Striking down the Conservative's mandatory minimum sentencing monstrosity that is.
"...The Conservative government reaffirmed its tough-on-crime commitment Tuesday, trying to appear undeterred by yet another Supreme Court of Canada decision striking down as unconstitutional a showcase statute in its signature anti-crime agenda.
The government’s mandatory-minimum sentencing regime for illegal possession of a firearm, introduced in 2008 as part of the Tackling Violent Crime Act, violates Section 12 of the Charter of Rights because it has the potential to be cruel and unusual punishment, the court ruled in a 6-3 decision."
Know what's ridiculous? I'll tell you how irrationally psychotic the Tories are on this one.
My father owns a shot-gun he bought way before all this gun-control crap took a cultist hold on a frightened citizenry. Now. His son - HELLO! That being me - innocently takes his shot-gun because, you know, it's a 12 gauge St. Etienne double-barrel perfect for small game hunting and clay shooting and FREEDOM, can be thrown in prison for three years for merely transporting it from his house to mine prior to having my gun license. Imagine that. The government of Canada is willing to destroy a family for that.
The U.S.A does the same thing for small pot possession.
Now. To all you people who feel gun-control is a must; that the conservatives need to get 'tough on crime' DOES THIS STRIKE YOU AS A 'CANADIAN VALUE'?
For if it does, you're not my friend.
"...The Conservative government reaffirmed its tough-on-crime commitment Tuesday, trying to appear undeterred by yet another Supreme Court of Canada decision striking down as unconstitutional a showcase statute in its signature anti-crime agenda.
The government’s mandatory-minimum sentencing regime for illegal possession of a firearm, introduced in 2008 as part of the Tackling Violent Crime Act, violates Section 12 of the Charter of Rights because it has the potential to be cruel and unusual punishment, the court ruled in a 6-3 decision."
Know what's ridiculous? I'll tell you how irrationally psychotic the Tories are on this one.
My father owns a shot-gun he bought way before all this gun-control crap took a cultist hold on a frightened citizenry. Now. His son - HELLO! That being me - innocently takes his shot-gun because, you know, it's a 12 gauge St. Etienne double-barrel perfect for small game hunting and clay shooting and FREEDOM, can be thrown in prison for three years for merely transporting it from his house to mine prior to having my gun license. Imagine that. The government of Canada is willing to destroy a family for that.
The U.S.A does the same thing for small pot possession.
Now. To all you people who feel gun-control is a must; that the conservatives need to get 'tough on crime' DOES THIS STRIKE YOU AS A 'CANADIAN VALUE'?
For if it does, you're not my friend.
Canada and USA, two countries run by psychopaths. Good for your Supremes doing the right thing, though.
ReplyDeleteInteresting how you put it, which shows the difference between US and Canadian "conservatives" I guess. I can't imagine in the land of the 2nd Amendment a conservative politician advocating gun control as crime control, quite the opposite. In fact, the usual response is harsher sentences for violent crimes, with gun ownership by the citizens advocated as a basic right and deterrence to criminals.
This bunch of conservatives are about as close to American conservatives as you'll get in that they're pretty much neo-conservative light. The problem is the alternative is worse - ie the Liberals being led by a mannequin and left-wing NDP. RE crime. It's hilarious. Canada doesn't have a gun crime problem. It does have hight rates of violent assault though. But let's put a person who transports a shot gun without a fucking piece of paper in prison for three years. Yeah. That's tough on crime! More like tough on idiocy. Let's smash up a family and community for that. Just like in the States with pot. Not too long ago a Pennsylvania working woman was threatened with life in prison because the gun she was carrying though legal in her state was not in NJ. I ask. Just who is being irrational here? The state or civilians? Where's the common sense we hear soooo much about under this administration?
DeleteThat's the bureaucratic mindset for you:
ReplyDeleteThey have to be "clinical" about everything.
It's only what's "on paper" that counts. Not what actually IS.