Re: Phillip Garrido

On Aug 31, 1:23 am, David Mitchell
<david.robot.mitch...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
as they
hadn't "taken" the first time.

Of course, the public's concern is that the *deterrence* element of
criminal sentences doesn't seem to take.

One person is convicted of holding up a convenience store. Because he
was caught, and subjected to the punishment decreed by law for that
crime... we expect that everyone else who might do such a horrible
thing in the future now hears of the terrible penalty this abominable
wretch has faced...

and, thus, it NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN. Not ever.

So if that doesn't happen, if crime still exists despite our penalties
for it, obviously they must not be harsh enough. Every time a crime is
committed, Parliament should go into emergency session to double all
the sentences in the Criminal Code!

Now, of course you might say that this is vengeful and ridiculous.

Why is the social sentiment in favor of this?

Well, in Canada, we used to have, back in 1962, a very low crime rate.

We had the death penalty back then. Rapists were sent to jail for ten
years - and they received "the lash" at the beginning and end of their
sentences. Provinces made up their own special rules for juvenile
offenders based on local circumstances.

But then Canada became too civilized for that sort of thing. Other
factors, such as a high unemployment rate - and, bizarrely enough,
opening the country to immigration _while_ it was suffering
unprecedented (in the postwar era, of course) levels of unemployment -
led to a soaring crime rate. As it happened, due to demographics, the
crime rate peaked at the time, in 1971, that the death penalty was
_formally_ abolished (the last actual hanging took place in 1962) so
there are those who try to claim there is no problem.

It doesn't matter what party one votes for, even the Conservatives
don't seem to take seriously the need to put the country back the way
it was. Abolish compulsory metrication! Get the steel mills and
automibile plants working again the way they did in the early 1960s!
Ensure that the enlightened tolerance of Canadians is not overtaxed by
unwise excesses, so that unseemly displays of bigotry are not provoked
by real causes.

The problem is that Canada faces many difficulties. An international
treaty regime denies countries the freedom to respond to economic
conditions by modifying tariffs. As a result, we can't simply choose
to cut off the flow of cheap imports the moment unemployment edges a
tenth of a percentage point above target levels.

World problems have led to Canada accepting many refugees from the
Uganda of Idi Amin and from Vietnam. One would hardly want Canada to
turn these deserving people away. But when people try to build new
lives, starting from nothing, not all will succeed right away. Thus,
Canada has a visible problem with youth gangs having a noticeable
Vietnamese ethnic character. This sort of thing can give rise to
unseemly sentiments coming from people who really aren't deranged
racist lunatics, and thus creates a danger of a horrible embarrassment
to our nation.

If the normal economic conditions of the early 1960s had been
continuously maintained by the government - instead of being lost
through Bensonomics in 1968, and failing to return since through
various causes, such as the oil embargo that began in October, 1973 -
a much higher fraction of those immigrants we needed to admit would
have found jobs quickly, and such problems would not have arisen.

If you have an ethnically distinct, and worse yet, visibly distinct,
group that is disadvantaged, then many of those within will be
alienated from the larger society, and this is an extremely dangerous
situation. One expects a sensible government will have the sense to
_never let that happen_ if it can possibly help it. This doesn't mean
some bigoted policy that bans all non-white immigration. Of course we
will admit a handful of university professors from places like India
and Taiwan. And since there are so few members of any visible minority
in the country, _no one will feel threatened by them_, and we can
boast to the world how tolerant we are... like Sweden, or Switzerland,
Switzerland in particular supplying the model for our immigration
policy.

Well, it does do our politicians credit that they were not quite so
cowardly as to go _that_ far. But why would the transition to a
multiracial society take place in anything but a period when an
economic boom is present to smooth over any problems of adjustment?
About the only explanation one can come up with is that big businesses
wanted a cheap labor force, and the government listened to them
instead of to the great masses of ordinary people, who want a labor
market that strongly favors the ordinary working man, and who want a
peaceful and tranquil country so that as little as possible of their
hard-earned money has to be taxed to support policemen and judges and
prison guards, to say nothing of the devastation caused by crime
itself.

And so we now have a country where there is tension and conflict
between working people and businessmen, instead of happy smiling
faces, full employment and constantly rising living standards, that
help everyone to recognize how wonderful the free enterprise system is
and how everyone contributes to the harmonious working of the economy,
both workers and investors, all having a valued function.

Some kind of a badly wrong turn has been taken. Apparently, the
details of getting back on the right track have not been worked out
yet, because clearly a politician who could manage that would be
popular.

John Savard
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Its open season on crooks down here in Texas
    ... >>> Crime is much lower in socialist countries like Canada, Australia ... >> Burglaries by country: ...
    (alt.politics)
  • No one can top America when it comes to spending and debt...
    ... "Which Western economy has both a budget surplus as well as a current ... How Canada got such vast quantities of Mother Nature's gifts we don't ... But where is the Canadian economy? ... The other comes from a country that is an exporter of both. ...
    (soc.culture.cuba)
  • Re: OT: The European Superstate
    ... Mexico brings lots of cheap labor to the table. ... Canada brings tons ... If we have one country the cheap labor now has to be ... The sum of each of our economies will not reduce our overall economy ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: Bailout (politics)
    ... Odd the Canadian economy is doing ok, ... I don't think that greedy businesses such as Big Oil or financial ... country cannot survive in an isolationist mode. ... As to Canada, it is way too early to tell if or how much it may be ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: All the hypocrites ran away... (was Political: Palin not fittobe VP.
    ... The economy isn't going to pick up and it's the people that are fucked ... and not just in this country. ... Canada was the number 2 industrailized nation in the world until we started ...
    (rec.sport.golf)
Loading