I dare say ... we told ya so.

You know what? Good!

I'm getting pretty sick and tired of criminals and all their goddamn rights. I can't stand Conservative BoBo much myself but if they bring in some tough new laws to kick the shit out of criminals and deadbeats, then I'm all for it. It's time to register pedophiles, crack down on street racers, deport the Khadrs, and implement minimum sentencing. That and having a referendum on the death penalty.

What makes me feel good is that the NDP has the balance of power this time. I know that the NDP will support these things.

No surprise that Day would have a professional troglodyte like Newark as senior advisor. I would suspect two are familiar with each other; Newark worked as a Crown prosecutor in Wetaskiwin before getting into the advocacy game. Here's the rest of the first quote, scraped off conservativeforum.org:

"As we always say, the charter helps only murderers, pedophiles and judges. This year the Supreme Court decreed, on the authority of the Charter, that the provinces must give their judges pay raises."

Rather reinforces the Tories' image of being unconcerned with civil liberties, I'd think. Newark also wrote a couple of er, creative columns for Leo Knight's (another Charter-basher extraordinaire) website trying to tie together the Maurice Strong-Kyoto-United Nations-Oil for Food-Antichrist connections; it's the sort of stuff you'd find on reputable news outlets like Canada Free Press or NewsMax.

This portfolio was supposed to be a quiet corner for Day. But nothing Day is involved in remains quiet for long...

They kind of have a point...the Charter has been used to protect criminals for too long, when really, we should be putting the public first and criminals second.

It's gutless politicians who blame The Charter for their inability to advance whatever cause they are serious about.
If there is a sufficient grass roots Canadian campaign for a cause, it would be too much of a hassle for the Supreme Court to overturn.
These Judges read Canadian tendencies and try to react to a populist view.
The populist view was way too liberal in Canada. But it was real.
It's changing, and the salesmen of this now popular conservative view have a big job trying to change the " too liberal " consensus.
I don't think it's as easy as changing a few judges.

I certainly don't see the Charter as an impediment to effective, efficient law enforcement, nor should it be. If Newark is just pandering for the audience in rural Alberta, so what? But if he really believes this drivel that is an ominous sign.

We do have judges who have imposed absurdly lenient sentences, such as two years less a day to be served at home with a monitoring bracelet while eating chips and watching TV for a pair of spoiled brat street racers who killed a woman on the sidewalk who was out shopping. Why was the biased judge who authored this incredible assault on basic justice not removed from the bench by a joint address of both Houses of Parliament? At the same time, I have heard of people getting more time than that, three years in an actual federal prison, for, ... wait for it, ... counterfeiting. Do these judgements taken together represent a scale of values that ANYONE can support?

Can Newark or Day point to any court judgements that have hampered the police in the detection of crime, such as prohibiting the use of modern technology? Personally, I doubt it.

And one more point. Leo Knight, named above, is a Liberal hack, so Newark isn't entirely a Tory problem.

"a society that is willing to sacrifice a little liberty for a little security deserves neither and will lose both" Benjamin Franklin.

Before we wipe the floor with the judges, let's remember they don't set the time limits for offences, the government does. Let's always remember that a judge on the lower courts makes decisions that a higher court can agree on or disagree. Appeals courts exist and the final court is the Supreme Court of Canada. You want criminals to be thown into jail for almost any crime should look to the US of A. Biggest industry down there seems to be the building jails. Simplistic thinking.

Ask wally Oppel who used to be a BC apeals Court judge what he has to say about wharehousing law breakers. Best training ground for later says Wally.

Let's spend some more effort getting real rehab for drug users who almost immedialty become small time crooks . Le'ts do some more work on keeping those loonies that drive like fools off the road , befoe not after they kill somebody else.
Let's remind car sellers that showing guys flying down the road with the latest, must have edition of something or other capable of greater speeds than the roads or most drivers can handle. Might cut high end car sales, but hey it's cheaper than death. While we are at it, let's get a handle on the drug providers. End of sermon. Blame the culprits, they are us, the voters

Some basic housing would be a good start.

Give me a break.

People don't traffic drugs, street race, or commit sex crimes because they didn't have any brekkie or have sub-standard housing. These are hard core crimes that deserve hard-core punishment. I agree that jail just serves as a training ground, though. All the more reason to bring back chain gangs. Criminals should be quarrying rock or picking litter off the highway.

And as for drug dealers and molesters, this is why we need a referendum on the death penalty. They just don't have the same problems as we do in China.

Our charter is just fine. It's what guarantees the freedoms of those of us who are not criminals. I deserve maximum freedom and rights, and as long as you are not a criminal you deserve them too.

Our judicial system seems weak. Our prosecutors and judges often seem to lack the guts to imprison our dangerous criminals fully and appropriately. We need a strong deterrent when it comes to crime: if you choose crime, you choose to lose many of your freedoms and rights.

Our prison system is awful. It does little to reform prisoners. Restricting a criminal's freedoms and rights does not teach that criminal how to properly participate fully in our society. It is insane to release them if we have not taught them better.

Restricting criminals' rights shows them that rights are too valuable to just give to anyone. They should have to earn back their rights.

Our judges are frankly a national disgrace. As s solution to overcrowded prisons, we should billet prisoners who receive light sentences with the judges that gave them the slap on the wrist.

And I agree, our charter is just fine. We always have the notwithstanding clause. In my opinion, any anti-gang laws or laws to deal with drug traffickers that didn't invoke the notwithstanding clause are probably too lenient.

Dag, you keep going on about drug dealers.

I hope you're for full legalization of all drugs, concomitantly with education and rehab programs.

Doing so would utterly decimate the drug trafficking trade.

I hope you're for full legalization of all drugs, concomitantly with education and rehab programs.

Doing so would utterly decimate the drug trafficking trade.

Posted by FFFish on February 17, 2006 10:14 AM

FFFish, ... don't hold your breath. Harper said in Burnaby on Dec 3 that a Conservative Govt would refuse to reintroduce the bill to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana, and furthermore would make safe injection sites, such as Vancouver's, illegal. So, unless the NDP can force the Conservatives to rethink their position, we are going to have drug policies in Canada that are dictated by John Walters, the Bush Administration's Chief of National Drug Policy.

No, FFFish, I am not for legalization. You see, I am a recovering pot addict and can tell you how difficult it is to get off drugs. It may seem like a good idea to legalize drugs from your standpoint, but I can tell you that I've seen the bong and the damage done.

My story can be found at www.stevedagmar.blogspot.com

"Pot addict"? That does explain your obsession with drug dealers. Because, y'know, it's their fault that you lacked the self-control to use marijuana — a physically non-addictive drug — responsibly.

Kind of like how the Sunshine Corner grocery is responsible for making me 300lbs overweight, because they kept selling me Cheetos. Not my fault!

So I guess you think heroin dealers and crack dealers are okay too. Because the children they prey on don't have the self control to say no.

Look. I was in Jamaica. I didn't know that ginja was pot. I smoked some and got hooked.

How can you say that pot isn't addictive? Either you've never been where I've been or you are where I've been and you're just in denial. You don't understand the evils of the bong, and I do.

How can I say pot isn't physically addictive? Because it is not. I've done the hard research on this, digging up the studies and learning about how THC and our brain's cannaboid receptor system work.

There is no one more passionate, and more misinformed, than a person who has "found salvation" and feels a need to spread it. JW's, Nutralife reps, and ex-smokers are all fanatics for their cause, and are all equally untrustworthy.

The ease with which you threw your life away in favour of getting stoned is representative of only your experience with marijuana. It is not typical of the vast majority of users, and is certainly no basis upon which to write law.

You will have truly kicked your problem when you accept that it was your problem, not marijuana's.

You are obviously angry and in denial. Perhaps your research has resulted in you getting addicted to the bong.

Yes, it's all about me. I'm the one ranting about drug dealers and my incipient salvation from self-destruction.

Please, Dagmar, do not mistake your life for mine.