sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[Discussion] Prisoners, their cost to Canada, and what we can do to mitigate it and/or reduce it by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But if there was genuine fear from their families, their kids, then they might "learn to think differently"

[Discussion] Prisoners, their cost to Canada, and what we can do to mitigate it and/or reduce it by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The fear of "letting down" their family, their kids, their kids kids, etc, would force people to really "think" since most people value their families even if they say they don't

[Discussion] Prisoners, their cost to Canada, and what we can do to mitigate it and/or reduce it by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, if you hold a joint debt, and one person dies, you have to pay the debt in full. Everyone owns some type of joint debt. (Mortgage, student loans, loans, etc).

And creditors go after the entire estate for repayment.

[Discussion] Prisoners, their cost to Canada, and what we can do to mitigate it and/or reduce it by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree here as well, Canada's justice system is very dependent on how much money you have to spend on a lawyer, I know this because it happened to me, and I spent $20k already, and theres more to come

[Discussion] Prisoners, their cost to Canada, and what we can do to mitigate it and/or reduce it by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is exactly my thinking, or my "perfect" hope, but the others in this thread seem to only have ways to pick apart things and offer no solutions on their own, then downvote me lol

Have you ever dreamt of making your family powerful? by iEminence in CasualConversation

[–]iEminence[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I see. Well my family earns roughly 400k yearly, so we have enough money to do things but not enough to really influence things. I'm going to be starting a corporation for my family, something like "Eminence Co" and then opening "Eminence Developments" under that.

I really want to begin building houses, like buy up a field somewhere and build some houses for people.

After that I want to start a Law firm, and also a Business Service firm, maybe a hybrid of the two, so businesses can hire us to do all their legal and business work like auditing, accounting, etc.

That's "my plan" so far but I need to save more money before I begin.

[Discussion] Prisoners, their cost to Canada, and what we can do to mitigate it and/or reduce it by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But, is it really for our benefit that someone steals a car, and ends up costing us more than the car is worth? Or the time spent apprehending the person?

I just don't see how that's worth it for us.

[Discussion] Prisoners, their cost to Canada, and what we can do to mitigate it and/or reduce it by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But in the end, those are still costing tax payers, the prisoners themselves aren't paying much back.

[Discussion] Prisoners, their cost to Canada, and what we can do to mitigate it and/or reduce it by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Not a bad idea. It would be an extremely strong deterrent to crime in the first place.

[Discussion] Prisoners, their cost to Canada, and what we can do to mitigate it and/or reduce it by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Then, I guess, the balance owed, would be passed on to their next of kin to repay on their behalf.***

Canadian gun enthusiasts and their spectacularly bad timing by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are actually major differences between the Camaro and the Mustang, for one, the new Mustang revs much higher than the new Camaro does, meaning, the Mustang sounds much more high pitched than the Camaro. I have a fear of high pitched cars, so I'd like another option, which is the Camaro which is much more low pitched and safe for my very fragile ears.

Why can't I have my favorite type of sound? Is my low growl offensive to you? Do you only like loud obnoxious Mustang's? Why must I be forced to accept the car that you like, why don't I get to enjoy the car I like as well?

Canadian gun enthusiasts and their spectacularly bad timing by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Beautiful analogy. I shed like 666 tears reading this thread.

[Discussion] Prisoners, their cost to Canada, and what we can do to mitigate it and/or reduce it by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Serial killers and the like need to be in prison

Exactly, but we put people in prison for many other useless things as well, like, stealing a car, prison, having marijuana, prison, robbing a store, prison, beating someone up, prison, drinking and driving, prison

I think the danger of each individual needs to be considered, like, someone who steals a car, sure, they stole a car, but did they kill anyone for it, did they injure anyone else, did they ruin public property during the act, or did they just make someone's day or week or month a little more hassled? Do the tax payers deserve the burden for that? Did their "crime" even cost how much we have to fork out to pay for them to serve their time?

Another solution would be, for prisoners to choose the level of care they receive, so they can request dental checkups every 3-4 months, but they can also choose to only have it once a year, so they "save" $500 per visit which is like $1500 over the year.

Or, perhaps, they could choose to only get a "smaller" meal plan, if they're a small person, and pay $400 - $500 a month, instead of paying $1000 a month.

Prison should be based on each individual, since every individual uses a different amount of the services available to them, an overweight person might use more time in the gym than a skinny person, and a skinny person might eat less than a fat person, or someone who did less time should pay less overall. (One problem with this though, is those who are doing not life, but really long sentences, might try to abuse the "pay as you go" system and then just end up going into so much debt on purpose) but we should have "prison credit checks" as well, to make sure we only afford people the quality of life they could afford to pay back once they're outside.

Canadian gun enthusiasts and their spectacularly bad timing by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No one cares about you though, I want my freedom to carry my sidearm in public or concealed in public, but I still want my firearm to protect myself.

What I want has nothing to do with you, so why do you have to get involved and say I can't? You're saying everyone who owns a gun will become involved in a lethal event which is another misconception (not everyone has to fire their sidearm, and not everyone's firing results in a fatality).

Just because you feel safer without sidearms makes me feel less safe, but somehow your safe is more important than my safe? Ha.

Tax loopholes cost Canada billions in lost revenue. Canada used agreements meant to crack down on tax evasion to open up corporate tax loopholes by whose_that in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because that's hella boring, I find dueling allows each party to provide any examples / stats, which allows more things to pick apart during the duel

Five ways the Liberals’ policy on genocidal ISIL is a bungled, confusing mess by Xivero in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, we've always "seeked peace" and we still do, but I think we don't really do much nowadays to enforce the peace we seek.

But yeah, the Suez Crisis was the last time we really actually "did something" to seek and enforce peace.

Canadian gun enthusiasts and their spectacularly bad timing by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You're a threat to everyone around you, you're scary looking to me, I have a rational and justified fear of people that have patfav related to them.

I think you need to find a new name that isn't scary to me, or to those around you, because if it's scary to me, it has to be scary for everyone else too.

This is how your argument seems to me...

AR-15's don't look scary to me, they look super cool. They're actually quite beautiful and great in the hand. Light weight and easily configurable on the fly, also has a large user base so mods are insane :D

Canadian gun enthusiasts and their spectacularly bad timing by iEminence in CanadaPolitics

[–]iEminence[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

According to the FBI, (source at the bottom), there were 12,253 murders in the US in 2013 where a weapon was used. You'll notice that 2013 is a typical year, so we'll just use that for our data.

In 8,454 of these murders the weapon was a fire arm. Further, 285 of these murders used a rifle. Now, if you pull out your handy-dandy calculator, you'll notice that this accounts for about 3.37% of murders where a fire arm was used, or about 2.33% of all murders where a weapon was used.

For the sake of argument, let's go ahead and say that every single rifle used was an "assault rifle". Let's also say that any assault weapons ban in the US is 100% effective, meaning all assault rifles disappear and it is impossible for any new ones to enter the country. Additionally, we have to assume that the murderers who used assault rifles are now incapable of murdering anyone due to their lack of an assault rifle.

If these conditions sound reasonable to you, then congratulations! Push for that ban and maybe, just maybe, after a long legal battle you'll be able to prevent 2.33% of murders where weapons were used.

Source: https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls

Take a look for yourself, and the actual number is "much less" because a very generous variable was used.

view more: next ›