|
Re: Toronto Shooting
I am sure there is some sort of solution, however not sure if long prison terms are the answer. Look south of the border and you can easily see what happens when harsh long sentences take place, government ends up with massive bills related to prisons and overcrowded prisons to a point courts have had to intervene and force states to release prisoners to reduce overcrowding.
|
Re: Toronto Shooting
Of course, it doesn't matter what's banned in Canada when there's an open border with the US so the route to reducing gun crime in Toronto is to reduce the influence of the NRA, elect Democrats, introduce gun control in the US and wait 100 years.
That's quite a self-centred viewpoint - you cheerfully propose interfering in the domestic affairs of a neighbouring country, rather than the bleeding obvious - better enforcement of (existing) Canadian laws, within Canada, by Canada. |
Re: Toronto Shooting
Originally Posted by tooboocoo
(Post 12556494)
Of course, it doesn't matter what's banned in Canada when there's an open border with the US so the route to reducing gun crime in Toronto is to reduce the influence of the NRA, elect Democrats, introduce gun control in the US and wait 100 years.
That's quite a self-centred viewpoint - you cheerfully propose interfering in the domestic affairs of a neighbouring country, rather than the bleeding obvious - better enforcement of (existing) Canadian laws, within Canada, by Canada. One could argue that the US takes a self-centered view in maintaining a state of domestic anarchy as that inevitably causes problems for other countries. The US position on the gun issue, being unique in the world, is plainly unsound. The best one can say for it is that Americans killing their schoolchildren is, perhaps, their own business if they can keep it to their own schoolchildren. They don't though. On this issue the US is the dangerous dog owner who won't buy a fence. |
Re: Toronto Shooting
Canada isn't an independent country but a subsidiary state, something like Scotland, Wales or NI. Bizarre, and news to a lot of people, I suspect... or is that supposed to be some kind of wry thigh-slapper?
Of course the people of Canada should try to influence decisions that directly affect their lives. So you'd be equally relaxed about Americans "influencing" the political process in Canada, purely for their own benefit? ... if they can keep it to their own schoolchildren. They don't though. I really shake my head at the casualness with which you say the most incendiary things. "They" are known for killing schoolchildren in other countries, really? Please provide one example. One could argue what you do, but it's a weak argument. A dog is known to act independently and instinctively, sometimes with violence; inanimate objects such as guns are not. The dog owner is very reasonably expected to foresee possible harm occasioned by his/her dog. Yet you expect Americans to be responsible for the illegal actions of Canadians. Surely that's a matter for Canadian law-enforcement? Or would better/more enforcement somehow require a bit of backbone (and funding)? |
Re: Toronto Shooting
Originally Posted by tooboocoo
(Post 12556559)
Canada isn't an independent country but a subsidiary state, something like Scotland, Wales or NI. Bizarre, and news to a lot of people, I suspect... or is that supposed to be some kind of wry thigh-slapper?
Of course the people of Canada should try to influence decisions that directly affect their lives. So you'd be equally relaxed about Americans "influencing" the political process in Canada, purely for their own benefit? ... if they can keep it to their own schoolchildren. They don't though. I really shake my head at the casualness with which you say the most incendiary things. "They" are known for killing schoolchildren in other countries, really? Please provide one example. One could argue what you do, but it's a weak argument. A dog is known to act independently and instinctively, sometimes with violence; inanimate objects such as guns are not. The dog owner is very reasonably expected to foresee possible harm occasioned by his/her dog. Yet you expect Americans to be responsible for the illegal actions of Canadians. Surely that's a matter for Canadian law-enforcement? Or would better/more enforcement somehow require a bit of backbone (and funding)? Canadian law enforcement is acting at least as effectively in this regard as US law enforcement. If guns are widely distributed among random people, something only the US supports, then people will inevitably been killed by them as that's what they're for. If the rabid dog analogy is too far fetched for you then I suggest that the US acts toward Canada as Colombia does to the US; cocaine does not shove itself up the noses of Americans, it's inanimate. |
Re: Toronto Shooting
Mid afternoon what the F does this city look like https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.thes...olice-say.html |
Re: Toronto Shooting
Originally Posted by magnumpi
(Post 12556710)
|
Re: Toronto Shooting
Shots fired in Ajax today, two cars shooting at each other Ugh !!! Now I am pissed !!! |
Re: Toronto Shooting
Shooting/murder happened yesterday evening not too far from where we are.
https://toronto.citynews.ca/2018/09/...ildren-police/ It was the fourth fatal shooting yesterday in the GTA. https://torontosun.com/news/local-ne...s-being-sought |
Re: Toronto Shooting
How about, for a start:- having an unregistered handgun in your possession. 10 years in jail, no parole firing an unregistered handgun. 15 years in jail, no parole firing an unregistered handgun injuring someone. 20 years to life in jail, no parole killing someone with unregistered handgun. Full life term in jail, no possibility of parole |
Re: Toronto Shooting
Originally Posted by plasticcanuck
(Post 12558274)
How about, for a start:- having an unregistered handgun in your possession. 10 years in jail, no parole firing an unregistered handgun. 15 years in jail, no parole firing an unregistered handgun injuring someone. 20 years to life in jail, no parole killing someone with unregistered handgun. Full life term in jail, no possibility of parole dream oncehh |
Re: Toronto Shooting
Originally Posted by plasticcanuck
(Post 12558274)
How about, for a start:- having an unregistered handgun in your possession. 10 years in jail, no parole firing an unregistered handgun. 15 years in jail, no parole firing an unregistered handgun injuring someone. 20 years to life in jail, no parole killing someone with unregistered handgun. Full life term in jail, no possibility of parole |
Re: Toronto Shooting
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 12558397)
This approach is so short sighted that we might call it Thatcheresque.
|
Re: Toronto Shooting
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 12558397)
The "unregistered" seems an unnecessary qualification, what would the penalty be if the gun was registered? And then there's are the problems of how to fund a large prison population and what happens when the prisoners are released. This approach is so short sighted that we might call it Thatcheresque.
You said my comments were Thatcheresque. I don’t quite understand this except perhaps that you’re suggesting my thoughts on the matter are much too tough. IMO, we must get these criminals to think twice before buying and carrying illegal handguns. Do you have any suggestions on how to deal with the situation? |
Re: Toronto Shooting
Besides larger prison costs, do longer sentences reduce crime by a significant amount? Are they useful?
They sound good on paper and in the media and it will win elections, but do long sentences work in reality? |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 2:03 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.