# The CanaDoper Café (2012 edition of The great, ongoing Canadian current events and politics thread.) **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [January 1, 2012, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014 "2012-01-01T03:31:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 40
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/781 "2012-03-26T19:01:00Z")
The provision was added because of a concern that courts were not taking into account the circumstances of aboriginal peoples. The stats indicate that aboriginal peoples tend to be disproportionately imprisoned, measured against others with similar records. That raises a concern about systemic discrimination in the justice system. Sentencing is meant to find a punishment that fits the crime, and the offender. Some aboriginal people have had life experiences that are outside the norm of most judges, who tend to be from upper middle-class backgrounds, without much systemic traumas, such as the residential schools experience. The provision is telling judges, “Don’t assume that everyone has had your life experiences, and particularly make sure you understand the very different backgrounds and experiences of some aboriginal offenders.” ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/782 "2012-03-26T19:05:41Z")
So, discrimination for good instead of evil, eh? If I understand that correctly, two people who commit the same crime could get two different sentences, if one was a white guy and one was an Aboriginal guy. That doesn’t seem like equality to me. I did like the point made in the article - it doesn’t matter to the victims what race the person was that curb-stomped their face or raped them - they’re still just as damaged. ---
**Author:** ![Leaffan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leaffan/32/299_2.png) [@Leaffan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaffan)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/783 "2012-03-26T19:10:48Z")
> [@Cat\_Whisperer](#): > > …Isn’t that racist, to treat one race differently than others? I don’t think so. I think it’s justifiable to take into consideration the circumstances of aboriginal offenders. As we saw in the Attawapiskat story, their living conditions can be quite horrendous. As far as I’m aware though, the justice system does take history into consideration for all sentencing. If you’re a first-time offender who is employed full time, I think you’d be sentenced differently than an unemployed repeat offender, for example. I don’t have a problem with the “special considerations” but as that National Post opinion pointed out, public safety should be paramount. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/784 "2012-03-26T19:16:22Z")
> [@Cat\_Whisperer](#): > > So, discrimination for good instead of evil, eh? If I understand that correctly, two people who commit the same crime could get two different sentences, if one was a white guy and one was an Aboriginal guy. That doesn’t seem like equality to me. I wouldn’t agree with that characterisation. The provision is to direct judges to take everything into account about the individual. It’s not saying to treat aboriginal offenders more leniently. ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/785 "2012-03-26T19:17:22Z")
Depends I suppose. The Aboriginal Justice Initiative emerged in the early 1990’s along with a Royal Commission to investigate Aboriginal concerns. This is the time period of Oka, Residential School fall out etc. And for the Justice department the issue at hand really was that aboriginals were in prison far in excess of what their population would indicate. In fact in 2008 the Justice department said : > [@](#): > > “Nationally, Aboriginal people are less than 3 percent of the Canadian population, but they comprise almost 20 percent of the total federal prison population … Using the latest census data, we estimate the overall incarceration rate of Aboriginal Canadians to be 983 per 100,000, or almost nine times higher than the rate for non-Aboriginal people.” So in the mid 1990s the Justice department opted to kick off a series of pilot projects and experiments geared to keeping offenders in their communities while being rehabilitated. The other option of prison would simply continue to tear at the social fabric of first nation’s commnuities which in turn would drive crime. > [@](#): > > In 1996, Parliament adopted the following amendments to the Criminal Code (pertaining to adults only) to deal with diversion and sentencing: > > ``` > Section 717 of the Criminal Code clarifies conditions to be met for using alternative measures when dealing with a person alleged to have committed an offence. > Sub-section 718.2 (e) of the Criminal Code dictates that “all available sanctions other than imprisonment that are reasonable in the circumstances should be considered for all offenders, with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders”. > > ``` > > In 1999, the Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. Gladue provided an interpretation of subsection 718.2 (e) of the Criminal Code. This landmark decision provided a framework for personal background and social and economic conditions to be considered by sentencing judges when deliberating on offences committed by Aboriginal people. In Gladue, the Supreme Court also emphasized the far-reaching consequences of keeping Aboriginal offenders in a justice system that was failing to serve and to rehabilitate them. > > The amendments to the Criminal Code, along with the Gladue decision, provide the context through which the RCMP, crowns, and judges can refer offenders to Aboriginal Justice Strategy programs. So given the context of what the Canadian government had done to aboriginals this was seen as a way to begin mitigating the destruction inflicted through earlier practices through legislation. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/786 "2012-03-26T19:22:14Z")
Plus, it’s also a basic principle of sentencing, as set out in s. 718.2(b), as quoted by **Grey** upthread, that “a sentence should be similar to sentences imposed on similar offenders for similar offences committed in similar circumstances”. That’s not negated by the direction to be aware of the particular circumstances of aboriginal offenders. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/787 "2012-03-26T19:25:07Z")
> [@Leaffan](#): > > I don’t have a problem with the “special considerations” but as that National Post opinion pointed out, public safety should be paramount. Protection of the public is already set out in the Criminal Code, in s. 718, which sets out the basic principles for sentencing. It’s not as if the law has ignored that key purpose of a criminal system. > [@](#): > > **718.** The fundamental purpose of sentencing is to contribute, along with crime prevention initiatives, to respect for the law and the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society by imposing just sanctions that have one or more of the following objectives: > > (a) to denounce unlawful conduct; > > (b) to deter the offender and other persons from committing offences; > > (c) to separate offenders from society, where necessary; > > (d) to assist in rehabilitating offenders; > > (e) to provide reparations for harm done to victims or to the community; and > > (f) to promote a sense of responsibility in offenders, and acknowledgment of the harm done to victims and to the community. ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/788 "2012-03-26T20:11:45Z")
More importantly the National Post seems to be casting Rothstein as the only one who cares about community protection. However Rothstein appears to agree with the majority but disagrees about their interpretation of Parliamentary intent of the Long Term Supervision Order (LTSO). > [@](#): > > While I am in agreement with much of what my colleague has written in the context of general sentencing principles and application of those principles to Aboriginal offenders, I am of the respectful opinion that he does not specifically address the issue of the sentencing of Aboriginal offenders who have been found to be long-term offenders and have been found guilty of breaching a condition of a long-term supervision order (“LTSO”) Actually the more I read this judgement the less difference I see between Rothstein and the majority opinion. From the decision: > [@](#): > > The sentencing judge’s findings demonstrate a thorough appreciation of the circumstances. He properly recognized that protection of the public was the paramount concern in breaches of LTSOs. so I’m confused as to what was different w.r.t LTSO and the second appeal of Ladue. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/789 "2012-03-26T20:41:15Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > I wouldn’t agree with that characterisation. The provision is to direct judges to take everything into account about the individual. It’s not saying to treat aboriginal offenders more leniently. > [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Plus, it’s also a basic principle of sentencing, as set out in s. 718.2(b), as quoted by **Grey** upthread, that “a sentence should be similar to sentences imposed on similar offenders for similar offences committed in similar circumstances”. That’s not negated by the direction to be aware of the particular circumstances of aboriginal offenders. I guess I’m just not getting why judges who are assumed to be competent and fair need to be told to give special attention to the circumstances of native offenders. Why don’t they just judge and sentence everyone according to the circumstances they come to court with? ---
**Author:** ![mnemosyne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c4cdca/32.png) [@mnemosyne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mnemosyne)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/790 "2012-03-26T20:53:58Z")
> [@Cat\_Whisperer](#): > > I guess I’m just not getting why judges who are assumed to be competent and fair need to be told to give special attention to the circumstances of native offenders. Why don’t they just judge and sentence everyone according to the circumstances they come to court with? It does seem a little weird, doesn’t it? It makes a certain historical sense, and is a reasonable effort, but I wonder if - regardless of the _intent_ of the law - that extra, explicit statement results in a discrepency in sentencing, such as more lenient sentences for aboriginals (as compared to non-aboriginals, rather than compared to previous sentencing trends). I think it would be a rather large undertaking to try and see if that statement has had an impact on the types of sentences handed out. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/791 "2012-03-26T20:58:58Z")
> [@Leaffan](#): > > I don’t think so. I think it’s justifiable to take into consideration the circumstances of aboriginal offenders. It’s undeniably racist. Now, you might argue that some forms of racism are justifiable, but that doesn’t make them not racist. Law provides for many forms of justifiable or legal discrimination. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2012, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/792 "2012-03-27T14:41:19Z")
> [@Cat\_Whisperer](#): > > I guess I’m just not getting why judges who are assumed to be competent and fair need to be told to give special attention to the circumstances of native offenders. Why don’t they just judge and sentence everyone according to the circumstances they come to court with? Except that wasn’t happening, for numerous reasons. There were ample studies, culminating in the evidence before the Royal Commission mentioned by **Grey** , that aboriginal people were over-incarcerated, even when other factors were taken into account. When you have an identifiable group of people who are being imprisoned more harshly than others for the same types of crimes, that raises a serious issue about the fundamental fairness of the criminal justice system. Section 718.2(e) was one measure that was added to try to rectify that injustice. > [@RickJay](#): > > It’s undeniably racist. So if you have a group of people being over-incarcerated, tied to their racial origins, it’s racist to try to rectify the problem so that they are treated the same as other people of different races? ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2012, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/793 "2012-03-27T14:45:44Z")
For instance, there was the wrongful conviction of Donald Marshall Jr, as recounted in [this news story](http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2009/08/06/donald-marshall-wrongful-conviction-dies342.html) when he died a few years ago: > [@](#): > > **Systemic racism** > Marshall, a Mi’kmaq, was exonerated by a royal commission in 1990 that determined systemic racism had contributed to his wrongful imprisonment. > > The seven-volume report pointed the finger at police, judges, Marshall’s original defence lawyers, Crown lawyers and bureaucrats. > > “The criminal justice system failed Donald Marshall Jr. at virtually every turn from his arrest and wrongful conviction for murder in 1971 up to and even beyond his acquittal by the Court of Appeal in 1983,” the report said. ---
**Author:** ![Le\_Ministre\_de\_l\_au-dela](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/le_ministre_de_l_au-dela/32/12181_2.png) [@Le\_Ministre\_de\_l\_au-dela](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Le_Ministre_de_l_au-dela)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2012, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/794 "2012-03-27T15:08:11Z")
We’d be so much better off to eliminate the poverty that leads to native people becoming hardened criminals in the first place. And it would be good if ‘innocent until proven guilty’ could apply across the board. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2012, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/795 "2012-03-27T15:11:50Z")
> [@](#): > > We’d be so much better off to eliminate the poverty that leads to native people becoming hardened criminals in the first place. True enough, but until that happens, we want a justice system that operates fairly in light of the great disparities in wealth and life experiences among Canadians. ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2012, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/796 "2012-03-27T15:19:36Z")
Besides Canada has systematically undermined the social fabric within aboriginal communities. Sometimes intentionally, sometimes not, but couple massive family fabric disruption with poverty and you create a poverty trap of astounding proportions. ---
**Author:** ![Leaffan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leaffan/32/299_2.png) [@Leaffan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaffan)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2012, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/797 "2012-03-27T17:09:37Z")
Who could be this stupid, really? There’s no way I can possibly believe that this was a Conservative or Liberal [attack](http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/Massive+cyber+attack+leadership+vote/6366386/story.html). What the fuck is going on here? > [@](#): > > A large-scale cyber-attack involving more than 10,000 computers was responsible for the online polling problems during Saturday’s NDP leadership vote, according to Scytl Canada, the company contracted by the party to conduct the vote. > [@](#): > > A forensic investigation is ongoing to locate the source of the attack, but the company said it has identified more than 10,000 “malevolent” IP addresses behind the “hundreds of thousands of false voting requests to the system.” ---
**Author:** ![Le\_Ministre\_de\_l\_au-dela](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/le_ministre_de_l_au-dela/32/12181_2.png) [@Le\_Ministre\_de\_l\_au-dela](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Le_Ministre_de_l_au-dela)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2012, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/798 "2012-03-27T17:18:43Z")
The strangest thing about that attack is that the people who are cyber-savvy enough to try to pull that off ought to be cyber-savvy enough to know that they’ll leave traces of their IP addresses behind… ---
**Author:** ![Le\_Ministre\_de\_l\_au-dela](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/le_ministre_de_l_au-dela/32/12181_2.png) [@Le\_Ministre\_de\_l\_au-dela](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Le_Ministre_de_l_au-dela)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2012, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/799 "2012-03-27T17:26:23Z")
And here’s an interesting survey result - a NANOS poll commissioned by the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, a pro-CBC group shows that > [@](#): > > Canadians are generally satisfied with the programs and content provided by the CBC. They are more likely to support maintaining current funding compared to a cut or increase and believe that possible cuts would likely have a negative impact in terms of Canadian content, local news and national news. The executive summary, and a link to the full report in PDF format, can be found at [this link](http://www.friends.ca/poll/10624). I find it quite heartening after all the Conservative-based petitions and CBC bashing by Sun Media that there are some hard numbers out there that show public support for CBC. ---
**Author:** ![mnemosyne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c4cdca/32.png) [@mnemosyne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mnemosyne)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2012, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/800 "2012-03-27T18:01:48Z")
I’m no computer geek - though I am married to one - and it seems to me that something with that many attacking IP addresses would be done through somesort of distributed malware or virus or whatever. Get thousands of computers infected with something that logs on to a central place without the computer owner knowing, then a ‘single’ person (or small group) could command those computers to “attack.” Everything in quotes up there because I don’t really know how it works, but it sounds like you could use the type of tools used for [Folding@home](http://folding.stanford.edu/)or SETI@home (distributed computing) for all kinds of malicious stuff too. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014.md?page=39) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014.md?page=41)