Calgary man will serve 10 years for killing pregnant girlfriend

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

well, that depends
Does a more agressive justice system lead to reduced crime?
What if that money was put into crime prevention instead?

Definitely lowers the amount of repeat offenders.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

I don't think so. I guees I'll have to go digging through my school books to prove it, but I'm confident it in general is more expensive to use the death penalty.



well, that depends
Does a more agressive justice system lead to reduced crime?
What if that money was put into crime prevention instead?

What exactly is crime prevention? How do you prevent a guy from murdering his wife? A knife registry? Armour? Education as to why sharp objects ought not to be plunged into loved ones?

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

I don't think so. I guees I'll have to go digging through my school books to prove it, but I'm confident it in general is more expensive to use the death penalty.

Could be, I just heard that it wasn't always more expensive, and averaged out to be about the same. Could be wrong.

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

well, that depends
Does a more agressive justice system lead to reduced crime?
What if that money was put into crime prevention instead?

Well, the goal to crime prevention is the elimination of the root causes of crime. One of those is criminals. We have a pretty disgusting rate of re-offense. The others are a little more difficult to nail down, since those are essentially the so called "seven deadly sins" (lust, greed, envy, gluttony, wrath, sloth, pride). The best way to prevent crime is to create a moral society that as a whole, does not want to deviate from legality... either through government force or enlightenment (which we are much further away from than we'd like to think)

[JimmytheT]

Originally Posted by 4X4

What exactly is crime prevention? How do you prevent a guy from murdering his wife? A knife registry? Armour? Education as to why sharp objects ought not to be plunged into loved ones?

As morbid as it is, I got a small chuckle out of your wording here

Edit: Might I add the sentencing is an absolute joke. First time offender or not, this guy murdered his 17 year old girlfriend because she probably did not want to have an abortion. Now I am pro-choice when it comes to women's decisions, but the fact that he decided she wasn't having this baby by offing her, is sickening.

[JimmytheT]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Could be, I just heard that it wasn't always more expensive, and averaged out to be about the same. Could be wrong.



Well, the goal to crime prevention is the elimination of the root causes of crime. One of those is criminals. We have a pretty disgusting rate of re-offense. The others are a little more difficult to nail down, since those are essentially the so called "seven deadly sins" (lust, greed, envy, gluttony, wrath, sloth, pride). The best way to prevent crime is to create a moral society that as a whole, does not want to deviate from legality... either through government force or enlightenment (which we are much further away from than we'd like to think)

I can see how the so-called Seven sins, could all potentially lead to crime, but in general, wanting to have consensual sex, over-eating, laziness, and excessive vanity are not at all criminal.

Edit: I also would like to add that I am glad the legal system is not structured around Dante's seven deadly sins.
The Golden Rule seems to be the best when it comes to judging what is criminal.

If you guys really knew what sentences judges were handing out you would be ouraged. Keep in mind, for most sentences you only have to serve 60% then u get double credit for time served... say for example you get 6 years... you would server around 4... now, if u spent 12 months in jail awaiting trial, you get 2 years credit... so, you might serve less then 2 years.


A little off topic but he probably will be release before 10 years is up regardless of what his sentence is.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by JimmytheT

I can see how the so-called Seven sins, could all potentially lead to crime, but in general, wanting to have consensual sex, over-eating, laziness, and excessive vanity are not at all criminal.

Edit: I also would like to add that I am glad the legal system is not structured around Dante's seven deadly sins.
The Golden Rule seems to be the best when it comes to judging what is criminal.

You're not looking at it right... I said that the root causes of crime stem from one of the Dante's seven deadly sins... which they do:

Lust: Rape, Sexual Assault, Sexual Harassment
Greed: Theft, Armed Robbery, Larceny, etc.
Envy: Theft, Murder, Identity Theft, etc.
Gluttony: Substance Abuse, Drug Related Crime
Wrath: Obvious
Sloth: Theft, Gang crime (too lazy to get what you want the hard way)
Pride: A Prevailing motive to commit the other 6.

The legal system isn't based of these... not directly at least, but you'll find nearly all types of crime can be linked to one of these.

[pope04]

Originally Posted by JimmytheT

this guy murdered his 17 year old girlfriend because she probably did not want to have an abortion.

My understanding of this crime was that he thought she was unfaithful to him, and he stabbed her when she scoffed at hisdeclaration that he was going to kill himself.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by 4X4

What exactly is crime prevention? How do you prevent a guy from murdering his wife? A knife registry? Armour? Education as to why sharp objects ought not to be plunged into loved ones?

I'm not sure if you're serious, but I meen things like education, services to fight poverty, domestic counceling, programs to help minor young offenders turn their lives around etc.

That wife that is murdered by her husband has probably been abused many times before. If she knew where to seek help, and get away from him she might still be alive today.

There are many many predictors of criminality. If you put in systems that prevent people from choosing a life of crime, crime will go down. If you help victims see a way to get clear before the crimes against them get worse, crime will go down.

It's not that complicated

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Well, the goal to crime prevention is the elimination of the root causes of crime. One of those is criminals. We have a pretty disgusting rate of re-offense. The others are a little more difficult to nail down, since those are essentially the so called "seven deadly sins" (lust, greed, envy, gluttony, wrath, sloth, pride). The best way to prevent crime is to create a moral society that as a whole, does not want to deviate from legality... either through government force or enlightenment (which we are much further away from than we'd like to think)

That's not at all what I meant by causes of crime. Maybe a better word would be "predictors" such as poverty, broken homes, domestic violence etc.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

That's not at all what I meant by causes of crime. Maybe a better word would be "predictors" such as poverty, broken homes, domestic violence etc.

Technically, what you speak of is more mitigating crime, not actually eliminating it. Domestic violence is a crime... its just not as severe as murder. Broken homes are not always predictors of crime either, there's a large amount of divorced and separated families in our society and its not a disproportionate cause of crime.

Lets talk poverty, cause its a good example. Poverty is a root cause of crime (and it goes with my example of greed, envy, and in some instances, sloth). But why are the poor more likely to commit crime? Is it to ensure their basic needs? Hardly. The problems lie elsewhere.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

The question simply put is, are we as a society willing to exceed normal costs to have a more aggressive justice system?

If not, you end up with a revolving door disaster, like in Canada, where many are too cheap to lock dangerous people away for life with no chance of parole... and yet, everyone looks so shocked when a repeat criminal pulls that atrocity in Mayerthorpe.

What exactly makes Canada a disaster? I agree it's not perfect, but I'm not sure a more "aggressive" justice system would help much.

It took me about 5 seconds to find out that in 2003 there were 548 murders in Canada. In that same year, there were 657 murders in the state of Georgia, which has about 1/4 the population of Canada, and they aren't afraid to execute people down there. What happened?

[CrusaderPi]

I'd to share a comment I made to my wife in relation to this event that has gotten me a good does of the cold shoulder for probably the next 2 weeks.

"See? He'll get out 8 years earlier then if he let her live."

In fairness it was a shot at the much maligned Canadian justice system, not a statement of my pro-killing attitude. Nonetheless I am in trouble for it.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

What exactly makes Canada a disaster? I agree it's not perfect, but I'm not sure a more "aggressive" justice system would help much.

It took me about 5 seconds to find out that in 2003 there were 548 murders in Canada. In that same year, there were 657 murders in the state of Georgia, which has about 1/4 the population of Canada, and they aren't afraid to execute people down there. What happened?

the phrase was "revolving door disaster" and that referred to the fact that too many of our serious crimes are committed by people who have committed crimes in the past. Mayerthorpe was the example I used to support that, and there are many others.

[PsYcNeT]

Harsher punishments =/= less crime

Education, higher standard of living, proper social programs, healthcare etc. and all that leftist garbage are what lower crime rates, hence Canada's extremely low instances of violent crime.

People aren't thinking about the death penalty or 25 potential years in jail when they commit 2nd degree murder.

The only thing harsh punishment could potentially deter is 1st degree, and there is a far smaller proportion of people being charged for 1st than 2nd.

To paraphrase:

"100% of violent crime is caused by children resulting from unaborted pregnancies" - Jeff Tremaine

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Harsher punishments =/= less crime

Education, higher standard of living, proper social programs, healthcare etc. and all that leftist garbage are what lower crime rates, hence Canada's extremely low instances of violent crime.

People aren't thinking about the death penalty or 25 potential years in jail when they commit 2nd degree murder.

The only thing harsh punishment could potentially deter is 1st degree, and there is a far smaller proportion of people being charged for 1st than 2nd.

To paraphrase:

"100% of violent crime is caused by children resulting from unaborted pregnancies" - Jeff Tremaine

Not that I'm disagreeing... but what about Singapore?

Vicious penalties for everything, and a minimal crime rate. Cultural, or a result of harsh penalties?

[PsYcNeT]

Well I'm sure flagrantly abusing human rights would lead to a downturn in crime, but that's not really bringing us forward as a society, now is it

If I could choose one extreme or the other, I'd side with those damn dirty hippies

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

the phrase was "revolving door disaster" and that referred to the fact that too many of our serious crimes are committed by people who have committed crimes in the past. Mayerthorpe was the example I used to support that, and there are many others.

Okay fair enough, but I'm sure most of the murderers down there weren't exactly choir boys either.

I hear what you are saying but harsher sentences and executions don't appear to lead to less crime. If we had capital punishment here in Alberta and this guy was electrocuted or poisoned to death by the authorities instead of getting 10 years, I don't think it would stop the next lunatic from doing what he's going to do.

It would obviously cut down on the chance that the new inmate might do it again, but hopefully they can keep him in the slammer long enough so that can't happen.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

but hopefully they can keep him in the slammer long enough so that can't happen.

Thats really all I'm saying with harsher penalties. That could go the capital punishment road... doesn't have to. Probably confused my point when I said that capital punishment isn't always more expensive and that price shouldn't mean lesser justice.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

In Freakonomics the author makes a very interesting analysis of the drop in violent crime in the US...it wasn't due to any program or policy or police tactics, it had to do with Roe vs Wade and how approx 18 (or so) years before the crime rate dropped dramatically women were allowed to abort unwanted pregananies...therefore less people in desperate situations placed on a path that was rife with criminal 'opportunities'.

IMO the best tool we have to reduce crime in the long term are poverty reduction programs, education, social programs (identifying kids with social/psychological problems and getting them help) etc.

Increasing punishment will help to a degree with certain types of crimes, but I don't know what would have stopped this tragedy...