Dec. 11/04 Squamidian Supplement
The
following entries are the responses generated to the Dec. 11 Squamidian and
Greg’s Ontarion article. They are here
in the order that they ended up in my IN Box, not necessarily the order that
they were sent out. So there can be some confusion when reading though them.
Most relate to Greg’s topic but some are a bit more benign.
****
Doug:
Hi Again,
Firstly, great to read that story sent in by Lorne, written by his great uncle. Shows us where our traditions come from.
Greg, you are right on as usual. Until the punishment starts to fit the crime there is no deterrent and no protection for the public. Always seems the law abiding citizen has the least rights of all. We can thank our social engineering politicians and do-gooders for the mess we are in.
Jackie, way to go! Maybe some might think you are crazy but the worst thing you could do is to not follow your dreams. Life is too short to spend wishing you had tried something. Better to try and chance it not working out than to regret not trying at all. And you won't regret this, the adventure begins. I think we all can now look forward to a regular Fernglen Inn report in the Squamidian. Reserve a room for us next June when we are back for the parent's 60th. Doug
****
Sus:
Hi All,
Thanks for the Christmas story Lorne. I enjoyed it very much.
Good for you Jackie
and Jim, I am very excited for you. I know you will love your new venture
meeting people from all over the world. The property sounds very
interesting with lots of land to do whatever you want. I'm planning on
going to Lorne and Vivyan's 60th too so maybe I can join Doug and Sue and see
your place too. Good luck in your new adventure. Owning your own
business is exhilarating and I know you have the energy for it. Peter's
sister has a resort near Huntsville called Bunnie Hollow on Rabbit Bay on
Lake of Bays. They do a booming business with their cottages. Sus
****
WOW! Congratulations Jackie and Jim! Carole and I wish you
every success and
be sure to send all us Squamidian members your literature when you get into
operation! You guys are brave, to say the least but I'm sure you'll love the
move and enjoy the success you deserve. What a great way to start the new
year. Good Luck to you both! Sincerely, Greg and Carole Payne.
****
Rosemary:
I can't stay quiet on this one, Greg. While I understand your fury with people who commit serious crimes against others, your solution of throwing them in jails made as sparse and uncomfortable as possible, or adopting the chain-gang approach of the Americans, would result in a huge problem. That is, they'd have to be kept in prison forever, because there would be no hope of re-integration back into society. Their resentment against society would increase, as would their skills at learning the tricks of the trade from each other. It would never be safe to let them out. There goes the budget.
You deplore the fact that prisoners can get an education and learn a trade in jail. Maybe for the first time in their lives they will have hope for a way out of a miserable existence. The warm bed, decent food, and library may not have been part of their pre-prison life. Probably most of the people who commit crimes are products of a rotten family life, or they are mentally ill. In either case, if the goal is to get them back into society and functioning productively, they need life skills training, vocational training, counselling, therapy, medication... whatever it takes to get them properly re-integrated. For some, nothing will work, and they are the ones who should be kept inside forever.
If a family member of mine was ever the victim of a crime, I would no doubt feel the way you do, Greg. I would want revenge. That is such a normal reaction. But that is why our judicial system is run by professionals whom we must trust to be informed and impartial and to carry out the laws that have been established to reflect a civilized society. There are too many frightening countries out there that base their punishments on revenge. I'll stick with our system. Rosemary
****
Greg:
Hi Rosemary! I can see exactly what you're saying and perhaps my comments were a bit too harsh. However, I'd like to see the stats on how many criminals reoffend and how successful the re-integration process really is. Could it still be that many of these people are so thrilled with the fact that being incarcerated affords them such luxuries they have never known that they reoffend every so often so as to take advantage of these benefits? I'm sure that some do but by and large I realize that the majority of former prisoners would prefer to stay free. However, I have many police officer aquaintances and friends that truly believe "Once a criminal, always a criminal". Who knows? GREG.
****
Greg:
Hi Mary! Oh I'm sure there is a lot more to the story, like the poor hard done by kid that lit the fire has had a difficult life and he's therefore justified in attempting to murder 5 innocent people. So we as a society should understand his actions and forgive what he's done. GREG.
****
Karin:
G'day everyone,
what an interesting report this week, or should I say, especially interesting.
First of all Jackie and Jim - that is such amazing news. I really admire what you are doing, and I have a feeling it will be very rewarding for you. Huntsville is one of those places that is gaining in popularity with leaps and bounds. My Dad has lived there for possibly 20 years and has always loved it. But certain times of the year, he complains about how busy it gets during tourist season. I think even in winter people come for snow sports.
I wish you the best of luck, although I'm sure you will do extremely well, with lots of hard work and persistence. You seem to make a good team, and know what you are doing. On the other hand, the great thing about doing something like this is, that your life is transformed into a great adventure. It'll be exciting and scary at times, and will probably be full of wonderful surprises. Good on you! (as the Aussies would say)
I look forward to
hearing more about your new venture. We will definitely check you out the
next time we are in Canada.
As usual, the Squamidian was a mixed bag, and that's what I like about it.
Greg, your story about the arsonist really made my blood boil. It really angers me that there are people like that, who wilfully destroy people's lives, or their property. The worst of it is, that the law is too lenient with these offenders. How fortunate, however, that no-one got hurt, and that they caught the offender. It really makes you wonder about what motivates someone like that to commit such an act. Are they sick, or are they evil? I especially found it intriguing to hear the story from a fire-fighter's point of view. Thanks for sharing.
I really enjoyed the article by Lorne's great uncle. How cool is that? I love to hear a voice from the past. It is quite interesting to hear where traditions originate from. Thanks for that, Lorne...
Doug, it is nice to know there are still lots of eagles in the wild, especially when you hear about a lot of large birds of prey becoming endangered species. It must be really amazing to watch them. Your weather sounds pretty unpleasant. Snow, slush, and mudslides. Well, it's not boring at least.
There really isn't much new and exciting happening in my life, so I will leave it at that for today.
Hope you all have a
great week! warm regards, Karin
****
Greg:
Hi Karin!
I appreciate your comments on my Ontarion this week! Thoughtless and dangerous acts such as the arson I spoke about do make people's blood boil for sure. We will have to wait and see how things turn out justice wise for this young arsonist. It will be truly interesting to see if he gets what he deserves or if as you say, the judge is too lenient on him. I'll be sure to keep you posted on this one. I guess I've stirred up some interesting input from other Squamidian's on this one. Rosemary's views on the situation are interesting and obviously informed and I must say how much I appreciated her comments. I'm sure we will be talking some more about this particular subject. Thanks again Karin and I look forward to hearing from you again as well. Bye for now....GREG.
****
Clyde:
Well actually, I guess I feel the need to step up to the plate on this one on Greg's behalf. What would Greg possibly know about the perpetrator when he's the guy expected to to risk his life to save others. How would Greg know that it was just a snaughty mouth idiot whose burnt every bridge in his life including these people's homes and destroyed their lives. What would Greg know about the pain and sorrow there after. Ya, Rosemary let's rehabilitate him/her so we won't have to worry if they plan to kill again.... maybe us. God knows we want him to be a useful, productive member of society. Maybe one of the best. To heck with the victim. Ya and my name's Little Bo Peep! If I met Paul Bernardo; I wouldn't be talking rehab...... sorry. I hate having to send flowers to the hospital. In a perfect world therapy can perform wonders. If I told you badgers make good house pets; would you believe me? Sorry Rosemary, I have to side with Greg on this. I do believe in the one bad apple don't spoil the whole bunch theory but being kind to murderers, rapists, or pediphiles has never seemed to change their behaviour. Please prove me wrong.........
Most of the people straight out of prison applying for welfare that I saw were within six months back in. Ya; I suppose we should put up with things like incest and say maybe we can help him become a productive member of society. But what about the victim? Rosemary, Greg was only saying that some people are just bad to the bone. Bu bu bu baddddddddddddd ! I side with Greg but appreciate all others opinions.
P.S. Maybe I'll get jury duty eh?
P.P.S. Thank heavens they are mostly male judges. Toodles!!!!!!
****
Greg:
RIGHT ON CLYDE!!!!!!!! Thanks Pal! GP
****
Greg:
Thanks for the support on this one Karin. I agree that he should have to work to pay them back for their losses however, it isn't just the financial devistation that resulted from his act but the fact that all five of these people could have lost their lives! How would he ever pay them back for that? He needs to be jailed and not in a country club, but a "Maximum security, hard time prison"! Only this type of punishment when made public will act as a deterant for anyone else who might consider committing such an evil crime. Severe punishment might give this young guy the incentive to be a career criminal but it might just stop 10 others who see what happens when you commit such a crime from doing it in the first place. GREG.
****
Mary:
You guys just don't get it. Rosemary and I are not saying that these crimes don't hurt people, cause devastation, and all the rest that is outrageous and shocking and absolutely unacceptable. We are reacting to the hatred and intolerance that fuel your rage. You need to put a human face on mental illness. Doing that does not discount the harm to innocent victims. Mary
****
Clyde:
I'm sorry Mary with all due respect I'm afraid that you just don't get it. Putting a human face to a guy like Paul Bernardo would be like swatting flies with bacon. As you know he was also the Scarborughl rapist. Understanding his illness; still won't protect us from him. We unfortunately have less rights than he does. I'm with Greg, the kill'em with kindness approach doesn't work for all. Social work is mainly female dominated and that is way there is an innate difference to the approach. It also explains why most world leaders are men. God bless Bush.......Clyde
****
Mary:
I was a little shocked, I must say, Clyde. It didn't sound like
you. Maybe you should send your response to me to every on the
list. You and Greg were sounding like my red-neck Albertan brother. Mary
Clyde:
Read from bottom to top while humming
"I never promised you a Rose Gordon"...........Clyde
Greg:
Hi Mary! Sounds like Clyde and I would get along just fine with your brother! LOL! GP
****
Greg:
I'm sure Rosemary can speak for herself when it comes to what her comments mean. It seems to me that you however are saying every person that commits a serious crime is mentally ill and should be forgiven because they don't realize what they've done? Horse Pucky!!!!!!!! Granted there are a few mentally ill people that do what they do because of it but for the most part, criminals are clear and calculating people that think they won't get caught and as they reoffend and reoffend there chances of getting caught diminish because they get better and better at what they do! I think you're looking at the world through rose coloured glasses Mary. You stated in your letter here that these crimes are terrible and unacceptable but you don't seem willing to accept the fact that such crimes deserve punishment, not benevolant understanding! GREG.
****
Mary:
Where did you hear me say that I didn't agree with
punishment, Greg? Are
you listening? I'm losing interest in continuing to have a dialogue with
you. Sorry. I'm stepping out of the discussion. Mary
****
Jackie:
Wow, this has been interesting reading. There are many things I love about being part of this cyber community, including the way we can use this forum to express personal views about a wide range of (sometimes hot) topics. As the debate about rights rages, no one can accuse us of not excercising our right of free speech!
But I'm going to do an abrupt change of topic now, because another thing I love about this group is the wealth of knowledge and experience represented here and the willingness to share it.
So let's channel some of this energy into something constructive...like building a house! I've got to make some decisions--and quickly--about the repair work to our new house.
I'm looking for advice on flooring options in the kitchen. There had been ceramic tile in there but I don't want to stay with it because it's cold and awfully hard on feet and backs when spending long stretches of time in the kitchen (which I love to do). Any ideas? I heard about some kind of soft tile that is homogenous throughout so it won't show knicks or scratches but I don't know much about it.
I'm also wondering about heating options. It was electic baseboard heat, which is cheap to install and expensive to pay for. I wonder if putting in ductwork and a propane furnace would be more cost effective over the long run? I don't even know if it's an option from a construction point of view. I'd love to eventually generate at least some of our electricity with solar power but that's very expensive to install, too. Does anyone know anything about geothermal heating systems?
I've started to research much of this on the internet, it's just hard to sort out what's reliable information vs what's a sales pitch. Any advice or opinions are welcome. We're going back up to meet with the contractor on Friday and I have to have some answers for certain items by then if we're going to meet our deadline.Thanks in advance for any input,
Jackie
****
Rosemary:
If Clyde and Greg come up with controversial topics just to stir things up, forget it! I have better things to do with my time then try to educate a very intolerant, and as Mary says, red neck, point of view.
As a social worker, you should know better, Clyde, than to goad people on purpose just for a good read. The truly alarming part of it is, I don't believe that's what you're doing. I think the two of you, and Doug too, really believe the crap you're dishing out right now. Mary, I'm with you. They're not going to listen and therefore they will never understand.
And by the way, don't accuse us of not having a sense of humour. This isn't a funny topic. Rosemary
****
Karin:
Thanks Rosemary, I agree with you whole-heartedly. Thanks for saying it so eloquently.I applaud you for this...Karin
****
Mary:
Doug, have you ever been to a gas chamber? I have. Thanks for all the support, Karin and Rosemary. My son was molested when he was 7 years old by a young man in the park who went on to more and more serious violations. Eventually, he was declared a dangerous offender. It is just damned sad all around. For the victims, for the offenders, for the whole lot. Mary
****
Ewan:
Hi all!
Wow, I get tuned in Monday night and miss all the action! But I guess that gives me a chance to NOT put my foot in my mouth... well here goes anyway!
First of all, Jackie, congratulations to you and Jim! I can't wait to get up there!
Skip this part if you're not interested in power generation (warning: I enjoy reading Doug's computer stuff). I've learned a lot about alternative energy systems, water collection and storage, building techniques etc. Unfortunately almost all of it is second hand. Solar panels for small to medium sized buildings in this part of the world rarely pay off without wind generation. Several smaller sources of power do create more maintenance and initial outlay. But much of the cost / work lies in integrating them in to your standard power supply. Most of that can be shared between them. Plus, they compensate for each other. The ideal would be a situation where you only stop generating power when there's no sun, wind and the small stream is low. If it were my place I would probably want to go all out and generate a surplus. But I'm not the norm that way, and I doubt you're interested in a hobby windmill! So, I think the best place to start is from the perspective of ongoing maintenance. I assume that you're not interested in spending a few hours a month performing maintenance work on a system? Some people are, most not. In that case I suggest poking around and finding out who in the area does such work, what options they present, and what their cost would be. In that part of the world there are a surprising number of resourceful entrepreneurs and small companies filled with people who refuse to be in Toronto, Hamilton, etc. to make a living. If power is their thing then you may be able to negotiate an economic package. As a business there could be environmental subsidies... we'll talk later...
Also, I would like to test any trails, swinging ropes and any other potentially dangerous junk on your property! No lawsuits!!!
I really enjoyed the article by Robert Haufschild! Thank you for submitting it, Grandpa. Can I call myself a Haufschild? That really sounds slick. When I was small I was starting to get in to the fire bug thing. It felt exciting when it started to burn out of control. I think it's a natural, and potentially deadly, reaction to fire. I wouldn't have thought of burning people, and a fire truck would have scarred the crap out of me. I was punished (not at all harshly) after burning down part of my Mom's hedge. More importantly, the family and the homestead gave me a chance to learn about fire, and gain some respect for it. We had a lot of fun with that, and the lessons were learned well. The maple syrup was good too!
This is the part where I chime in squarely in the middle of the road (skip the rest if that bugs you!). Among my friends who would never consider being in Toronto, I'm the nut case who lives in the big smoke. To the native city dwellers (those born and raised in Toronto, not the Indian kind) I'm always the country boy at heart. I defend the virtues of the big city to those outside, and I point out the positives of the smaller places to the people who can't imagine life outside the megacity. I admit the problems. Most people tend to accept that there are strengths and weaknesses to both, others never will. Ultimately, I'll move. But my point of view always seems so far from so many. To a child I'm old, to an old man I'm just a boy.
So it is with the whole crime thing. Fear, anger and compassion are all equally irrational. But there all equally human as well, and all those feelings are there for very good reasons. The human race wouldn't have made it this far without both points of view. Punishment and basic physical deterrents are kind of what keep us alive. But we need logic to really identify and defeat the underlying enemy. Identifying and preventing an arsonist is better than catching one. Learning from an arsonist is good to, for the same reason. Helping a person rebuild their mind is a great feat. When possible I think it's a good idea. It's good to offer people hope, as long as it does actually exist. Personally, I don't believe that a sane person can commit many of the crimes that we see. My definition of sanity and the nature of those crimes are mutually exclusive. I don't see mental illness as an excuse, just a fact. It must be dealt with. There are reasons why people behave the way they do. It's important to understand those causes. But everyone of them has reasons, that doesn't make it acceptable to simply let someone do it again.
Is someone who burns down 10 homes twice as guilty as someone who burns down 5? I don't think so. They're both nuts. The correct amount of time to remove them from the opportunity to do it again would be as long as it takes before we can be reasonably certain (can't be 100%) that they won't do it again. Personally, I believe that if a person keeps doing something even after being caught, they'll keep doing it. I just think it's unfortunate that justice boils down to a tug of war between emotions, as opposed to an exercise in reason. Even that's better than a contest between bank accounts.
Making people sicker through punishment for it's own sake is wrong. Nothing wrong with some solid community labour though. Doug brought up capitol punishment, a dangerous topic at the best of times. I'm against it, mostly because of my dim view of the justice system and our government. I just think it opens a dangerous door. I believe that the government, and people with tremendous amounts of money and power, can alter the law to suit their needs. Once someone has been painted a certain way those people could have the right to execute him. There are people who, frankly, don't deserve to live. But history shows us that men of power and influence will kill anyone who gets in their way, and the law often supports it.
In the end, they shot Ol' Yeller. Not because the dog was evil, not even because he deserved it, but because it had to be done. A cure would have been better. Prevention better still. But there is a lesson in that old story. Sick individuals in our own society could be viewed with the same compassion. I don't mean that they should all be shot! I just mean that they should be viewed as human. Very sick humans. The devil doesn't make people do it. There isn't a malevolent under world super villain pulling the strings. People do these things. Bernardo has a face, a Mom and heart. That's what makes him so scary. But that doesn't mean that he should be free again.
So both sides have some valid points, and some rhetoric. Clyde, you have a way of undermining your own side by pushing too many buttons! But you're the best at it! Mary, it's just like we're all kids in school. The boys pull your hair because you set off the loudest. The ladies started out more logical than the guys, then you fall to pieces when the boys throw mud at you! Composure. Damn Vulcan logic can be really annoying too.
In Toronto, suppose I fall closer to the red neck side. In other circles I'm the pencil neck. No matter what, when it comes to arson, I've got to put some weight behind the point of view of a fireman. Anyone who fights needs to know their shadow.
P.S. Something to think about:
There are four orders of criminal-
- The lowest order break the law.
- - Those above them tailor their crime to suit the law.
- - The highest order of criminal tailor the law to suit their crime.
- - The strangest commit crimes for which no laws have been written.
Ewan
****
Greg:
Thanks for an extremely well written point of view Ewan and thanks for the moderate support. As you say, there are valid points to both sides of this one and I'm sure by now you've read my final comments. For a kid who's an old man with a red pencil neck, you make a lot of sense! Great to hear from you my friend and keep tuning in. Talk again soon...GREG.
PS: You're right, Clyde is the ultimate shit disturber but he calls 'em as he sees 'em! I admire him for that!
****
Greg:
Hi again Mary! I'm saddened by your son's experience but I think you just made my point!
Of course I understand and agree that rehab is a less barbaric and oft times effective way of stopping repeat offenders. However, It is not the way to handle all major offenders just as a bread and water method is not the only way to go either. My point in the Ontarion was that I believe our justice system is a large percentage of the time too soft and slaps on the wrist in the form of light sentences are proven ineffective as a deterrant to reoffend. In my zeal to state my disgust over the arson crime this past week I may have sounded more rednecked than I actually am. Karin said that there is a difference between murder and arson and she is right BUT.....in this case had the young mother slept for another 5 minutes without getting up to go to the washroom and discover the fire, the authorities would have been dealing with 5 counts of murder instead of arson. They are both MAJOR crimes and where do we draw the line?
As far as Clyde and I just saying these thing to stir the pot, not so! We are stating a strong side of this matter to stimulate input. It obviously worked. By somewhat playing the Devil's advocate we've managed to bring out both sides of the situation in very strong showings and this is what makes for good reading as well as improving awareness to not only our group but also to the general public when a system needs attention to gain improvement. There is no hard and fast way of dealing with criminals and a mixture of punishment and rehab methods seems to work to some degree. In Canada we do have maximum security prisons that are extremely rough places to do one's time however, it seems to me that more and more major offenders are receiving less and less severe sentences these days and they are truly laughing in the face of not only the judicial system but our faces as well and I take offence to that! I can't speak for Clyde of Doug but I have heard what you and Rosemary have been saying and I respect both of your opinions. All I ask is that you respect my right to express my views on this as well. You DID say that you understand my outrage at this arson situation and so did Rosemary and I doubt either of you take this or any other crime lightly. No decent person can hear the facts of this case and not feel disgust. It is also clear that you both agree that some form of punisment must be dealt to this individual as I do. However it's also clear that we differ on the definition of "Punishment" and the method used to rehabilitate this individual so that he will not reoffend in the future. Let's hope that whatever the judge meters out to this young man is successful in achieving this goal and that whatever his sentence is, it's enough of a lesson that it will be a deterrant to anyone else that is contemplating committing the same crime as well. If the "Punishment" this fellow receives prevents even one such act in the future, then I will agree that justice has prevailed.
My comments were not meant to be inflamatory or disrespectful to anyone involved in this exchange of opinions and I hope we can continue to have interesting and meaningful discussions on other topics in future Ontarions.
Rosemary, I thank you for your interesting and enlightening input as well and I hope I haven't turned you off as a contributor. I enjoy our exchanges very much and look forward to more in the future.
PS: My "redneck" comment to Mary was only meant to lighten the mood a tad but I guess it backfired or was misunderstood. The problem with e-mail is that one can't see or hear the emotion or vocal inflections that add so much to a conversation and are sometimes the only way to understand the true meaning of one's comments.
Sincerely....GREG. Please keep the comments and opinions coming! Thanks!
*************************************
To All: I have one more situation regarding my thoughts on punishment fitting the crime that I wish to relate to you before I sign off tonight. Please read the following and then I'll say no more. I do believe it proves my point and is fact based and varifiable.
Today I had breakfast with a lifelong friend who is a retired police officer and we talked at length about what we Squamidian's have been discussing this week. My friend told me that he can produce the stats to back up what I'm about to tell you. I hope you understand the outcome of this after reading what he had to say.
This gentleman told me that when he started his career as a police officer, he would be out on patrol in the evenings. He said that they kept stats on this and he was shocked at this situation. During the night shift on any given night, 50% of the vehicles that he encountered on the roads after 10pm were driven by impaired drivers! He told me that even if he made a stop for some other infraction of the law, he invariably encountered drivers that had been drinking to some degree. It was a situation that was so prolific that his detachment commanders preferred that he and the other officers make a point of simply driving the individual home and having their vehicle towed to the impound rather than charge every drinking driver. Of course they only did this as long as there were no other vehicles endangered or involved in an accident with these individuals. If they were only on their own and causing nobody else harm or danger then they got a ride home and a warning. If they were indeed causing dangerous situations they were of course charged. The main reason for the "unwritten" action was that if the officers charged every drinking driver, their "zone" would be left unattended for several hours with the laying of each impaired charge. Thus, in many situations it was more prudent to drive them home and get back to doing other duties in their zone rather than spending long periods of time processing the DD's. One heck of a way to have to look at policing but nevertheless a fact of the times. Back then, the charge of Impaired Driving amounted to an $80.00 fine and no loss of licence or demerit points. Truly the punishment was no deterrant to drinking and driving the following day let alone never again. This situation went on for many years. My friend says that when he retired last year and for many years previous to that in the latter part of his career, it was a busy week if they were able to lay 2 or 3 Impaired Driving charges. His comment to me was "Why do you suppose the number of Impaired charges has dropped so dramatically over the past 20 years?" My immediate answer to him was because the fines for being guilty of that offence these days are HUGE and the automatic long term suspension of one's license and the eventual lifetime loss of one's license for repeat offenders, as well as a possible jail term, has caused these drivers to NOT REOFFEND. Clearly proof that if the punishment fits the crime, the guilty individuals learn a lesson and most DO NOT REOFFEND and my friend agreed. The point being, that if the sentence (punishment) is severe enough, it will lessen the number of offences of each type committed whether it be Murder, Arson, Incest, Pedophilia, Fraud, Assault or simply Drunk Driving! Back in the days when the Impaired Drivers were slapped on the wrist or driven home with a warning, they new they had gotten away with their deed and laughed up their sleeves. Counceling them certainly didn't work but scaring the hell out of them with the threat of losing their driving privilages or going to jail sure did. I believe if we apply this same principle to all crimes, along with a well planned rehab program we will find that most crimes if not all will lessen in number. There is no hard and fast way of achieving this goal but I do not believe that the soft understanding "OK, I believe you've learned your lesson after suffering some humiliation by being dragged into court and having your name in the paper" approach will work at all. The Punishment Must Fit the Crime! Greg
****
Karin:
I have to come to Mary's defence. I understand what Mary is saying. In some cases, people are genuinely mentally ill , and therefore are not capable of understanding the consequences of their actions.(think mentally handicapped, schizophrenics). And there are those who are not, who, with the advice of their lawyers, use the insanity plea as their defence. Of course there are the hardened criminals, like Bernardo, which have gradually turned bad to the point of no return. It's not a black and white issue.
Clyde, you have to be careful what you say. I think you and Greg were being unfair to Mary. If we had more caring people like Mary, it would be a better world. Besides, we weren't discussing Bernardo, but rather we were all talking about the arsonist. (there is a big difference here). Both arson, and murder are despicable crimes, but have to be judged individually.
Our justice system is not perfect, but it is compassion and
understanding, that makes us a
better society, not brutality. Punishment has it's place, but it has to be fair
to all concerned. Unfortunately, sometimes the law does seem to favor the
criminal. So should we blame the justice system for this, or the lawyers?
I think once we do evolve to have a better understanding of what motivates people to commit crimes, we might prevent it from happening in the first place. I would love to hear what Carol has to say about this issue.
Regards, Karin
Ps. I read the story about Bernardo, and it is clear to me, that this tragic crime could have been prevented. Bernardo may have committed the murder but a lot of other people contributed to the outcome. Don't you agree, Clyde?
****
Mary:
But did you know (unless it has changed in the last few years) that rehabilitation does not take place in prison until near the very END of a long sentence? For example, with murder, if the sentence is life, and, therefore 15 years minimum, then rehabilitation begins around year 14. This may be wrong, but I followed the course of the homophobic/related murder in Victoria Park back in 1985 and Darrel Kluke, who was in his early 20's, would receive no treatment until he would be almost 40!
Re: drunk driving. In Scandanavia, where they do most things better than just about anywhere else in the world, in my opinion, punishment for impaired driving (which is very tightly defined) is swift and short, but embarrassing and debilitating. I believe you are incarcerated immediately (on the spot) and can't show up for work and your license is suspended for a period of time, also immediately. They apparently have little impaired driving as a result. I may be wrong about the details, but the spirit of the thing is intact. Mary
****
Carol:
I'm like Ewan and
always miss checking the e-mails for a few days and then find all the amazing
responses. There is nothing left for me to say that Rosemary and Mary
haven't already said but I just wanted them to know that if one had to pick
sides on this issue I would take theirs. Is this a male/female divide
thing? It would be interesting to know what Carole and Barb think of this
discussion.
Carol
****
Rosemary:
Good to get your opinion, Carol, although I was certain this would also be your perspective.
Ewan, you present a well-thought out point of view. Hey, shows there is some hope for the male species. Just a little jab there, guys, for your quite nasty references to "do-gooders". Greg, you say you hope you didn't offend anyone, but the rage you boys directed toward those of us who believe in a progressive approach to crime and punishment really was quite offensive. Your email today was much less emotional and therefore easier to read and respond to.
Greg's statistics and Mary's on impaired driving are true. This is one crime where swift action deters the offender and potential offenders from drinking and driving. Preventing the offender from driving is the most logical of consequences, and therefore it works.
But it is not accurate to say that harsh punishment for all other crimes therefore is a deterrent. It is not. In the U.S. where certain states have capital punishment, the incidents of murder have not decreased. In fact, just compare Canada with its more liberal views of punishment, with the U.S. They have so much more crime down there. Their belief in the right to own guns has resulted in huge gun-related murders. That's what happens when revenge is allowed to take over.
We, uh, do-gooders, are not saying that crimes should not be punished. We are saying there needs to be:
There is a new program being tried now with certain offenders where they meet their victims and talk about the crime and the effect it has had. For many offenders this has completely turned them around, and has had a profound healing effect on the victims. As Mary has said, it has put a human face on both sides.
For the record, I believe there are some criminals who can never be released, as they will always pose a threat, Bernardo being one of them. Rosemary
****
Mary:
Greg, Clyde and
Doug, didn't you grow up in Kitchener? Haven't you heard about the birth
of Community Justice Initiatives and the victim-offender program? They
teach about it and the Elmira case in law schools around the world. We
have the privilege to live in the community where it began. It
works! It's based on native justice principles. Shame on
you all...I'm with the ladies on this.
Mary
****
Greg:
Just a couple of comments here Rosemary and then
I'll drop it. First of all, I take offence to your use of the term rage when
describing my thoughts. Just because someone objects to lighter sentencing and
a psycological approach to punishment rather than strict incarceration does not
mean we are in a rage about it. It's just a different view than yours!
Secondly: The USA has 10 times the population
that Canada has and therefore they do have more crime. I agree that gun related
crimes of course are more prolific in the States and their views on the right
to own and carry firearms is of course the reason. No argument there!
Thirdly: (if there is such a word) This whole
conversation is NOT about Capital Punishment! That is a whole different subject
and I'd rather not bring that into this exchange.
I disagree that harsher punisment such as that
used for Impaired Driving won't make a differenct in the number of more serious
offences. My original argument was in part that when criminals do actually get
sentenced to incarceration for the crime they have committed, the cushy
surroundings and "country club" style of buildings many of them serve
their time in only serve to take away the desired effect that being put in JAIL
is intended to have on them! Although they are still denied their freedom, they
are afforded luxuries inside that many of them do not have in their "free
life". This to me is not the deterrant that knowing they are going to be
locked in a concrete block 6 x 10 room with bars for a door for 22 hours a day
for the duration of their sentence would be! Also, as Mary pointed out, when
rehabilitation is prescribed as part of an offenders punishment, it is not
instituted until the very end of the offenders term and therefore the benefit
of this "treatment" is minimal at best. It seems to me that if
psycological, theraputic or skills related
"Punishment/Rehabilitation" is the answer, the offenders should be
exposed to these methods from day one to the very last day of their sentence
whether that be incarceration or probation and continued to be monitored for a
period of time after they are deemed fit for release to see how successful
these methods are. I'd still be interested to see actual statistics showing a
comparison between the number of criminals that reoffend after each type of
punishment we've been talking about and also the number that reoffend after
being punished with a combination of both. Surely there is a middle ground here
somewhere that would make for the best results.
In the final analysis I do believe that my
reference to "Do Gooders" was with regard mainly to the Judges that
see fit to hand down light and in my opinion ineffective sentences for serious
crimes. I do think that handing down sentences that are more toward the maximum
allowed for each type of crime would result in less people reoffending, just as
it does in the case of Impaired Driving. Impaired Driving stats PROVE that it
works.I rest my case! Court is adjourned! Greg
****
Karin:
The women know
what they are talking about. I enjoyed Ewan's commentary, however, and he
speaks words of wisdom, for one so young. Greg, I can understand where you are
coming from, because as a firefighter, you were on the front-lines, and
had to deal directly with the problem of fires caused by firebugs. So you are
entitled to be angry about these thugs who burn and distroy property and lives.
This is absolutely
my last comment regarding this issue...
but it's been fun. Karin
****
Rosemary:
And my last word on the subject is that we will
have to agree to disagree, Greg. I don't believe we can deter people from
committing crimes (other than in the impaired driving instance of taking their
license and car away). I do not think most criminals consider
the consequences of their actions. Since I don't see deterrence working,
my money would go into trying to change these people while they are serving
their sentences. And if more money was put into this, maybe rehab treatment
programs would begin earlier.
Let's call a truce, Greg. Rosemary
****
Mary:
I lead a choir at the women's prison. I
would love for you to meet the women, Greg. Talk about the human
face. And I don't find the whole process of being there soft or
cosy. Taking away my freedom would be about the worst thing you could do
to me. Just going through the dog sniffing process each time I go in
should put the idea of luxury and "retreat" to rest! Mary
****
Tara:
I somehow began
getting all these emails somewhere after this whole debate began, but I feel
compelled to point out that my sister who has never committed a crime will come
out of university with a debt of close to fifty thousand dollars, while Karla
Homolka earned a degree while in prison. For free. That's pretty cushy.
There is definitely something wrong with our judicial system.
****
Ewan:
True. But the trouble with the education system
is also pretty bad! "In order to qualify for enrolment you must have at
least a 92% average...or kill someone, whichever."
I think it's good that prisoners get a chance at
education. All of us should have access to health care, education, decent air
and water etc. It does seem wrong to ask someone to PAY BACK all that money if
a criminal gets it for free though. Nothing about bombs though... or anything
too related to what they're in for. No Hannibal Lector stuff. What about a nice
course on home PC repair?
If you go to prison for never paying back your
student loan can you go back to school for free? I can imagine people doing
that, if it worked!
I think college would have been easier if I
didn't keep having to go outside in the winter to get to class. I bet they
still make them fill out all kinds of forms though. The government probably has
entire offices that do nothing but process applications, in triplicate, from
inmates to attend school. They know they're in prison... they have their name
and everything. But there's probably still some special stupid forms where they
have to look up the stupid 19 digit prison application number for their
specific cell block... which for stupid reason can only be found in a book in a
special dedicated office in Thunderbay... but the book is from last year...
"Are you in prison full time, or part time?"... "Are one or both
of your parents/legal guardians also in prison?"... and then they have to
go through their LAWYER to get it done... which is also FREE (as far as they're
concerned) and for some reason it's simply taken care of.
Huh! Sorry... I still bare scars from my
experiences with the OSAP/CSL application process and related baloney. I think
I should be rehabilitated! Ewan
****
Ewan:
Looking someone in the face and admitting to
them that you did something wrong has got to be tough for many people. Trying
to explain why you did what you did... I think for a lot of criminals that can
be bitter medicine. Others would laugh in their face of course, but those with
some humanity left could really feel it. Some people are good actors, but
looking at, for example, someone in a wheel chair who is there because of
something that you thoughtlessly did (e.g. drinking and driving) would be a
cold and sobering experience for almost anyone (no pun intended).
I think that people should have to pick up
trash. There is too much trash around here, and a fair bit of crime too. Taking
someone out of the city, to pick up any garbage on or around somewhere like the
Bruce Trail wouldn't exactly be cruel or unusual punishment. Might do them some
good. Hell, I might go!
My grandfather Ewan Cameron (deceased before I
was born) was a strong proponent of steering young people away from crime. As a
police officer I think he could be pretty intimidating. But he also got young
offenders playing hockey and stuff. He didn't measure success so much by how
many crooks he could lock up so much as how many he could save. They told me he
resented the fellow who took over for him at the police station because he was
very focused on numbers. Generating positive stats instead of professional
decisions. Only when I became a troubleshooter in a big company did I start to
understand that. I can focus on generating monthly report statistics that
suggest that people are happy, or I can actually fix their phone problems.
One of my favourite places in Toronto is High
Park. It's helped me keep a grip on a little sanity since I've lived here. One
day I found a plaque in the park that described the man who started it. John
Howard was a surveyor/engineer/painter/architect wealthy good guy in Toronto in
the 19th century. He donated most of his land in the city, prime real-estate,
which makes up much of the 199 acres of High Park today.
That inspired me, and it made me remember
another John Howard (I used to think they were the same guy). He lived about
100 years before the High Park one. He was an English prisoner of war in
France, and spent much of the rest of his free life trying to improve
conditions in all prisons, and making the public aware of how bad it was. He
also got changes made that meant that people who were found innocent were
actually free to go, instead of making them pay their way out. Now there are
John Howard's Societies all over that help people (not to be confused with
Howard Johnson's).
When I was 11 I was was arrested for shop
lifting! Old enough to know better. The charges were eventually dropped when we
agreed that I would spend some time with the John Howard's Society. This was a
few nights a week, not to stay. Anyway, Mom and Dad and the ride home in a
cruiser were plenty to scare me straight (Mom can STILL do that!). But the
whole experience with John Howard's was positive. There was a serious side to
it too, but I guess it was a "slap on the wrist." The point was that
they could see that we weren't a rotten kids, just wandered off the path. So
they focused on getting us interested in other stuff, and talking about things
in a totally informal way. I still spent much of my teen years causing trouble,
but nothing too serious and I didn't steal. I guess I was lucky in that I got
in to a little trouble before I found big trouble. I still think highly of the
John Howard's Society, and of the adult do-gooders who spent time with us. I
don't think they were in it for the money. Maybe that was a bit like one of the
vaccines that I also got as a kid.
That will be the last I say about this topic as
well. I probably wrote so much that your eyes fell out! I've had extra time
because at work we're in "condition brown" for the holidays (less
messing up the phone system). Ewan
****
Clyde:
I loved this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks Ewan.Your so called sordid past has
indeed given you a pretty bright future. (you might have to wear glasses). Clyde