Stephen Harper's Crime Policies
Yesterday, Stephen Harper gave a speech to the Canadian Police Association on the party's plans for tackling crime. There were both good and bad parts to it, so first I will talk about the few things I liked.
I agree the gun registry needs to be scrapped. Considering most criminals don't register their guns and the huge overblown cost of it, I think the costs clearly outweigh the benefits. The Liberals may also want to re-consider their position as most of their seat losses, especially in Ontario, were in rural ridings where opposition to the gun registry is quite strong as opposed to urban ridings, which will go Liberal no matter what. I support hiring more police officers, which incidentally the Liberals planned to do anyways. I support the principle of mandatory minimum sentences, but after seeing the costs in terms of building more jails and housing the prisoners, I am not sure how affordable it is. The best solution is at least ensure the most dangerous criminals like Paul Bernardo and Clifford Olson never get out of jail. The one area I do oppose mandatory minimums is for drugs. Drug use is an addiction that people should be treated for, not thrown in jail.
However, I have a couple of strong disagreements. The major one is the plans to scrap the decriminalization of marijuana. I believe this is very short-sighted as millions of Canadians (I am not one of them) have tried marijuana, so giving them criminal records just doesn't make sense. Police should be going after real criminals not hunting down people experimenting with marijuana. The United States has some of the toughest drug laws in the World, yet has one of the highest crime rates, so tougher drug laws, don't lower crime. I personally think marijuana should be legalized as it would not only provide billions of dollars in tax revenue, but it would get rid of the black market element, therefore allowing for some control over it much like we do with alcohol and tobacco. I am especially concerned about throwing medicinal marijuana users in jail. Since Harper has taken over the police have started arresting medicinal marijuana users, so my advice to Stephen Harper, leave them alone! One shouldn't face the choice between their health and going to jail. Finally I am concerned this tough approach is simply because the Americans don't like it. Well Stephen Harper, America is our neighbour, not our nation. We have our values and they have their values and we must stand up for who we are, not cower over to them. This is one of the primary reasons I didn't vote Conservative. I have nothing against the United States or the Americans, but we are a sovereign nation and just as they have the right to decide their laws based on their values, we must decide our laws based on our values. We aren't better or worse, we are just different and I believe the PM of Canada must defend who we are just as their president must defend who they are. Finally some are suggesting that private prisons be built to accomodate the increased number of prisoners. For starters I think this is more fear of some as I haven't heard or seen anything to suggest the Conservatives plan to do this. But let me say, despite my general support for privatization, prisons are one of the few areas I don't believe the private sector can do and therefore shouldn't be privatized. The police, military, courts, and prisons are clearly governmental responsibilities that shouldn't be privatized.
I agree the gun registry needs to be scrapped. Considering most criminals don't register their guns and the huge overblown cost of it, I think the costs clearly outweigh the benefits. The Liberals may also want to re-consider their position as most of their seat losses, especially in Ontario, were in rural ridings where opposition to the gun registry is quite strong as opposed to urban ridings, which will go Liberal no matter what. I support hiring more police officers, which incidentally the Liberals planned to do anyways. I support the principle of mandatory minimum sentences, but after seeing the costs in terms of building more jails and housing the prisoners, I am not sure how affordable it is. The best solution is at least ensure the most dangerous criminals like Paul Bernardo and Clifford Olson never get out of jail. The one area I do oppose mandatory minimums is for drugs. Drug use is an addiction that people should be treated for, not thrown in jail.
However, I have a couple of strong disagreements. The major one is the plans to scrap the decriminalization of marijuana. I believe this is very short-sighted as millions of Canadians (I am not one of them) have tried marijuana, so giving them criminal records just doesn't make sense. Police should be going after real criminals not hunting down people experimenting with marijuana. The United States has some of the toughest drug laws in the World, yet has one of the highest crime rates, so tougher drug laws, don't lower crime. I personally think marijuana should be legalized as it would not only provide billions of dollars in tax revenue, but it would get rid of the black market element, therefore allowing for some control over it much like we do with alcohol and tobacco. I am especially concerned about throwing medicinal marijuana users in jail. Since Harper has taken over the police have started arresting medicinal marijuana users, so my advice to Stephen Harper, leave them alone! One shouldn't face the choice between their health and going to jail. Finally I am concerned this tough approach is simply because the Americans don't like it. Well Stephen Harper, America is our neighbour, not our nation. We have our values and they have their values and we must stand up for who we are, not cower over to them. This is one of the primary reasons I didn't vote Conservative. I have nothing against the United States or the Americans, but we are a sovereign nation and just as they have the right to decide their laws based on their values, we must decide our laws based on our values. We aren't better or worse, we are just different and I believe the PM of Canada must defend who we are just as their president must defend who they are. Finally some are suggesting that private prisons be built to accomodate the increased number of prisoners. For starters I think this is more fear of some as I haven't heard or seen anything to suggest the Conservatives plan to do this. But let me say, despite my general support for privatization, prisons are one of the few areas I don't believe the private sector can do and therefore shouldn't be privatized. The police, military, courts, and prisons are clearly governmental responsibilities that shouldn't be privatized.
posted by Monkey Loves to Fight at 1:36 PM
10 Comments:
I will admit I am a rather serious person, though I could do a bit better with the humour here.
My goodness. Let's see, you agree with most of the Conservative platform save for not decriminalizing marijuana. I would agree, though I would still criminalize grow ops, importation, (if that happens anymore), and sale of marijuana to support a criminal enterprise, such as the Hells Angels.
As for prisons - we probably need more - and if that's the right thing to do, then we'll just have to find a way to pay.
But then, you drift off on this all-too-typical Stephen Harper / American toady rant. It's factually wrong and it's tiresome. But go ahead; increasing numbers of voters are realizing that all the Fiberals have to offer is endless demonizing claptrap, fashion reviews, and puffed-up bravado to cover up thier total lack of policy and character.
AB/ba
Anonymous - I believe unlicenced grow ops should remain illegal just as selling and producing tobacco and liquor without a licence is illegal, but licenced vendors and growers should be permitted.
We may need more prisons, but lets look for other solutions first and lets not start a huge prison building expansion.
As for Harper being toady to the Americans, this is not just my opinion many others feel this way. Bush is absolutely hated in Canada so even though we do have to work together from time to time, Harper should do the absolute bare minimum for working with Bush and not be afraid to stand up to him when he is wrong.
You know, your argument makes sense, but would have a lot more gravity if you didn't recycle old Martin Liberal rhetoric from the 2006 Election. Just a thought.
Sorry, but the "neighbour, not nation" stuff was repeated ad nauseam in January..I am still sick of it.
I'll admit using old Liberal slogans does turn some people off. But anyways I kind of like the slogan. You know it is easy and fun to use partisan rhetoric.
You know it is easy and fun to use partisan rhetoric.
Indeed, and it worked so well last time. Oh. Ooops.
No, unfortunately it didn't work, but hey it sounds good. Besides when Paul Martin first turned up the anti-American rhetoric, his poll numbers went up. It was things such as Beer and Popcorn comment, comparing opponents to animals, the military ad, and the fact they didn't release their policies until they were 10 points behind in the polls that cost them the election.
I think the whole boogie-man thing turned on the Liberals.
It was dumb and desperate and nothing drivers voters away faster than the stink of dsesperation.
I note that Bill Graham is trying a more civil approach.
I agree Bill Graham is trying a more civil approach, although he still will oppose them when they are wrong. The whole boogey man thing was over the top, but it did work in 2004, so if something works once why not try it again. Off course I think the party would be dumb to do it again unless they can find something to back it up. Besides they will make enough dumb mistakes that there will be plenty to attack the party over.
"I could do a bit better with the humour here."
And some paragraphs. Separate your thoughts.
Post a Comment
<< Home