Are we going to say anything ?

[sumdumguy]

Not when there are places where people can cross the border unhindered. But its odd in Europe, driving between France and Italy, no border at all. Maybe like that all over Europe?

[LEP]

So when gun crime continues virtually unabated in the future, who will the liberal blame then?

[TOM4CWB]

So when gun crime continues virtually unabated in the future, who will the liberal blame then?

legal firearms owners who obey the law will get blamed... without question... as they are most likely never to vote for Liberals.

The Liberals know all their proposed firearms legislation is illegal... it is for show to get votes. As is the Assisted Suicide of handicapped and those with mental illness and depression. teens and then under 12 are the next in line...

[burnt]

Was on the news that Calgary is 40% visible minority,so just hold on for a little longer and we the evil whites will be the visible minority and receive all the preferential treatment.

Umm, it's unlikely that "preferential treatment" is to be expected by a people group targeted for elimination.

At least not in a positive sense.

[chuckChuck]

https://bccla.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Mandatory-Minimum-Sentencing.pdf https://bccla.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Mandatory-Minimum-Sentencing.pdf


Rationales advanced in support of mandatory minimum sentencing include their effect as a general deterrent, and their role in making the justice system more transparent, certain and fair. However, the research shows that punitive sentencing does not lead to safer communities. Instead of deterring potential offenders, mandatory minimums result in excessive, harsh penalties that increase the likelihood of recidivism.

Mandatory minimum sentencing shifts discretion from judges, whose decisions are public and reviewable, to prosecutors, whose decision-making is largely beyond review. While facially neutral, mandatory minimum sentences affect individuals from certain communities disproportionately. Mandatory minimum sentences have a particularly detrimental effect on Aboriginal offenders and communities.

The monetary costs associated with punitive reforms to the criminal justice system, including the rise of mandatory minimum sentencing, are staggering. However, the true cost of these measures goes well beyond expenditures on their implementation. There is a human and social cost to mandatory minimum sentencing that affects the long-term economic viability and wellbeing of Canadian communities. It is important to appreciate the downstream collateral consequences of punitive sentencing regimes as part of our collective responsibility for a just society.

[GOODRUM]

https://bccla.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Mandatory-Minimum-Sentencing.pdf https://bccla.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Mandatory-Minimum-Sentencing.pdf


Rationales advanced in support of mandatory minimum sentencing include their effect as a general deterrent, and their role in making the justice system more transparent, certain and fair. However, the research shows that punitive sentencing does not lead to safer communities. Instead of deterring potential offenders, mandatory minimums result in excessive, harsh penalties that increase the likelihood of recidivism.

Mandatory minimum sentencing shifts discretion from judges, whose decisions are public and reviewable, to prosecutors, whose decision-making is largely beyond review. While facially neutral, mandatory minimum sentences affect individuals from certain communities disproportionately. Mandatory minimum sentences have a particularly detrimental effect on Aboriginal offenders and communities.

The monetary costs associated with punitive reforms to the criminal justice system, including the rise of mandatory minimum sentencing, are staggering. However, the true cost of these measures goes well beyond expenditures on their implementation. There is a human and social cost to mandatory minimum sentencing that affects the long-term economic viability and wellbeing of Canadian communities. It is important to appreciate the downstream collateral consequences of punitive sentencing regimes as part of our collective responsibility for a just society.

Who did this research?
Can I apply this mentality to any law?

[foragefarmer]

As is the Assisted Suicide of handicapped and those with mental illness and depression. teens and then under 12 are the next in line...

TOM4TOM, you come on here copying and pasting pages and pages of Individual and Property rights and then post exaggerations and falsehoods on Sunday Morning (Convenient Christian) . We all know you know how to use Google, but for some unknow reason you would rather post B.S. then read about C-14, so here's some important information for you to read.

Under Bill C-14, two independent health care professionals need to evaluate an individual in order to determine whether he/she qualifies for MAID. To qualify for MAID, a person must satisfy all of the following eligibility criteria. They must:

1.Be eligible for government-funded health insurance in Canada;
2.Be 18 years of age or older;
3.Have a grievous and irremediable condition, as defined by Section 241.2, para. 2 of the Criminal Code;
4.Have made a voluntary request for MAID that was not made as a result of external pressure;
5.Give informed consent to receive MAID after having been informed of the means that are available to relieve their suffering, including palliative care.

In order to have a “grievous and irremediable medical condition,” as defined by Bill C-14, a person must satisfy all of the following requirements:

1.Have a serious and incurable illness, disease, or disability;
2.Be in an advanced state of irreversible decline in capability;
3.Endure physical and psychological suffering that is intolerable to them; and
4.Their natural death has become reasonably foreseeable.
5.Patients must also be capable of providing informed consent at the time that MAID is provided.

[Sheepwheat]

Poor criminals.

My idea.

You get caught carrying handgun in trona? Automatic 25 year sentence.

You use a handgun in a crime in trona? Automatic life, no parole.

Use any gun in crime anywhere in Canada? Automatic life no parole.



Yes, we will need to build more prisons. So what? Show me the downside to locking up idiotic criminals for life? Harper mused that our prison capacity is getting short, the liberals had a meltdown and spread the word how bad this would be. Why?

We need teeth in our laws and we need to clean up the filthy few percent who do crime. Get them off the streets permanently. How could this idea not reduce crime. Between removing the stupid in society, and the certain deterrent to would be idiots, we could clean up our streets permanently. But no one has the nerve to do what’s right.

[Rareearth]

Provide enough services, in these new prison they will fill very fast.
Social security at its best.