and not the issue. My apparent level of intellectual coma not withstanding.....

Any person who intentionally starts a fire and people die, should suffer the same fate as ther intended or unintended victims. "Nuke him" was just a figure of speech. Get a grip.....

That's like saying anyone who willfully drives drunk and kills someone should also be put to death. Their victim was unintended. With pushyboss in charge, we would have a death row from coast to coast!!!

Anyway, I do apologize for the "personal attack"... it's just frustrating sometimes to listen to people who support capital punishment. Especially when you just enter and thread and say "Nuke 'em". You sound like the same guy who says "Iraq, @#$!, nuke 'em" or "Should've nuked 'Nam". Not saying you are this person, but by posting just a blunt and short message, that's exactly what you sound like.

[xsbank]

Canada uses the 'rehabilitation' model of incarceration. The processing of charging, court, sentencing and incarceration is a process of de-socializing the perpetrator and then re-socializing them with various programs to re-integrate them into society as useful citizens. The model aims to use parole for the re-integration process so we don't jail somebody for a long period of time and then just dump a sociopath who can't feed, work or participate in society again out on the streets.

Agree with this or not, that is the current model.

Canada has a virtually fixed rate of murder year-to-year ( 'about' 500, compared to 100,000 annual deaths from heart disease and cancer) and the preferred method is the baseball bat (not guns, as your government goofs would have you believe. Go to the Stats Canada site for the numbers).

How many crimes are committed with registered guns? Oops, disregard, old rant topic!

I am glad that we do not have the death penalty because I don't think that, as a society, we are good enough to determine guilt. We just screw up too much to attach a life to some bureaucrat's opinion. Unless we in the West are willing to lower the value we put on life, a trend that seems to be spreading as we hear more and more people willing to blow themselves up, the death penalty should stay out of our society.

I hate to think of Clifford Olsen being released one day, or Carla Homolka wandering free, but if a handful of creeps and jerks being free is required for us to not kill an innocent someone by mistake, no material difference than any victim, that is a fair price to pay.

[Just another canuck]

Carla Homolka wandering free,

Didn't she get a couple degrees in prison and now lives and works under a different name in Quebec somewhere?

Scary thought? Yes.
Do I think she should have been executed? No. Who knows? Maybe she's an honest, contributing member of society now.

[habit]

Carla Homolka wandering free,

Didn't she get a couple degrees in prison and now lives and works under a different name in Quebec somewhere?

Scary thought? Yes.
Do I think she should have been executed? No. Who knows? Maybe she's an honest, contributing member of society now.

I give up, let all the killers loose poor poor killers deserve a second chance

[MUSKEG]

Answer as correctly as possible and see if it doesn't line up with your view on capital punishment. And JAC it's just as frustrating to listen to those who oppose capital punishment. See #11

1) You vote liberal
2) You fully endorse unions
3) You have been an employee your whole life.
4) You value pets as much as a human life
5) You scorn those who believe differently than you
6) You always lean towards the warm fuzzy side
7) You dont believe in marriage
You have no strong feelings about Canada
9) You show distain towards all authority
10) People are inherintly good vs inherintly bad
11) You think you are smarter than those you associate with

[MUSKEG]

Have no idea why the smiley face showed up.

[Icebound]

OHHHHH the BLEEDING HEART,

You really didn't read what I wrote, did you?

Letting killers free because it saves money!!!!!!!!!! are your for real?

First of all, they are not set "free", they remain on parole, under supervision.
Secondly, I made it clear that every case is individual, so no, I do no advocate setting EVERY killer "free".
I also made it clear that some are "dangerous offenders".

But it makes no sense to spend society's money in a way that produces no benefit to it, so there is a certain segment of the population of offenders that, yes, should be paroled.

And no not revenge it is called punishment.

That was specifically a reference to CAPITAL punishment. Nobody can convince me that killing someone is somehow "punishing" him. It is, in fact, freeing him from pain, suffering, responsibility, remorse, whatever.

"Punishment" may include prison, but we should also be looking at more innovative and productive punishments. But whatever it is, the punishment is supposed to serve JUSTICE. Justice, not revenge.

Why are you such an advocate or parole? Are you or a loved one on parole?

Because I want your tax money to be spent in the most efficient manner. Because I read a little; study the facts and data a little; talk to people who deal with offenders, and whose opinions I respect because they have been there.

Because I try to form my opinion based on facts, rather than knee-jerk emotion.

So killers are low-risk offenders? If one of these low-risk scumbags murdered someone close to you would it not bother you to see them free 15 years later?

Sure it would. And I have made it very clear that victims rights is one issue that needs to be better addressed.

But my family's life would have been destroyed anyway, no matter what happened to the pervert. Society's problem is how to look after itself for the future. And to that end, it has to decide how much risk it is willing to tolerate and what costs it is willing to undertake...

My personal problem doesn't really come into that equation, except insofar as society should realize that it has a greater responsibility toward its victims.

Like it or not, (and conservative, republican rhetoric notwithstanding).... like it or not, civilized society does not operate on an "every person for herself" basis. We all take advantage of society's benefits, and we must all share in its costs.

To that end, more attention to victims rights may quell some of your outrage.

Would you move your family into a neighbourhood were there was a murderer out on parole?

I least I would know who and where he was.

Sure, I would rather move my family into a pristine neighbourhood where I know everything about everybody. But right now, my family is in a neighbourhood where I know pretty much nothing about what goes on inside most of the houses. Ten doors down might be a latent murderer that is still planning his first victim, how do I tell?

Statistically, I am more likely to be murdered by a first-timer, unknown to police.... than I am by a repeater. So your implication of some sort of increased danger is totally bogus.

You seem to forget the rights of the victim and their family for justice and are too considered with stats and cost effect, prison is not a business it is punishment for the low lifes of society.

As I said above, do you actually read anything before posting? I made it a point again and again to complain about the state of victims rights in this country. But the victim has no right to revenge at society's expense. Justice, yes; revenge, no.

You cannot give a valid argument why a killer should be set free in my opinion, they decide to kill so should suffer the consequences!

I already have.

Within the caveat that "free" means supervised on parole, etc. That we are talking about individual cases and not a blanket parole.

But whether you choose to read it, or to do some independant research on your own, is up to you.


...

[Just another canuck]

Answer as correctly as possible and see if it doesn't line up with your view on capital punishment. And JAC it's just as frustrating to listen to those who oppose capital punishment. See #11

1) You vote liberal
2) You fully endorse unions
3) You have been an employee your whole life.
4) You value pets as much as a human life
5) You scorn those who believe differently than you
6) You always lean towards the warm fuzzy side
7) You dont believe in marriage
You have no strong feelings about Canada
9) You show distain towards all authority
10) People are inherintly good vs inherintly bad
11) You think you are smarter than those you associate with

1) I don't vote.
2) I have been part of one union and have to say the positives outweighed the negatives. Just my personal experience... can't comment on any others.
3) Yup. Why is this relevant?
4) I value MY pets life very much and I would do anything for them. I also care for them more than I care for most people, but I certainly don't value them more than human life.
5) Not true... at all.
6) Warm is better than cold. Not sure what you mean here.
7) True... So?
I'm very proud to be Canadian.
9) Not true... I show disdain towards people with personalities who should not be in the position of authority. Like our RCMP friend from Vancouver.
10) I like to think so. Someone who thinks opposite, I would think, would live a lonely life. Imagine going through life thinking people are inherently evil... how could you trust anyone?
11) Not true... at all.

I'm not sure if these were all directed towards me, nor do I see any major relevance of the above points to the thread at hand.

If you believe in capital punishment, fine. You are entitled to your own opinion and I accept that. Everyone is different. My real problem is how willing some here are to KILL someone. Think about that... once we inject that needle or flip the switch or fill the gas chamber, what is the real difference between us and the murderer. Actually, in this case, a man unintentionally killed people, while capital punishment involves PLANNED DEATH, with a viewing audience taking PLEASURE in it. This man is obviously sick (or has an addiction of sorts), while we are a group of sane, logical people.

So, at the end of the day, the families of the victims still have dead relatives. Oh, but at least they got to smile while a human life was taken. Don't you see the problem?

Anyway, no hard feelings. This is simply a difference of opinions between people.

[xsbank]

Muskeg, would you be willing to be the Executioner? Would you be willing to do the deed if somebody in a government organization told you that the convicted person was guilty?

Would it bother you if the dead person was subsequently declared innocent by somebody else's confession or would you just call it collateral damage?

Well? OK, would anyone on here be willing to do it? I'm not talking about catching somebody messing with one of your family, I mean executing the end-product of a jury trial?

[2R]

“The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of the civilisation of any country. A calm and dispassionate recognition of the rights of the accused against the State, and even of convicted criminals against the State, a constant heart-searching by all charged with the duty of punishment, a desire and eagerness to rehabilitate in the world of industry all those who have paid their dues in the hard coinage of punishment, tireless efforts towards the discovery of curative and regenerating processes, and an unfaltering faith that there is a treasure, if only you can find it, in the heart of every man- these are the symbols which in the treatment of crime and criminals mark and measure the stored-up strength of a nation, and are the sign and proof of the living virtue in it.”
Winston Churchill 1910

[Just another canuck]

Well? OK, would anyone on here be willing to do it? I'm not talking about catching somebody messing with one of your family, I mean executing the end-product of a jury trial?

Exactly... in fact, if it's such a great thing, why can nobody do the deed? Is it not a randomized trigger pulled by more than one executioner, so nobody has to feel guilty about it.

[xsbank]

Good quote, 2R. That's the model that Canada traditionally used, when we were peace-keepers and Quebec was part of Canada and the word 'entitlement' had not been invented yet.

Death, destruction and gang wars are now just headlines and the "hang 'em high" crowd are just knee-jerk, non-thinking me-first rednecks.

Once upon a time, Canada was a compassionate society, setting up free medical care, EI, welfare etc. to protect the weak in society (neatly sidestepping the atrocious ways we treated aboriginals, why, I don't know) no matter if they were sick, weak, unemployed, loony or just lazy (well-represented on this site ) and now it has turned into a totally self-centred, gimme my share I was here first selfish lot of stucco-dwelling yahoos with Habs flags on their shitty Korean cars cutting into lines of traffic and throwing their Tim Hortons bags out the window or scratching their initials on bus windows with their diamond rings or spray-bombing incomprehensible drivel all over other people's buildings.

If one person pulls the switch or squirts the poison or drops the pill, or a group of them do it, the result is the same, somebody dies. Hands up those who want the job to do it? There's a few of you collecting EI who could certainly qualify. Kinda like all the guys that just quietly left the room at the Polytechnic in Montreal....

That should just about offend everyone - now I'm going to go to work while I still have a job.

[Icebound]

Answer as correctly as possible and see if it doesn't line up with your view on capital punishment. And JAC it's just as frustrating to listen to those who oppose capital punishment. See #11

This is a very interesting post.

It reflects the attitude of people who always trying to pigeon hole everything as white or black. Real life does not work that way, which is why people who think that way rarely hold political power for extended periods.


1) You vote liberal....
probably but not necessarily

2) You fully endorse unions...
Only where management has lost sight of the fact that its employees are an asset which should be treated as an integral part of its success. Where employees are treated as a "cost" to be supressed and as an adversary to be controlled, then I fully endose the idea that they have to obtain a fair share of their enterprise as best they can.

3) You have been an employee your whole life...
Somebody paid my salary, yes. I was actually what is commonly called a "professional".

4) You value pets as much as a human life..
No. My view on animal rights is very "conservative". PETA is not on my list of supported charities. Cities were invented to prevent man, in part, from wild animals. Protection of wild animals within dense living areas is a farce. Racoons, wild geese, squirrels, rodents which damage property should be eliminated.

I support the seal hunt.

I support "conservation" of habitat for wild animals and protection of wild animals within that habitat. But the farmer or homeowner adjacent should have complete right to kill anything that wanders off and damages his stuff.

And in case you were wondering, I am not a particular fan of "gun control", without a better demonstration that there is actually some benefit.


5) You scorn those who believe differently than you
I try not to scorn. My impatience with prejudice may show through.

6) You always lean towards the warm fuzzy side
Sure.

7) You dont believe in marriage
I very much believe in a "nuclear family" as it is often described. But profit and money is a very "conservative" idea and its lure has destroyed the family. Thus I believe in a very socialist idea that stay-at-home parents need serious compensation from the state. And especially so for parents with special needs children.

We condemn Latimer for what he did, but we don't help him deal with the situation.


8.. You have no strong feelings about Canada
Where do you get this? It is a big-business conservative idea not to care about Canada. Take the jobs out of the country, hide money offshore, avoid taxes as a matter of entitlement. Harper's disdain was shown quite clearly in his "third-rate socialist country" comment.
I care very much about Canada.

9) You show distain towards all authority
Again, how do you get here? I very much support the concept of authority, but I also strongly oppose ABUSE BY authority.

10) People are inherintly good vs inherintly bad
Of course. Even if their spelling IS suspect.

11) You think you are smarter than those you associate with...
Very untrue... I try to associate with those who I can learn from, whether I like them personally or not. There is a very good book about how to improve your golf, which makes this very point. "Absorb from many sources. Your prejudice limits your potential."


...

[habit]

Good quote, 2R. That's the model that Canada traditionally used, when we were peace-keepers and Quebec was part of Canada and the word 'entitlement' had not been invented yet.

Death, destruction and gang wars are now just headlines and the "hang 'em high" crowd are just knee-jerk, non-thinking me-first rednecks.

Once upon a time, Canada was a compassionate society, setting up free medical care, EI, welfare etc. to protect the weak in society (neatly sidestepping the atrocious ways we treated aboriginals, why, I don't know) no matter if they were sick, weak, unemployed, loony or just lazy (well-represented on this site ) and now it has turned into a totally self-centred, gimme my share I was here first selfish lot of stucco-dwelling yahoos with Habs flags on their shitty Korean cars cutting into lines of traffic and throwing their Tim Hortons bags out the window or scratching their initials on bus windows with their diamond rings or spray-bombing incomprehensible drivel all over other people's buildings.

If one person pulls the switch or squirts the poison or drops the pill, or a group of them do it, the result is the same, somebody dies. Hands up those who want the job to do it? There's a few of you collecting EI who could certainly qualify. Kinda like all the guys that just quietly left the room at the Polytechnic in Montreal....

That should just about offend everyone - now I'm going to go to work while I still have a job.

Ok, so you obvioulsy do not support capital punsihmnent, but do you agree that a life term for murder should be just that or are you another typical bleeding heart liberal who feels killers are victims too and should be given a second chance with parole etc...And why are people with the desire to see people who kill others locked up for the rest of their life considered me first non-thinking rednecks?

And are you considering criminals as weak members of society who shold be taken care off by the rest of us? a great deal of your rant was way off topic and made no sense, " throwing tim horton's bags out the widows" etc so in your opinion people who desire justice for crime are the same type of crowd who litter and vandalize buses WTF you lost me,

GO HABS GO