Only one way to prevent people from reoffending and thats execution. Kinda hard to reoffend when you're dead
Only one way to prevent people from reoffending and thats execution. Kinda hard to reoffend when you're dead
Why the f would a guy who apparently has a job would stab another guy over 1K? Sure he might be crazy or on the edge, but still...1K, that's a f'n motive?
Why the f would a guy who apparently has a job would stab another guy over 1K? Sure he might be crazy or on the edge, but still...1K, that's a f'n motive?
From a 2010 article from the Winnipeg Sun:
[...]
Fair enough!
I have no doubt that most thieves/drug dealers reoffend. My specific worry comes with murders and I don't think that most of those do.
I agree it's a hot potato issue but I have no fixes either. I don't think life imprisonment is the answer (as you can probably tell).
We read about murders in the papers all the time, do you think they wouldn't mention it if the suspect had already been in jail for murder? How often do you remember seeing that? Yet it seems like people often assume that's what's going to happen.
It happens very rarely.
As for the Homolka argument, I can't comment on that. I don't know how authorities keep tabs on offenders with new identities/locations of residence.
Anyway, my point is, if this guy gets 2 years (or however little) or gets convicted of manslaughter, given the fact that he's not psychotic or something, PM me and I'll admit I was wrong!
The justice system is effed but not because of this. Let's get rid of HTA 172 and idiotic stuff like crazy sentences for dealing weed (who cares about weed??).
I know, but it's context right. You wouldn't think a guy with a steady job (from the news it seemed like he was a mechanic) wouldn't bring a damn knife and just start stabbing. This doesn't seem irrational (so take away the crazy angle) and all you have is deliberate. It just seems fkd up up to kill a guy over 1k deliberately unless of course it's accidental I guess.A lot of crazies out there. People have been killed for a lot less
Meh; In Canada ? Not likely. He'll plead insanity and be out in two years. .
And we should have 'Stand Your Ground' laws like the US. If someone intentional knock your bike down, and by chance, you are carrying a Glock 22 as part of your religious requirement just like other religion has a sabre and your religion is with a gun.... you put two in the head and empty the rest on the centre mass of the punk who messed with your bike. And that would be a justifiable action....
A lot of crazies out there. People have been killed for a lot less
Why do I bother. The woman committed the act in 2004. 2010 - 6 years (it is in the story, first line) Simple law concept is that the law applies that was in force when you committed the act not when you are convicted. Yep that means people who committed crimes back 30 years ago are judged by those laws. (There is an exception for the death penalty in Canada since those sentences were commuted at the time).
As for the rest, read the story again. Try a little mental game. Pretend you believe the exact opposite of what you do. See if you can read the story another way. Trust me it is all there.
Yes... I re-read the article... Maybe I am quite simple minded, actually pretty dumb, definitely not as smart as you..... I still see killing your own daughter out of inconvenience because she is autistic and getting only 2.5 years jail time and she is scott free, head back to China for a new life.
If she is mentally unstable and bipolar to a point of committing murder, that's why she drowned her own daughter, shouldn't she be locked up in some mental hospital?? Upon her release, she did admit regret but still blame autism for her action as she is quoted “the most stupid thing I have ever done.”
“I will feel great regret the rest of my life,” Peng said. “I miss my daughter every day. I still love my daughter. I hate autism.”
By that account, does all parents with an autistic child should get a lenient sentence if they couldn't take it anymore and put their child out of their misery?? This court case definitely provides a precedent.
2 mistakes there:
Settling it privately even tho its not his fault
Leading a retard to your home
I usually give the option of settling outside of insurance. But as soon as they get mouthy I just tell them not to worry about it and then call insurance anyway.
Well, I've also settled out of insurance too, and had to cough up $500. Sometimes if the damage is small enough, it makes sense to just do. For big stuff, I would definitely make sure that insurance takes care of it because I need a loaner car and everything.Guy rear ended me. He wanted to offer me $300. Waste of time. I went thru insurance, got my bumper fixed plu a loaner. Cant get better than that
Sent from my tablet using my paws
Guy rear ended me. He wanted to offer me $300. Waste of time. I went thru insurance, got my bumper fixed plu a loaner. Cant get better than that
Sent from my tablet using my paws
Well, I've also settled out of insurance too, and had to cough up $500. Sometimes if the damage is small enough, it makes sense to just do. For big stuff, I would definitely make sure that insurance takes care of it because I need a loaner car and everything.