No data backs Tory corrections policy: study

CTV is giving this ideologically driven professor far too much credability.

NO. In fact I posted this very thing a while ago when we debated drugs and law&order. The prison culture of the US with its far harsher penal system doesn't produce a more law abiding society or impact crime rates in any meaningful way.

It does however cost the tax-payers a great deal of money and when we have a populace that complains about taxes as much as Canada does thats something to consider.

There is little in their record that the Tories have done that shows they are reaching out to their old Reform base. But a more draconian approach to the penal system should go down well in central Alberta.

How many people on this forum are disgusted but the 2 for one deals these criminals get?
That's because of overcrowding in the jails and defense lawyers and judges use that to shuffle people through.
Making more room and streamlining the system will let us end this judicial joke.

I think the majority of Vancouver business owners would be pleased to see their taxes going into reducing their million dollar property crime problems.

Are you a judge? A Lawyer? No you or any of the others have expert knowledge to back up your opinion? (I just thought I'd put that out there since the war threads all end up saying that very thing).

You claim overcrowding yet you want more people in jail and in for longer. Are you willing to pay higher taxes? MUCH higher taxes to support your believe?

Streamline? What are you going to do, wave a wand? Do you not think that not only the government but the entire judicial system is trying to do just that?

Were you coaching Poquas?
Do you really want all of us to qualify ourselves to comment on these threads?

Again.. Look around at any of the law & order threads and people are upset with criminals not doing their full time or getting out early. The only solution is more places to put them because treating them nicely definately isn't working.

The Tories have already said they will eliminate this. It has nothing to do with the building of new prisons.

The reason that people are upset with criminals "not doing their full time" is that they don't understand what "full time" means. But judges do, and over-sentence accordingly. When a judge sentences a guy to 10 years, he/she knows that he/she is really imposing 3-5 years in custody and 3-5 more in the community. And there are sound reasons for doing things this way, that, if those over-reacting bothered to research a little bit, might understand.

With him being banned I'd watch what you say!

My point was mearly to point out that professional experience as "the only real opinion that matters" gets tossed out easily in war threads.

People are upset (more so) about taxes also. Doesn't mean they are correct we should slash taxes to the level they think is fair because they have no idea about how much it costs to run the programs they demand.

The Tories have already said they will eliminate this. It has nothing to do with the building of new prisons.


The reason why the 2 for 1 was started was because activist judges felt that conditions in the temporary holding cells where suspects are held before trials was wrong. I guess they expected that this would provoke politicians to make more room and speed up the system.

Looks to me like that's exactly what Canadians want and what this government is doing.

I don't want to throw out the baby with the bath water here. Unfortunately as a debate in the larger society it has fast degenerated into an ideological debate with the law 'n order Tories versus the bleeding heart liberals.

Let's see what van Loan will have in his bill. The proposal to eliminate mandatory release to be replaced with a credit system that can be applied to parole might well have some merit.

I don't see abandoning the two-for-one amounting to anything. As you say the judges know what the rules are now. If it becomes a mandatory one-for-one instead of the discretionary system we have now judges might just give shorter sentences.

This guy used to be the top bod for the 'John Howard Society'.
Treating this report like it doesn't have an agenda is patently wrong.

This would be like PETA doing a report on MacDonald’s.

The John Howard Society are the most left-leaning bunch of social engineers around. All prisoners are victims to them and they couldn’t give a shite about the real victims of crime who are beaten, stabbed, raped and murdered by the poor misunderstood prisoners that they are advocates for.

Personally I'd like to see some rather large changes to the prison system. Violent offenders should be spending more time locked up, not for rehabilitation reasons but so they don't offend again.

A good chunk of these career thugs will never change. Lock them up for a longer time.

On the other hand, people doing time for minor drug offences makes no sense. I'm all for the decriminalisation of narcotics. Let's make some room at the inn for the violent psycho’s and send the coke-heads home and let them chase the dragon.

On the two for-one thing, make it 1.25 for 1.

That's why I suggested, earlier, that 2-for-1 is smoke and mirrors. There's, practically, no difference between sentencing someone to 3 years and keeping them in jail for 3 or sentencing them to 6 years, giving them 2-for-1 for a year served and letting them out in 2 years. If the government gets rid of 2-for-1 credit, judges'll just alter their sentences accordingly, exactly as you suggest.

The change would be only one of political perception.

Due to the 2 for 1, net time behind bars dropped. If the 2 for 1 is removed and sentances goes down again, there's going to be even more public outrage. The public are obviously looking for harsher punishment, not less.