77 Comments
User's avatar
Eldeezy's avatar

Her bill makes complete sense, concurrent sentencing is a B.S. scheme and should have no place in our system of jurisprudence.

Laura Smith's avatar

I agree and hope it passes.

John Powell's avatar

O

Wait.

CBC to the rescue.

No room In The prisons. Costs $100,000 dollars to incarcerate criminal annually.

Somehow that makes it ok to release bad people to steal and murder.

And yet?

Root cause?

Unfettered unvetted immigration.

Joe Zucchiatti's avatar

There is lots of room in the prisons if you hot bunk the prisoners. 8 hour shifts in the bunks in turns and 16 in the common areas. Use the notwithstanding clause when the dissenters want to take it to court.

Karen Benz's avatar

Why should prison be made comfortable!? Don't do the crimes and you won't be in one. I'd say crappy conditions might be a deterrent.

Andree's avatar

It does not cost me $100,000 per year to live in my home and feed myself. I don't earn that much. Are our prisons so luxurious? Let the prisoners work on something useful to pay for their keep. They might even learn payable skills.

Gary's avatar

Andree, making inmates work and learn trades etc. used to be the norm, but they have "rights" now - they do not have to anythings except eat and sleep, etc.

Andree's avatar

In Antiquity, serious offenders who were not put to death were punished by exile, bannisment from society. I think that when you commit a serious crime, you forfeit your "rights". The sentence should include an obligation to repair the harm done in some way, some kind of reparative justice. You kill the father of young kids, you ought to help support that family. Good for the killer who might (re)gain a sense of responsibility and atonement, a measure of rehabilitation, and good for the family who in time could forgive the killer. Being soft on crimes has not helped anybody so far that I can see.

Gary's avatar

I fully agree with you in regards (to criminals who commit capital offences) to forfeiture of all of their constitutional rights in this country.

However, most criminals that commit these offenses are psychopaths or sociopaths and their only remorse is being caught and nothing for their victims.

Your intentions for restitution is most kind but I think it would cause a lot victims and their families etc. more mental hardship which they do not need nor deserve.

Andree's avatar

You might be right but I still think that criminals should actively work to compensate for harm done one way or the other. If not directly, in a "compensation fund" maybe. Same for people who commit fraud, destroy property, etc. There should be some accountability for the perpetrators.

Gary's avatar

No argument there from me. You are a lot more sympathetic than I am.

Rocky Brawn's avatar

Good evening folks,

We must stop worrying about whether criminals are comfortable or not. There is lots of Canadians just scraping by every day, working hard to pay their bills and just surviving. I have worked in Maximum Security Prisons and it would be nice if Canadians knew the living conditions. Big screen televisions, weight rooms, pool tables for recreation, basket ball nets, special meals, etc.

What would be wrong with chaining them all together and housing them outdoors with the flies and insects? How did the criminals get so many rights?

The prison system should be feared by criminals, not seen as a good old boys club.

Nothing will change until we get a change in Government and as long as Canadians continue to have a soft spot in their hearts for the rapists and criminals we must try to survive.

Thanks,

Rocky

Wayne Lock's avatar

Let’s congratulate MP Rachel Thomas for her thoughtful insight. This would seem to be common sense but not in the world we live in today. Who ever thought concurrent was adequate definitely needs a lesson in common sense!

Richard Robertson's avatar

Hi Wayne, the math is simple, the sentence is divided by the number crimes.

Wayne Lock's avatar

I am glad you are so good at math Rich! It seems you do not believe in justice for All. It seems a watered down and divided approach is your way of ensuring a just and fair deterrent!

Lorne Beaudette's avatar

So if an offender is found guilty of 10 charges and sentenced to 1 year per charge, served consecutively they would be incarcerated for 10 years. If served concurrently, they would serve on year. That is what conservative and concurrent mean. What kind of math are you referring to? I need some clarification to understand your point.

David James's avatar

At one time wasn't a rape sentence death?

Jeannie's avatar

It’s about time.. and if it’s costly in prison deport them from wherever they’re from. Time to clean u Canada !

Angela's avatar

I hope so too. It's been a long time in coming & needs to be passed asap!! Especially with what's happening in the U.K. & Europe, it's only a matter of time before it becomes even worse.

Sandra Lent's avatar

Such a good, commonsense idea. Will it pass? Doubtful.

Angela's avatar

The Liberals & NDP will ensure it won't. Mind you, not many private members bills pass anyway so it's doubtful this one will.

Barbara Bell's avatar

I read a clip that indicated the Liberals, NDPs and the Block voted against it. I do not understand why.

David James's avatar

Liberals seem to in some strange way bond with the criminal element. 10.5 million comes to mind.

KFLY's avatar

How inhumane! They should be treated with respect. They are the victims. They need more chances. More milk and cookies.

WTF is wrong with this insane government???

Christine T.'s avatar

I really hope it passes but I am highly doubtful. The Liberals, NDP and the Bloc just voted down the Conservative bill on bail reform. Even if it passes, there are still too many activist judges acting like social workers rather than applying the law. An Indigenous criminal who sexually assaulted a girl just got a lighter sentence because he was Indigenous. Here's the story covered on Juno News:

https://www.junonews.com/p/judge-passes-light-sentence-for-child

mooligan007's avatar

How do these people vote against letting people who commit serious crimes go free. Hopefully they and their family members become victims of nasty crimes then we will see how they feel. Arseholes should be crucified down each side of the road for all to throw rovks at.

WatZ_In_Ur_Head?'s avatar

The Degenerates in our Canadian parliament will vote it down.

Debbie's avatar

If you do the crime, you do all the time. There shouldn’t be any exceptions. Why make it easy for criminals?

David James's avatar

No early release.

John Barron's avatar

I fully agree with this line of thinking. Our justice system need a complete overhaul. Right now, there doesn't seem to be any significant deterrents.

EHB's avatar

I really hope that Canadians see the immense value Ms. Rachael Thomas, M.P., is for all of Canada/s future!

Jeannie's avatar

It’s about time.. and if it’s costly in prison deport them from wherever they’re from. Time to clean u Canada !

Shelley Wiltshire Baty's avatar

Hmm and Canada started its immigration schemes in 2015, really makes you think about it huh! I fully agree with this action and hope the Liberals we'll see they're way to protecting us properly!

Richard Courtemanche's avatar

Nice. Hopefully, judges will oblige. No more bigotry, especially against natural Canadians.