Will they include a prison for the terminally stupid?

[Scooter]

Perhaps Mr. Day can be the first inmate:

Despite historically low crime rates, Canada is expected to spend $9.5 billion to build new prisons and retrofit old ones — a figure that has Conservative politicians scrambling to justify the cost. Last week, Treasury Board Minister Stockwell Day suggested Canada needs more prisons because of an “increase in the amount of unreported crime.”

Uh, Stockwell, care trying to explain how one goes about imprisoning the perpetrators of unreported crime?

But then again, the guy also believes in young earth creationism, so...

[Lord Jim]

How is he even able to tell that unreported crime is going up?

Seems to me that whether unreported crime is going up, down, or staying the same is completely unknowable, since it's...

well....

unreported....

[Scooter]

Statistics Canada does a crime survey every five years. They ask if people have been victims of certain crimes and whether those crimes were reported to police. It's a way of adjusting the crime stats as reported by policing agencies to get a truer picture of the actual level of crime, but, of course, could not possibly have any effect on the need for more prisons.

[Lord Jim]

Well, what would account for the numbers of unreported crime going up while the numbers for reported crimes aren't? All factors being equal, shouldn't these two stay in a rough correspondence to each other?

There are some things I could think of that might account for this. An increase in the percentage of foreign residents who might have less trust in the police authorities or a cultural bias towards handling problems within their community without going to the law, might be one thing...(But then one would expect that people in these communities would be less inclined to answer "crime surveys" honestly too.)

Or a general rise in distrust towards the authorities would be another....

Is there a pattern in Canada where a rise in unreported crime has been sort of a "leading indicator" of reported crime rising a year or two later?

If that's the case, then maybe this guy's position isn't as silly as it sounds....

[Rick]

According to this, yes crime over all has declined. However violent crime only slightly...

[Gob]

Maybe they want to fill the prisons with the uncaught perpetrators of the unreported crimes..

[Andrew D]

Maybe they want to fill the prisons with the uncaught perpetrators of the unreported crimes.

Wouldn't it be a lot more cost-effective to incarcerate them in unbuilt prisons?

[Crackpot]

There you go being soft on crime again

[Lord Jim]

There you go being soft on crime again

Well that's hardly surprising...

We all know Andrew's a thug hugger....

[Andrew D]

No, I just have a healthy mistrust of our "criminal justice" system's ability to produce correct results.

And those of us who do not share that mistrust must believe that the system's outcomes are "absolutely" correct. You know, like the acquittal of O.J. Simpson ....

[dales]

Well, Andrew.....

Seen Charles Manson around lately

[Lord Jim]

And those of us who do not share that mistrust must believe that the system's outcomes are "absolutely" correct. You know, like the acquittal of O.J. Simpson ....

Well, now there's a classic example of a false choice...

If you don't have 100% skepticism, you "must" have 100% belief that the system is always right...

Our system isn't perfect, (the Simpson case of course being a glaring example; if you're able to empanel a jury of compete imbeciles, just about anything is possible) but there are a lot that are worse.

Take the Italian system for example. I sure as hell wouldn't want their jury system; where there are only seven members, only a majority is required to convict, and worst of all, the judge actually sits on the jury. Talk about your basic undue influence. I wonder how often judges sitting on Italian juries find themselves in the minority on a decision...I would bet damn infrequently.

[rubato]

No, I just have a healthy mistrust of our "criminal justice" system's ability to produce correct results.

And those of us who do not share that mistrust must believe that the system's outcomes are "absolutely" correct. You know, like the acquittal of O.J. Simpson ....

I don't know why you're being so snide about it. OJ had a lot of money and he bought his way out of trouble. That's how our system is supposed to work isn't it?

How many of the S&L crooks went to prison after stealing hundreds of billions from the taxpayers? Not so many after Bush I jiggered the justice dept for them (including his son).

yrs,
rubato

[Gob]

Take the Italian system for example. I sure as hell wouldn't want their jury system; where there are only seven members, only a majority is required to convict, and worst of all, the judge actually sits on the jury.

Jim;

In Italy, a Civil Law jurisdiction, a "popular Jury" is present only in the Corte d'Assise, where two career magistrates are supported by six so-called Lay Judges, whom are raffled from the registrar of voters.

Any Italian citizen, with no distinction of sex or religion, between 30 and 65 years of age, can be appointed as a Juror; in order to be eligible as a Juror for the Corte d'Appello, however, there is a minimum educational requirement, as the Juror must have completed his/her education at the Scuola Media (junior high school) level, while said level is raised for the Corte d'Assise d'Appello (appeal level of the Corte d'Assise) to the Scuola Superiore (senior high school) degree. In the Corte d'Assise, decisions are taken by the stipendiary judges and "Lay Judges" or jurors together at a special meeting behind closed doors, named Camera di Consiglio ("Counsel Chamber"), and the Court is subsequently required to publish written explanations of its decisions within 90 days from the verdict.

The Corte d'Assise has jurisdiction to try crimes carrying a maximum penalty of 24 years in prison or life imprisonment, and other serious crimes; felonies that fall under its jurisdiction include terrorism, murder, manslaughter, severe attempts against State personalities, as well as some matters of law requiring ethical and professional evaluations (ex. assisted suicide), while it generally has no jurisdiction over cases whose evaluation requires knowledges of Law which the "Lay Judges" generally don't have. Penalties imposed by the court can include life sentences.

Give me that over the US's; " whoever can buy the best justice wins" system any day