-
April 19th, 2015, 09:27 PM
#1
Mandatory minimum sentences
Mandatory minimum sentences for gun related crimes struck down by the Supreme Court:
Judge can still give plenty of prison time for serious gun offences , but minor offences no longer have to be assigned the minimum time.
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politi...earms-offences
" We are more than our gender, skin color, class, sexuality or age; we are unlimited potential, and can not be defined by one label." quote A. Bartlett
-
April 19th, 2015 09:27 PM
# ADS
-
April 19th, 2015, 10:12 PM
#2
As much as I'm a supporter of minimum sentences,this one was poorly written. Although there was a provision for a "minor" case to be proceeded with under summary indictment,the potential was there for it to be grossly abused by over-zealous Crown Attorney and/or crusading Liberal-appointed Judges. Had it remained,there would have been no way to appeal should that happen without an amendment by Parliament. Even a minor infraction like failing to renew a PAL could have very likely landed someone in jail.
If a tree falls on your ex in the woods and nobody hears it,you should probably still get rid of your chainsaw. Just sayin'....
-
April 20th, 2015, 04:05 AM
#3
Trimmer it's funny how you single out the Liberals when talking about judges when the whole bill is from the Conservative tough on crime agenda.
_____________________________________
Living proof that "beer builds better bellies".
-
April 20th, 2015, 07:35 AM
#4
Some people look at the words of a law and decide if it's a good or bad one. Others look at which party suggested it and base their decision on that.
I feel that the judge should have some leeway when he is faced with some poor guy who didn't renew his RPAL in time or grabbed his registered 45 to investigate the noise in his barn at 2am....
-
April 20th, 2015, 07:50 AM
#5
Big mistake....if you are in possession of a firearm without a proper licence you should do a minimum on 10 years with no time off for good behavior and if you used that firearm during a crime then you do whatever sentence that is handed out to you on top of the 10 years!!!! It is time to get tough on ANYONE who is in possession of a firearm illegally!
-
April 20th, 2015, 09:29 AM
#6
Mixed thoughts on this.
As a general rule, I would prefer our courts/judges have more flexibility when it comes to sentencing. However, over the past X years (decades) there is imo, an alarming trend to be too soft.
Meaning.
I like the idea of judges being able to weigh a case and decide. Nope, this is one where I don't think we need to send a message, be hard. However, too often it's going the other way. See the revolving door justice system. So nice on paper, in practice.......
-
April 20th, 2015, 09:38 AM
#7
Judges aren't directly affected when the criminal they release back into society re offend and sometimes commit murder in their escalating careers. Seems it doesn't matter what the Parliament creates in terms of laws anymore the judges only do what they want. That scares me.
I’m suspicious of people who don't like dogs, but I trust a dog who doesn't like a person.
-
April 20th, 2015, 10:47 AM
#8
Originally Posted by
Woodsman
Trimmer it's funny how you single out the Liberals when talking about judges when the whole bill is from the Conservative tough on crime agenda.
I don't think it's funny,at all. The Conservatives had the right idea,but,it hamstrung the Judges for even minor offenses. Bad legislation doesn't stop after an election,especially this kind which can come back to bite you in the butt. It's established fact that most Judges are Liberal Party patronage appointments and,as such,it's expected that they will obey the Liberal agenda or risk being "replaced" or "re-assigned" especially should the Liberals be elected to form a government. Let's not hand them the hammer to beat us to death with.
Last edited by trimmer21; April 20th, 2015 at 10:48 AM.
Reason: sp
If a tree falls on your ex in the woods and nobody hears it,you should probably still get rid of your chainsaw. Just sayin'....
-
April 20th, 2015, 12:47 PM
#9
Originally Posted by
Brampton Mike
Big mistake....if you are in possession of a firearm without a proper licence you should do a minimum on 10 years with no time off for good behavior and if you used that firearm during a crime then you do whatever sentence that is handed out to you on top of the 10 years!!!! It is time to get tough on ANYONE who is in possession of a firearm illegally!
What about when the post office goes on strike the week after your renewal has been approved, so you don't get your new card for about six more months. Which is two or three weeks AFTER your licence expired. I guess you feel that going to jail for a minimum of ten years is ok. Maybe the judge will agree with your "get touch on illegal gun possession view" and add a few more years for have more then one and lots of ammo. Maybe thirty to forty years would be just what a hardened criminal like you needs. Just getting you off the range is going to save the lives of millions of defenceless clay pigeons.
Last edited by Snowwalker; April 20th, 2015 at 12:49 PM.
Take the warning labels off. Darwin will solve the problem.
-
April 20th, 2015, 12:52 PM
#10
Wont happen snowwalker. If post is on strike you can at least get a confirmation # or more likely they will fax or email you a copy that can be printed at home or at work.
The mandatory minimum was a response to the many young gangbangers being sent home to mom under house arrest after being found in illegal possession of a firearm many of them were charged and convicted for discharging said firearm.
Reply With Quote
