Quote:
Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor
Sorry to here about your cousin, that is a terrible thing. My point is not to make you insensitive to Canadian values. Canadian values are not about letting criminals off easy and letting them out to commit other crimes. It is about the fact that people have certain rights until they violate the rights of other humans, the worst is taking somene elses life. Once that happens, they are NOT entitled to the same rights as law abiding citizens. That doesn't mean they should be treated cruel and unusual....it means that their rights are suspended or reduced to protect the public....to prevent other lives being destroyed.
|
Core Canadian values include the presumption of innocence, which means you are innocent until proven guilty. The reverse onus is contradictory to the presumption of innocence. The Charter also protects rights of liberty and mobility, until convicted of a crime and sentenced to incarceration. Currently judges consider the evidence before them to determine whether there is any valid reason to detain an accused before his or her trial, and they do a good job at it. To change the question before a judge from 'is there any reason to detain this person until trial?' to 'why should I let you go?' signals an erosion of key Charter values and a shift in the direction of witchhunting.
As for longer prison sentences for convicted criminals, I am not automatically opposed, although there are a lot of factors to consider such as the rehabilitative value of prison, strain on prison resources, and the potential of recidivism. No bills should ever be open and shut, and anything passed on a whim means that a lot of people aren't doing their job.