Conservatives want new law creating life sentences with no parole

[jar_e]

Just from a 660 News email...

The Harper government says it plans to introduce legislation that would keep what it calls "Canada's most heinous criminals" behind bars for life with no chance of parole.

Thoughts? I guess it matters what we're defining as "heinous criminals" but I'd imagine this is similar to Dangerous Offender Status here already....which they already can keep people remanded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dangerous_offender

In Canadian criminal law, a convicted person who is designated a dangerous offender may be subjected to an indeterminate prison sentence, whether or not the crime carries a life sentence, but this does not apply to convictions of first degree murder, second degree murder, high treason, and treason.[1] The purpose of the legislation is to detain offenders who are deemed too dangerous to be released into society because of their violent tendencies, but whose sentences would not necessarily keep them incarcerated under other legislation, such as the Correctional and Conditional Release Act.

[Huntingwhale]

Long time overdue.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

Long time overdue.

agree, people that a constantly putting the public at risk don't deserve to live in free society

[rubecube]

Seems pretty superfluous but I'll wait until more details come out.

[polak]

They better add some specificity to this law.

Broad interpretations to laws like this is a slippery slope if we ever get a PM with the wrong intentions.

[Resolute 14]

Yeah, I guess the question is whether this is basically streamlining and cleaning up what Dangerous Offender Status entails, or whether it is creating an entirely new category of criminal.

[polak]

Far stretch I know, but if all of the sudden we start using this law on "traitors" and the like...

Well, that's Putin some scary thoughts in my head.

[FLAMESRULE]

Another idiotic piece of legislation from the PC's that panders to knuckle draggers. There is no need for "no chance of parole" laws.

What needs to happen is more money and resources spent on rehab / mental health treatment / prevention etc.

[CaptainCrunch]

I'm for this law depending on how its executed.

The problem with the dangerous offender law is that the term is not defined.

If this is to be used for multiple time violent offenders, or multiple murderers for example go to it.

I need more information first.

[Harry Lime]

I'm willing to bet that this ends up being worded, and used, in much the same way as the existing dangerous offender legislation. This reeks of pandering and literally taking a law already in existence and renaming it to seem tough on crime.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by FLAMESRULE

Another idiotic piece of legislation from the PC's that panders to knuckle draggers. There is no need for "no chance of parole" laws.

What needs to happen is more money and resources spent on rehab / mental health treatment / prevention etc.

Agreed, with your 2nd statement, but I don't think anyone should have an issue with guys like Paul Bernardo never having a chance at parole, no matter how much he may or may not have reformed, nor should any resources be spent on his "rehabilitation".

[FlamesAddiction]

Need more info.

My sister works in corrections and has dealt with some of the worst offenders. Some times the only thing that keeps them somewhat behaving in prison is the thought that they might get out early. The faint hope you give them serves a purpose.

You need something you can take away still.

[1stLand]

The only people who are against life sentences with no parole, are people with Criminal Minds that can see themselves committing a serious crime.

[nik-]

Why are they so intent on making people think our world is so dangerous?

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by 1stLand

The only people who are against life sentences with no parole, are people with Criminal Minds that can see themselves committing a serious crime.

I gonna respectfully disagree with that, read the post above yours.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

The faint hope you give them serves a purpose.

As much as I'd like to see guys like Bernardo and Olson locked away forever, you make an excellent point. If you take somebody who is sentenced to spend life in maximum security, what incentive does that person have to not go around assaulting or even killing guards?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Dan02

I gonna respectfully disagree with that, read the post above yours.

I thought the implied green text was obvious, myself.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by nik-

Why are they so intent on making people think our world is so dangerous?

because, 9-11

[V]

I thought the implication of green text was nullified by the particular poster in this case. I could be wrong though.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by FLAMESRULE

...
What needs to happen is more money and resources spent on rehab / mental health treatment / prevention etc.

Is there any credible data reporting in each/any one of the areas you have listed that provides good correlation between levels of spending and re-occurring crimes?