In 2010 the Conservative government introduced a crime bill which would kill the so-called faint hope clause that allows some people serving life sentences to apply for parole after 15 years (instead of the usual 25 common for first-degree murder and other life sentence convictions). Opponents of the crime bill argue that extended prison sentences are cruel and will cost the government tens of millions of dollars per year.Proponents argue that 15 years is too short of a prison term for people serving life sentences.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
Electoral District (2011):
@5393P4V4yrs4Y
Prisoners are human too. A society that run charties for animal welfare should do treat a human with compassion.
@4P2GF3W4yrs4Y
Life is hard. People make mistakes, forgive
@8S7DRZV4yrs4Y
yes, depending on what they did
@B4NLL6DNew Democratic3 days3D
Life sentences shouldn't be eligible for parole. If you're serving multiple life sentences, then you shouldn't be eligible for the first 25 years.
@B3ZNKFH4wks4W
Not always. Courts should be given deference spanning from several years, to life, to the death penalty.
@B3ZLM7K4wks4W
I feel like the answer to that question depends on the nature of the crime. Do I believe a gang member killing another gang member should serve the same sentence as a wife beater who murdered his innocent wife? Absolutely not.
@B3WKY7R1mo1MO
No, but if thoroughly cleared as no longer being a danger to society, after 20-25 years would be reasonable in my opinion.
@B367BY42mos2MO
depends on what case is being discussed. If one man kills a pedophile because that person sexually assaulted one of his children, then I don't think he is necessarily a threat to society to begin with. In other more general cases the answer is that a prisoner shouldn't be let out of jail, rather they should show that they are being rehabilitated into society and be gradually given more freedom until they are fully reintegrated.
@B322MFJ2mos2MO
yes, depending on the violence of the crime, prisoners should be eligible for a parole hearing after 15 years unless the crime is repulsive then they should not get a chance.
Depends on how many crimes were committed beforehand and if they have a psychological evaluation that shows they are not a threat to society
@B2VNVNW2mos2MO
Yes and we should provide effective evidence based rehabilitation programs and strict psychological evaluation with continuous monitoring of varying degrees once released
@B2RK7N62mos2MO
I'm gonna have to say no as they are not only a danger to the public, but a danger to themselves.However if they have been falsely accused and charged with actual evidence that they did not commit the murder, then they should first be put in some kind of therapy to make sure they are okay.
@B2JHJYM3mos3MO
Yes, if it’s there only criminal offence and put though a strict psychological evaluation which shows they aren’t a threat in society, along with making a plan for their future and make up for their past.
@B2FB2YC3mos3MO
if the person being killed was a child molester, a rapist, or anything of a bad nature then they deserve parole but if they killed an innocent person then they deserve life
@B24HPT44mos4MO
the person who commits the crime should serve the time, they took someones live that they cant get back
@9WYDMSD6mos6MO
If the person who was murdered deserved it, most definitely. those who murder in cold blood because they are psychopaths who want to hurt and kill innocent people for their own gratification should be given the death penatly.
@9W9M54X6mos6MO
The motivation behind the crime needs to be considered heavily before and the prisoner should be given therapy while in prison before entering the rehabilitation stage, if they do chose to apply for it
@9VPNGYR6mos6MO
Maybe depends on the reason for the murder and if over the past 15 years they show remorse or improvement
@9V7D8FK7mos7MO
I believe it depends on the motive someone had to kill someone. But strict phycological evaluation is still necessary.
@9V46Q2W7mos7MO
The prisoners should receive rehabilitation while in prison. Then they should receive a psychological evaluation after 15 years to show they are no longer a threat to society. If they are no longer a threat to society, then they become eligible for a parole hearing.
@9V278397mos7MO
I believe it is important that they should be given a second chance however I think it should be taken case by case based on the severity of it.
@9TVRTDF7mos7MO
It should depend on what terms the murder the done was on. Such as murdering a rapist or a first, second, or third degree murderer you know of.
@9TSV2667mos7MO
Reinstate the death penalty but, you do to them what they did to someone else then kill them after 2 days.
@9TJJT4X7mos7MO
it depends what they are in for or who they killed, if it was cold hearted, no reason. having a mental break down then no. if it was an accident, or they killed someone in jail who graped a child or something like that, in my opinion yes. but that's just my opinion.
@9TD8FMR7mos7MO
depends on the reason for the murder, if it was for an actual good reason then yes but if it wasn't then no.
@9T2PRNX7mos7MO
yes, more rehabilitation programs in and outside of prisons, and provided and in depth psychological evaluation proving they aren’t a danger
@9MVJV3NConservative11mos11MO
Yes if they have been mentally checked and we know that they won't kill again but it also depends on the severity of the murder.
@9M7HCP412mos12MO
honestly depends on the person if he has mental ilness problems no but if hes truly sorry and gave his life to jesus i think they could be let out
@9M6RXV312mos12MO
A strict psychological evaluation shows they are no longer a threat to society as well as having completed the provided rehabilitation program
@9KRRPZZ1yr1Y
Eligible sure. Reinstate the death penalty for the extreme crimes that go so wildly against human nature and against children (physically or sexually)
@9K5QBS9 1yr1Y
first degree murder is pre-meditated. one should be given parole hearings for second degree instead.
@9K544ZP1yr1Y
Yes, though it depends on why they committed murder. Killing a man for raping someone close to your so they can’t hurt anyone else is a very different reason than killing a man so they can’t tell the police about another crime.
@9JYG2RM1yr1Y
I feel there should have rehabilitation and if they show to be better within the 15 years they should be eligible for a parole hearing.
@9JJC4PH1yr1Y
we should abolish the prison industrial complex and process harm through transformative and restorative justice
@9JCF3BY1yr1Y
Yes, depending on what the life sentence was for after 15 years they should be able to stand for another hearing
@9H2J5C31yr1Y
in some circumstances yes like if it was an accidental death but if it was planned and the person genuinely wanted the person dead then no
@9GNXXXT1yr1Y
Ideally, it should be allowed but it depends on the circumstances of each case and what the verdict was.
@9GNM9GS1yr1Y
No, but after 25-30 years of their sentence they should be allowed to be assessed to see if they are stable enough to re-enter society and have no intentions of doing crimes again and have a parole hearing to get the chance of getting parole.
@9FXZGWT2yrs2Y
I believe in the importance of rehabilitation, but acknowledge that some people are unwilling or unable to be safely incorporated into society.
@9FR55PM2yrs2Y
Depending on the situation, reasoning etc and add more programs for prisoners when released to help rehabilitate them and so they don’t end up back
@9FPX76R2yrs2Y
it depends if it was on self defence or something in common whit the self defence.
@9FMT2NH2yrs2Y
yes, depending on when and how the murder was commited
@9FM9QN92yrs2Y
No, it's not like the life taken by the prisoners will come back too.
@9FDQJPT2yrs2Y
they can try out new things and activities like gardening, drawing, cooking, etc before leaving for a parole to identify and examine their weaknesses, strengths, etc...
@9FCVHK32yrs2Y
depends on how the suspect's intentions are
it depends on the situation with the murder. why did they kill this person and what were the circumstances the victim endured
@9F9CFKW2yrs2Y
If it was proves self defense yes
@9F83RNNConservative2yrs2Y
A much longer time such as 30 years
@9F2WY5D2yrs2Y
Depends on the crime and if they were wrongfully accused or not
@9DLP8DB2yrs2Y
Depending on the circumstances of the murder. Self defence, or murder to protect a child or person or ourselves should be proved and given a chance for parole. But people that murder innocent kids and people because they have a disease in there brain that they are born with should never have a chance
@9DB85ZF2yrs2Y
Depends on the circumstances surrounding the murder as well as psychological profile.
@9FL7G8C2yrs2Y
they should be provided an opportunity for rehabilitation programs and a psychological evaluation to ensure they are no longer a threat to society
@9FKQZWZ2yrs2Y
Sure, but maybe they should serve more time in prison before a parole hearing.
@9BRWV5B2yrs2Y
Yes only if a certain amount of people believe their was a mistake.
@9BMT5FJ2yrs2Y
Yes but only during certain instances and causes for the act
No, unless first time offender and has shown non-violent behavior while in prison, with a psych evaluation pre- and post-exit and rehabilitation afterward
@96HP2BL3yrs3Y
this depends on how the murder is done and how the method of killing is. it also depends on their history of mental state and who and why they had killed them.
@96GN6MR3yrs3Y
DEATH treat people how you want to be treated
@96BBN743yrs3Y
Eligible for parol after 25 years.
Yes, but after 20 years and after a strict psychological evaluation shows they are no longer a threat to society
@9673VLG3yrs3Y
Yes, but not without a strict and thorough psychological evaluation and provide more rehabilitation programs
@965KWGTConservative3yrs3Y
depends on how the murder was preformed
@965GC6N3yrs3Y
Yes if there very young but if there brain is fully developed then no they should not be eligible for a parole hearing in 15 years
@95J3TL43yrs3Y
depends on what the situation was
No, after 25 years and a strict psychological evaluation
@95H2DSXConservative3yrs3Y
No, the minimum sentence for first-degree murder should be 25 years.
@95BTMTY3yrs3Y
remove the death penalty
@958H6MWConservative3yrs3Y
it all really depends on what happened or the story behind it
@958B2MN3yrs3Y
i believe they should get parole after 30 years
Yes, as long as there is significant psychological proof of rehabilitation, and a judge rules it to be the best option.
@94VP9NS3yrs3Y
Yes, but on a case by case basis with the context of the crime taken into account and a psychologist must believe the prisoner to be reformed.
@93TWQWC3yrs3Y
Depending on circumstances ex. Was the murderer a victim?
@93HFFHQ3yrs3Y
Reinstate the death penalty but only for people who commited crimes intentionaly
@93GMLS63yrs3Y
depends on how many they have murdered
@9393LCW3yrs3Y
No, I do believe they should get life for heinous crimes but there should be a rehabilitation program for those who’s under the influence. Basically making It so they’d be able to have a chance to kick the bucket if they so choose.
@92XLDYW3yrs3Y
Self defense should be eligible at a sooner parole time. After an evaluation for mental state.
@8ZM4Q6D3yrs3Y
Maybe after 20 years, rehabilitation should be highly considered before a psychological evaluation is conceived.
@8Z795TF3yrs3Y
Yes, provide they show that they aren't a threat to society
@8Z5PS4Y3yrs3Y
Depending on the nature and circumstance of the murder. (for example, if someone was on a mind altering drug, say LSD, and didn't know what was happening I thinktime should still be served, but the punishment less severe etc.)
@8Z4ZDM83yrs3Y
It matters on if the person is willing or is he just going to exploit this
@8Z3GL4T3yrs3Y
yes, if they commited it based on danger to themself or others.
@8YZY8PS3yrs3Y
No, and reinstate the death penalty for heinous premeditated crimes if we are 100% sure they are guilty
@8YZCDBRNew Democratic3yrs3Y
23 years then parole and psychological evaluation exam; you must study and pass to have a parole hearing
@8YXBQR73yrs3Y
Depends on the person, if their crime was with no original intent to kill the yes they should be eligible.
@8YX9SGH3yrs3Y
Depends on What kind of Murder, If on Purpose no. But if by Mistake then Yes
@8YW2L5T3yrs3Y
it depends on the details of the murder
@8YHW73L3yrs3Y
Yes, but there should be laws set in place to evaluate those in prison./
@8YCSK9C3yrs3Y
First degree murder is a choice you chose to do that everyone IS equal but it’s common sense not to kill someone no mercy for them
Yes, but it should be 20 years.
@8XZNFFC3yrs3Y
Yes, and use imprisonment only as a last resort and only for violent offenders who pose a significant demonstrable risk to others.
@8XRZ2XH3yrs3Y
First degree murder can be an array of acts leaning towards self defence and some criminals are let go deemed no longer a threat when they are. The Canadian criminal justice systems needs to crack down on more serious offences in general. Someone like Robert Pickton should have the death penalty and never be eligible for parole!
@8XPQKWP3yrs3Y
No and reduce the standard of living in prison to save money
@8WDWTJTConservative4yrs4Y
If they Prove they have changed and got the help when needed but if they killed more than one person not by accident than Life unless prove somthing but 3 No life no parole
@8WDF4G74yrs4Y
I think it depends on what the murder was on. if they were to kill someone that abused them, or raped them, then I think that would be considered self-defense. so no they should not be put in prison for that long especially after going through something so traumatic.
@8W65SXT4yrs4Y
If you have a life sentence for murdering someone I think that's what it should be, you made the decision to go through with that action and you should suffer the consequences.
@8W5XGMN4yrs4Y
Depends on the type of environment and what happened
@8W49PVJ4yrs4Y
All depends on the case.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
