gum wrote:The only accurate measure of crime rates is a survey of victims of crime. Surveys of crime victims consistently show that crime has increased markedly.
DOHH!
Maybe I didn’t explain it in simple enough terms.
StatsCan’s own website states that their crime statistics are based only on crimes reported to police.
StatsCan’s own website states that their measurement of the severity of crime is based on the length of sentence, not on the crime itself. So as sentencing lengths go down over time, the amount of crime goes down over time (according to Statistics Canada).
And these guys measure up to your expectations?
There are two explanations for why Statistics Canada botched this. One, they are incompetent. Or two, they are under pressure from bureaucrats “higher up” to come up with the “right” answers. From my limited dealing with various government departments, I suspect it is a little of one and a lot of two.
My expectations for Statistics Canada would be for them to try to measure actual crime, not just crime reported to police.
[quote=“gum”]
Maybe I didn’t explain it in simple enough terms.
StatsCan’s own website states that their crime statistics are based only on crimes reported to police.
StatsCan’s own website states that their measurement of the severity of crime is based on the length of sentence, not on the crime itself. So as sentencing lengths go down over time, the amount of crime goes down over time (according to Statistics Canada).
And these guys measure up to your expectations?
There are two explanations for why Statistics Canada botched this. One, they are incompetent. Or two, they are under pressure from bureaucrats “higher up” to come up with the “right” answers. From my limited dealing with various government departments, I suspect it is a little of one and a lot of two.
My expectations for Statistics Canada would be for them to try to measure actual crime, not just crime reported to police.[/quote]
You’re particularly dense arent you. People don’t go to jail for unreported crimes therefore prison spaces do not need to be created for unreported crimes. Creating more prisons wont make people start to report unreported crimes. I guess we could have a 3 strikes rule. 3 strikes you’re out for 10 years that’d fill up spaces in a hurry. I hear it works really well in the US.
[quote=“gum”]
Maybe I didn’t explain it in simple enough terms.
StatsCan’s own website states that their crime statistics are based only on crimes reported to police.
My expectations for Statistics Canada would be for them to try to measure actual crime, not just crime reported to police.[/quote]
No I follow your simple approach to a complex issue. However, before discussing methodologies the readers should have all the facts on the table. This would include the evidence that crime in Canada is increasing. I’ve twice asked for links to the surveys you’ve referenced. In the absence of verifiable and objective evidence to the contrary I accept the conclusions of the professionals. You stated that numerous surveys exist to support your contention crime is increasing and the Harper Cons are being prudent in spending billions on their prison expansion. Note this is not a one time capital cost but will be an annual burden for us to bear.
[quote=“gum”]The only accurate measure of crime rates is a survey of victims of crime. Surveys of crime victims consistently show that crime has increased markedly.
The bottom line is that crime, including violent crime, is increasing despite people’s attempts to ignore it. Perhaps the weather in Prince Rupert would improve if we all put on sunglasses and shorts in October and pretended it weren’t raining.[/quote]
**This is now my third request to you to back up your statements with links to the victims of crime surveys you say exist. ** Until then, in the absence of other objective data to the contrary, I’ll continue to rely on Stats Canada no matter what your conspiracy theories are. No doubt there is a possibility we could point Stats Canada to the prefect methodologies used by your referenced surveys so Stats Can will be able to meet your expectations of measuring “Actual Crime rather then Reported Crime”.
However, until you provide this data, I can only assume you are making it up. Regettably, this discussion appears to be a harbinger of the type of future public policy debate we will struggle with as the Harper Cons do away with the long form Census questionaire to support their desire to make decisions on ideology, prejudices, religion and the desire of big oil rather than science.
“Studies show” that gum avoids responding to hard questions.
For example, he has successfully avoided the logical challenge on his “trauma care is reducing the crime rate” logic on 5 occasions now. If trauma care is responsible for a drop in the reporting of crime, one must assume that ambulance drivers, nurses, and doctors (and often police themselves) are all part of a grand conspiracy to keep crimes secret from the police.
His brain must be gummed up. =.=’
[quote=“MiG”]“Studies show” that gum avoids responding to hard questions.
For example, he has successfully avoided the logical challenge on his “trauma care is reducing the crime rate” logic on 5 occasions now. If trauma care is responsible for a drop in the reporting of crime, one must assume that ambulance drivers, nurses, and doctors (and often police themselves) are all part of a grand conspiracy to keep crimes secret from the police.[/quote]
Not to help the tard but i remember seeing on the news a short while ago something along the lines of a law passing mandating all stabbings, gunshot wounds etc be reported. I guess that wastn always the case in bc.
In keeping with Tory tradition the plan is to add more criminals to fill those empty cells.
Selling an ounce of pot will get you five years.
Three people robbing a bank will be “organized crime” and get five years for that.
Legalize prostitution and make a red-light district? Not a friggin’ chance. Keeping a ‘common bawdy house’ - five years.
Hold a poker game - five years.
Take bets - five years.
The Tories LIE. Violent criminals already go to jail. They want non-violent criminals jailed, all other options removed.
Retrogressive Conservatives?
Or more Tory bag-licking to Everything American.
What’s wrong with you Conservatives? Kick these fucking fundies out of your party and get legitimate!
[quote=“herbie_popnecker”]In keeping with Tory tradition the plan is to add more criminals to fill those empty cells.
Selling an ounce of pot will get you five years.
Three people robbing a bank will be “organized crime” and get five years for that.
Legalize prostitution and make a red-light district? Not a friggin’ chance. Keeping a ‘common bawdy house’ - five years.
Hold a poker game - five years.
Take bets - five years.
The Tories LIE. Violent criminals already go to jail. They want non-violent criminals jailed, all other options removed.
Retrogressive Conservatives?
Or more Tory bag-licking to Everything American.
What’s wrong with you Conservatives? Kick these fucking fundies out of your party and get legitimate![/quote]
And don’t forget when the fundies and the religious right get their way, abortion will once again become illegal in Canada. So these prisons will be needed to lock up women that teminate their pregnancies as well.
[quote=“herbie_popnecker”]In keeping with Tory tradition the plan is to add more criminals to fill those empty cells.
Selling an ounce of pot will get you five years.
Three people robbing a bank will be “organized crime” and get five years for that.
Legalize prostitution and make a red-light district? Not a friggin’ chance. Keeping a ‘common bawdy house’ - five years.
Hold a poker game - five years.
Take bets - five years.
The Tories LIE. Violent criminals already go to jail. They want non-violent criminals jailed, all other options removed.
Retrogressive Conservatives?
Or more Tory bag-licking to Everything American.
What’s wrong with you Conservatives? Kick these fucking fundies out of your party and get legitimate![/quote]
Are you talking about the states or somthing ?
[quote=“herbie_popnecker”]In keeping with Tory tradition the plan is to add more criminals to fill those empty cells.
Selling an ounce of pot will get you five years.
Three people robbing a bank will be “organized crime” and get five years for that.
Legalize prostitution and make a red-light district? Not a friggin’ chance. Keeping a ‘common bawdy house’ - five years.
Hold a poker game - five years.
Take bets - five years.
The Tories LIE. Violent criminals already go to jail. They want non-violent criminals jailed, all other options removed.
Retrogressive Conservatives?
Or more Tory bag-licking to Everything American.
What’s wrong with you Conservatives? Kick these fucking fundies out of your party and get legitimate![/quote]
Are you talking about the states or somthing ?
Nothing like having a politician to help straighten things out. Absolutely nothing like it.
Crime is up, down and sideways. Here’s another crime category that’s been on the increase in Canada. Hate crimes.
For many, it may come as a shock to find out that Canada’s biggest hate-crime capitals are three Ontario university towns. Kingston, London and Guelph boast the country’s highest rates of police-reported hate crimes, according to Statistics Canada. Roughly six out of 10 people charged with hate crimes were between the ages of 12 to 22. It was found that in about 2/3 of these cases, Jews were targeted.
[quote=“dailymews”]Nothing like having a politician to help straighten things out. Absolutely nothing like it.
Crime is up, down and sideways. Here’s another crime category that’s been on the increase in Canada. Hate crimes.
For many, it may come as a shock to find out that Canada’s biggest hate-crime capitals are three Ontario university towns. Kingston, London and Guelph boast the country’s highest rates of police-reported hate crimes, according to Statistics Canada. Roughly six out of 10 people charged with hate crimes were between the ages of 12 to 22. It was found that in about 2/3 of these cases, Jews were targeted.[/quote]
Thats because nobody likes jews.
Just kidding 
(I’m sure someone does.)
No really I have no problems with jews. Just keep away from me with your knife.
Well you won’t listen to logic.
We will have to leave it at this… the decision is being made for you, like it or not.
I am done with this discussion, nothing but the predictable rhetoric. Fortunately none of you are in charge.
[quote=“gum”]Well you won’t listen to logic.
We will have to leave it at this… the decision is being made for you, like it or not.
I am done with this discussion, nothing but the predictable rhetoric. Fortunately none of you are in charge.[/quote]
Im pretty sure to engage in a logical discussion you need facts. You have provided no facts except for the ones you make up as you go along.
[quote=“gum”]Well you won’t listen to logic.
We will have to leave it at this… the decision is being made for you, like it or not.
I am done with this discussion, nothing but the predictable rhetoric. Fortunately none of you are in charge.[/quote]
I generally like logic that is based off a solid factual foundation which you’ve failed to provide. In any event since you are now done with the discussion we’ll accept that you chose to shut up rather than put up the links to support the empty rhertoric you posted her in support of the misguided waste of our taxdollars by the Harper Cons.
[quote=“gum”]Well you won’t listen to logic.
We will have to leave it at this… the decision is being made for you, like it or not.
I am done with this discussion, nothing but the predictable rhetoric. Fortunately none of you are in charge.[/quote]
Great. Bye.
[quote=“MiG”]“Studies show” that gum avoids responding to hard questions.
For example, he has successfully avoided the logical challenge on his “trauma care is reducing the crime rate” logic on 5 occasions now. If trauma care is responsible for a drop in the reporting of crime, one must assume that ambulance drivers, nurses, and doctors (and often police themselves) are all part of a grand conspiracy to keep crimes secret from the police.[/quote]
[quote=“gum”]Well you won’t listen to logic.
We will have to leave it at this… the decision is being made for you, like it or not.
I am done with this discussion, nothing but the predictable rhetoric. Fortunately none of you are in charge.[/quote]
That makes it 6 times you avoided the obvious contradiction in you so-called logic. Congratulations.
I’m taking my ball and I’m going home.
Check the logs. Is gum’s IP address the same as Stockwell Days?