[ridenrain]

jason700 jason700:

Criminals plead guilty all the time. Why can't we trust judges to judge each case individually instead of handcuffing them with mandatory minimum sentencing. Sometimes, alot of the time, prison is not the solution. Sometimes prison makes things worse.

Using BC as the example, the property crime rates for the 371 "super chronic" offenders the police track are huge.

$1:

"Some guys will go out and they'll break into 15 or 20 cars in [the] daytime. They are that prolific. They will go into an area and they will literally devastate an area," Rennie told CBC reporter Stephen Quinn.

Because these fools would always do dumb, petty crimes, the judges would keep handing them lax sentances, ignoring their records or worst, playing that these were the victims of society. These mininums and conditions will now start to address these problem people and put them away where they can't bother others.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columb ... nders.html

[Canadian_Mind]

can't believe you used CBC as a source RR.

[ridenrain]

Most of it was statements by police chief Chu so they couldn't spin it that much.

Here's a more official version:

$1:

NEWS RELEASE
For Immediate Release
Feb. 29, 2008
Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General

CHRONIC CRIMINALS TARGET OF ANTI- CRIME INITIATIVE

VANCOUVER – A new strategy aimed at reducing high volume crimes like break and enters, car thefts, assaults, robberies and drug trafficking is being piloted in five British Columbia communities, Solicitor General John Les announced today.

“One-half of crimes in B.C. are committed by just 10 per cent of offenders. These are the serious repeat offenders that we’re targeting,” said Les. “We need to try a more integrated multi-agency response because many of these chronic offenders are dealing with issues such as drug addiction, mental illness, unemployment or homelessness. Helping them deal with these issues is crucial to ending their cycle of crime.”

Prolific offenders have long criminal histories. Typically, they can have 24 convictions or more between the ages of 18 and 24 for property theft, drug offences and assault. Often they will have been to jail numerous times within a single year, breach probation and repeat the cycle of incarceration.

The Prolific Offender Management Project will be tested in, Surrey, Kamloops, Nanaimo, Prince George and the Capital Regional District. These communities already have integrated initiatives to reduce crime and social disorder which the pilot projects will enhance. The Province is also working with Williams Lake to add a pilot project there.

New community project teams will involve representatives from corrections, police, Ministry of Attorney General, regional health authorities, housing services, Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance and others. Based on selection criteria, the police and other criminal justice agencies will determine which of the offenders in their community will be part of the test pilot and get help with issues fuelling their crime. This can include referrals to drug treatment programs, seeing mental health professionals on a regular basis, work or housing programs.

Offenders selected for the pilots who continue to commit crime should expect a strong response from the criminal justice system. Courts will be provided extensive information about prolific offenders at the time of any sentencing for a new conviction.

Results of the pilots will be evaluated to determine how much crime declines in each community, and what approaches work well. Best practices in policing and intervention will be shared with interested B.C. communities.

“Since 2005, the RCMP has been targeting prolific offenders for arrest, which has resulted in impressive reductions in property crime, in some communities of between 20 and 30 per cent for certain types of crime,” said RCMP deputy commissioner Gary Bass. “The pilots being announced today take crime reduction to a new level by coordinating the approach to prolific offenders to prevent them from committing more crime.”

The project is part of wide-ranging, comprehensive justice reform initiative, which will complement the upcoming community safety strategy announced in the speech from the throne. The pilot communities will have their project teams in place early in 2008, with status reports beginning in fall, 2008.

“We will be monitoring these pilot projects closely,” said Les. “If the results mimic those already seen by the RCMP’s crime reduction efforts we will look at expanding the project to other areas of the province.”

http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_release ... 000271.htm

[jason700]

Yes, "super chronic" offenders SHOULD be in prison. That doesn't mean that we should blanket policy everyone else.

[ridenrain]

Tell that to the judges of BC. They were more than happy giving these folks a weekly slap on the wrist and sending them off again.

[Canadian_Mind]

Keeps them employed?

[dino_bobba_renno]

jason700 jason700:

Yes, "super chronic" offenders SHOULD be in prison. That doesn't mean that we should blanket policy everyone else.

Why not? If you don't want to go to jail there's an easy solution, don't break the law. It's not that complicated.

[Thanos]

I heard the Edmonton cops had a plan a few years back where they'd trail habitual drunk drivers when they were driving while sober. It turned out that they caught a few of them involved in petty crimes like B&E's, shoplifting, minor assaults, muggings, etc. All in all it proved that if you bust some asshole chronic on one charge and have them sent to jail it knocks down the rate of other crime by taking the slime out of circulation altogether.

Of course it all came to a halt for the Edmonton police. Some chickenshit lawyer went to court whining about the illegal "profiling" of some of his angelic clients. And of course some Judge Twinkletoes bought it. So once again, Criminals 1, Rest Of Society 0.

[Lemmy]

The problem here is if you take away sentencing options, like conditional discharges, eventually you're gonna run into a case like Robert Latimer where common sense dictates the guy getting no jail time, but ends up spending 10 years in prison. It's never a bad thing to have flexibility.

[Canadian_Mind]

Current flexibility didn't keep the guy out of the system. Conditional sentancing just means that people who repeatedly commit crimes are given the same treatment as someone who killed out of compassion.

[Thanos]

Latimer spent time in prison mostly because he refused to admit that he did anything wrong. He and his lawyers turned it all into a pro-euthanasia political stunt. If he'd pleaded out then he probably would have been released as a non-dangerous offender about five years ago. The judge did the right thing with Latimer. If he'd been found innocent then there probably would have been a nightmarish wave of copycats disposing of their own inconvenient relatives and Canada would have been a step closer to being like Holland where doctors can now cavalierly get rid of patients and old people without even informing the families first.

[Lemmy]

The jury attempted nullification in Latimer's case, but the minimum sentence was 10 years, so there was no option. If there was more flexibility then a great injustice could have been avoided. Granted, Latimer didn't help himself by taking the line he took, but none of the goals of sentencing were achieved by putting him in prison for a decade. I agree, we don't want everyone bumping off Granny for her fortune when she gets a little head cold, but that's why we, hopefully, hire smart folks to be judges. Even a not-so-smart judge ought to be able to discern between Latimer and someone out to rid themselves of an "inconvenient relative".

[Lemmy]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Current flexibility didn't keep the guy out of the system. Conditional sentancing just means that people who repeatedly commit crimes are given the same treatment as someone who killed out of compassion.

Simple solution: don't allow conditional sentencing for repeat offenders.

[commanderkai]

DerbyX DerbyX:

If that actually worked we would never have progressed from the inhumane system we had just a few generations ago to the system we have now. US jails and the US system is far less hospitable then ours yet their crime rates don't reflect that ideology.

Just curious, and just ignoring the many other factors attributed to higher incarceration rates in the United States, why do you think the US correctional system is less hospitable compared to ours? I'd say it's maybe equal.

[jason700]

dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:

jason700 jason700:

Yes, "super chronic" offenders SHOULD be in prison. That doesn't mean that we should blanket policy everyone else.

Why not? If you don't want to go to jail there's an easy solution, don't break the law. It's not that complicated.

Unfortunately, in real life each situation is complicated and complex rather than black and white. I somewhat agree with Lemmy, no conditional sentencing for those who prove to have no respect for the law.