I think his idea was that bounty hunting is by nature criminal, and that it just happens that the USA, misguided, doesn’t recognize this.
Anyway, does the USA extradite its citizens?
For it to be criminal in the US would require a law against it in the jurisdiction covered by the US. As the US law specifically provides for bounty hunting, it’s most certainly not criminal.
Yes, the US does.
Muffin:
I just realized I misstated something in a previous posting. The bounty hunters (who, once they entered Canada, were actually tourists) should, of course, know that “ignorance of the law is no excuse.” They should also have realized that they were no longer bounty hunters as they were out of their jurisdiction.
Yes, but what call “life imprisonment” is almost never life imprisonment (something which has always bugged me - call it what it is!). Even if you’re convicted of first-degree murder you can still apply for parole after 25 years (and we don’t have consecutive sentences either). Dangerous Offender status is the closest we have to throwing away the key, and the chances are nil that that would apply here.
I’m curious about something. Would the bounty hunters in fact be extraditable? I thought that in order to be extradited you had to do something that would be considered an offense in both the country you did it in and the country you were to be extradited from? Yes, there’s no such thing as bounty hunting in Canada and from Canada’s point of view they are kidnappers. However, unfortunately it seems that bounty hunting is legal under American law, so why would the Americans turn them over?
Note that I agree with our law that they are kidnappers. I’m just dubious that our friends south of the border would be particularly co-operative about turning over people who from their point of view broke no law.
Kidnapping is an offense in the United States.
But from the US point of view they weren’t kidnapping, they were bounty hunting.
How did they get the guy back across the border, is what I’m wondering. So much for tightened borders…
They weren’t bounty-hunting, since they were targeting someone they had no right to arrest.
From the bounty hunters’ point of view, they weren’t kidnapping. From the legal view, even in the US, they were intentionally and unlawfully denying their victim freedom and transporting said victim to another place against his will. That would be kidnapping.
We have consecutive sentences. Check out Criminal Code of Canada sections 718.3(4).
718.2 (b) provides that “where consecutive sentences are imposed, the combined sentence should not be unduly long or harsh,” which may be what you were thinking of.
Perhaps some folks could take the time to READ the story?
(All bolding mine):
Headline:
Text:
Other notes:
(The U.S. action was not for kidnapping, so I have no problem with Canada going after these guys for that charge, but they never delivered Weckworth to the court in Cleveland–which is why the only guy in the story who actually is foaming at the mouth that their action was OK is their boss, the bondsman who is out $40,000, (not the $125 of the story headline). I understand his being upset at the loss of bond, but it does not justify sending two clowns over the border to commit illegal acts.)
You’re completely correct. I failed to read the article. Good for that border guard!
And what I am saying is that bounty hunting IS, by its very nature, illegal, or else should be, and that states that don’t recognize this in law are simply misguided, just as rape would still be a criminal act even if some states chose to leave it off the books. Any U.S. state can pass or not pass whatever laws it likes; that’s their prerogative. I am still entitled to state that bounty hunters are criminal scum who hide away in states that (inexplicably) tolerate them the way Osama hid in Afghanistan, or Caribbean buccaneers hid out in Tortuga. It’s a personal value judgment but there it is.
Of course you can bounty hunt in Canada. Those two guys did exactly that. It’s illegal to use force in doing so, and violates any number of Criminal Code provisions, but let’s not play silly little games and pretend that the concept of “bounty hunting” does not exist in Canada. If you’re pursuing a fugitive for a cash reward, you’re a bounty hunter; it doesn’t matter if it’s legal to do it. That’s what the term “bounty hunter” means.
It sure did when two bounty hunters crossed the border. A bounty hunter is “a person who pursues fugitives for a reward.” They were still pursuing a fugitive for a reward when they were in Canada, and hence were bounty hunters, AND kidnappers, AND criminals. Those are not mutually exclusive concepts.
Maybe you could explain WHY this is your view.
The people sought by bounty hunters agreed, as a condition of their bond, to be in the custody of the bondsman. If they didn’t agree to this, the bondsman never would have agreed to secure their bond.
Is it your position that the entire system of bond is criminal? That people arrested should simply stay in jail until their trial comes up? Or that all arrested prisoners should be trusted to appear on their own recognizance?
What?
Of course you can bounty hunt in Canada. Those two guys did exactly that. It’s illegal to use force in doing so, and violates any number of Criminal Code provisions, but let’s not play silly little games and pretend that the concept of “bounty hunting” does not exist in Canada. If you’re pursuing a fugitive for a cash reward, you’re a bounty hunter; it doesn’t matter if it’s legal to do it. That’s what the term “bounty hunter” means.
It sure did when two bounty hunters crossed the border. A bounty hunter is “a person who pursues fugitives for a reward.” They were still pursuing a fugitive for a reward when they were in Canada, and hence were bounty hunters, AND kidnappers, AND criminals. Those are not mutually exclusive concepts.
[/QUOTE]
Because having armed men running around kidnapping people is
A) Insane, as vigilantism is not a wise methodology for law enforcement, and
B) Not coincidentally, the profession seems to draw, well, scum.
Funny how the system seems to still work okay in countries without vigilantes running around kidnapping people. What are cops and sherriffs for, anyway?
How are are professionals doing a job returning fleeing criminals to custody viglante justice? Since they are accepted as working for (if not directly) the state, how is it kidnapping? Since they are legally armed, what does that have to do with the entire thing?
Have you ever actually met Bounty Hunters? In what do you make your assertion. Bounty Hunters are pretty ordinary people. Contrary to that one episode of Law and Order, they’re pretty trustworthy. Some retired or resigned from the police to do it; others are simply ordinary people looking to make a living. I’ve even heard of several husband-and-wife teams.
Mostly, they look up criminals’ relatives, go in, and talk them into coming back. They’re not there for the accused’s comfort, but they’re allowed to take strong measures to protect themselves amd keep them in custody for transportation. Since you seem to think this somehow violates some deep moral principle, you rpobably ought to be able to enunciate it for the rest of us.
The police are charged with dealing with criminals after they commit crimes, but before they are jailed. Sometimes they do go after criminals who flee justice, but generally only when those are very serious crimes. Why bother? Bounty hunters do a solid job. It ain’t broke; don’t fix it.
Tom, as I stated, he was received into custody, was tried, and was convicted. You should review the OP’s article with respect to his pleading guilty. Also review the following two articles: http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2004/11/23/727565.html and http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2004/11/24/728898.html
Well, then he should have said that. “Criminal” implies there’s actually some factual, you know, “law” prohibiting it. Not just the opinion of some message board pundit.
Well, the thing is, my problem with your post is you weren’t making it in the form of an opinion, but a statement of fact.
The rest of your argument, eh whatever. Bounty hunting is fine from where I stand. I don’t doubt that your opinion on bounty hunting is probably born out of deap-seeted misunderstanding about what it actually entails.