Vandals hit Fan Fest military displays
- Thread starter JasonH
- Start date
Oh, OK. Well pardon me then if it is your belief that our veterens actually did fight for the right to cane people but it seems to me more likely you didn't get *my* point. Which, as I will sum up here, is that: It is better to have the perpetrators be introduced to whom they offended and taught why it is offensive, rather than having them beat up. This might be ignorance to you. If so, do you have a more enlightened viewpoint you can share?old medic said:
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I think that their should be a mandatory class for the whole country all on Canadian History. As I see it Social Studies currently does not teach students much history, as well it's important that we instill some pride into Canadian youth's at a young age. Thats my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Sooner or later, they'll blab to their friends, bragging of their exploits, and it will get back to the authorities, but sadly with the legal system (remember there is no justice system anymore), they'll get nothing but a slap on the hands, and maybe some publicity.
Its just oo bad someones vintage private property had to be vandalised. As they are the victims. Next time post a few sentires to watch over the display in the night. Maybe they should have done this in the first place.
Anyways i do hope they catch these grubs.
Cheers,
Wes
Its just oo bad someones vintage private property had to be vandalised. As they are the victims. Next time post a few sentires to watch over the display in the night. Maybe they should have done this in the first place.
Anyways i do hope they catch these grubs.
Cheers,
Wes
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Dare said:
I saw your point.
And I saw you try to flame Marty for his thought on corporal punishment. Your post was very ignorant
of both English common law and Canadian law.
Corporal punishment was legal in Canada until 1972.
It was common to have lashes of the whip, or the cat of nine tails given at court until 1954.
As a corrective punishment it was legal before the war, during the war, and
after the war.
The Legion and the BESL were often supporters of even harsher measures.
Thus, I do think your mis-guided. There is no way for you to say soldiers didn't support
corporal punishment. It was part of the democratic system they were defending.
http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/pblct/rights/50yrs/50yrs-05_e.shtml
Riiiight, so our veterens faught wars so we could whip vandals? They never whipped vandals and you'll notice it was abolished for a reason. Do you think vandals should be whipped with a cat o' nine tails or caned? If you do, I wouldn't be so cavalier about throwing around the "ignorant" label.old medic said:
As for Canadian Law and English common law, we can go all the way back before the Magna Carta if you want.. involuntary, unrepresented, undemocratic servitude is not what our veterens were fighting for, I can guarentee you that. In fact, the strong Irish and Scottish contingant in the CAF were the ancestors of the very ones that faught English rule at the time. So if you're going to use Law or law as a basis for your arguement you should be aware that while the Rule of Law is indeed a critical element, I would say most veterens were fighting for *freedom*. Just because they supported stricter penalties does not mean that is what they were fighting for. I support flossing after meals, that doesn't mean I'm going to fight for it. I'm sure the Legion supports all sorts of things, but by all means, if you like the Singapore model, carry on. Maybe we can start cutting thieves hands off, or executions for drug possession like Indonesia. That'll clean the streets up! Personally, though, this http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/05/27/corby.appeal/ angers me a lot. She's lucky they did not execute her, but maybe not when she finally gets to her cell..
And lastly, how is what I said a "flame". If you consider what I said to be a flame, was it your intent to flame me with your response? I simply found it ironic that one could talk about fighting tyranny in one sentence and then want to sign up to administer public beatings in the next.. maybe I'm just misguided though..
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Dare said:
Ah... Blanket statements, and the crux of this...
If you don't think I should make blanket statements saying they do,
why did you make one saying they didn't back on page two of this thread?
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/30977/post-220221.html#msg220221
Then when Marty tried to point that out,
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/30977/post-220297.html#msg220297
you tossed in a sniper comment at him:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/30977/post-220905.html#msg220905
Not completely true.
Although by 1953 the CCC gave the whip under the following sections:
s.80 Assaults on the sovereign: 7 years imprisonment + whipping
s.276 Strangling to commit an indictable offence: life imprisonment + whipping
s.292 Indecent assault on female, wife beating, beating a female: 2 years + whipping
s.299 Rape: death, or life imprisonment with or without whipping
s.300 Attempts to commit rape: 7 years + whipping
s.301 Carnal knowledge of girl under 14: life imprisonment + whipping
s.302 Attempt to have carnal knowledge of girl under 14: 2 years + whipping
s.293 Indecent assault on a male: 10 years + whipping
s.457 Burglary while armed with an offensive weapon: life imprisonment + whipping
s.448 Assault with intent to rob: 3 years + whipping
Once you were incarcerated for any crime, a different set of rules applied.
After the Guelph jail riot in 1952, there were 50 sentences carried out under
lines e and k of the prison book below:
"Punishment by the strap shall only be inflicted in extreme cases and for the following offences:
(a) Assault with violence on officers.
(b) Assault with violence on other inmates.
(c) Continued course of bad conduct.
(d) Escape or attempted escape.
(e) Malicious destruction of or injury to machinery or property.
(f) Malingering.
(g) Mutinous conduct.
(h) Repeated fighting after warning.
(i) Refusal to work after warning.
(j) Repeated insolence to officers.
(k) Riotous conduct in dormitories, cells, working gangs or elsewhere.
The number of blows with the strap shall be in proportion to the offence committed, and in no case shall exceed ten at any one application. "
I'm on the fence.
I think you'd be hard pressed on that. Corporal punishment was only enacted by act of the elected Canadian Parliament in 1892.
Outlined at the top of this message. and;
Yes. It's the same three word sentence. I think everyone caught that.
Given that I am around youth regularly, I can say absolutely it will help change their ways. You just have to communicate it effectively (speak their language). Lead by example. Show them the right thing to do. Tell them why it's the right thing to do and the often neglected *demonstrate* to them why it's the right thing to do.2332Piper said:
Well, I disagree with that entirely. I think humanity understands both pain and love. Sure, under your method they've stopped vandalizing military gear, but do you think you've instilled a respect for veterens? The cause of this vandalism is this disrespect and it will manifest itself elsewhere.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Dare said:
Come off it Dare,
The only reason it was abolshed was to please the snivel libertarians and to be PC, BTW go ask a Vet what he thinks of a good caneing to the youth of today, as guess what his answer will be. Something like 'thats how it was when I was a kid, and it didn't hurt me, and maybe it would teach this criminals some respect for other peoples property'.
Not that long ago, one recieved the strap at school, parents were allowed to spand their kids, and now since the 'snivels' have had their way look at things.
I reckon if the grubs that perform these cowardly crimes got caned for punnishment, there would be a lot less crimes of thsi nature, plus a host of others too.
My 2 bob,
Wes
PS How about filling in your profile too.
Well, frankly, I think his comment only deserved a "sniper" comment. That would be my opinion of an attitude that expresses a desire to publicly cane people. As for blanket statements, if the blanket fits, I have no problem with it. You seem to miss an important point in what I am saying. While veterens might support more punishment, they *fought* for the freedom of everyone else to override their opinion. So, I don't think it was the right of government to beat people up that veterens were fighting for after all. Which is why I feel my statement is apt.old medic said:
This is what tyranny is.
1. A government in which a single ruler is vested with absolute power.
2. The office, authority, or jurisdiction of an absolute ruler.
3. Absolute power, especially when exercised unjustly or cruelly: â Å“I have sworn... eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of manâ ? (Thomas Jefferson).
4.
1. Use of absolute power.
2. A tyrannical act.
5. Extreme harshness or severity; rigor.
I believe that public caning, generally, and especially for vandalism, equates to more than one description above. You're free to disagree, of course.
I do appreciate the amount of research you have put into this, but correct me if I'm wrong, you're talking about criminals in a jail riot? Not punks painting graffiti?
Well, you did bring up English common law, and I am quite sure corporal punishment and capital punishment were both widespread in the empire.
My intent was not to "flame", so if it is yours. I am abdicating this thread.
(unrelated to above post but on topic)
this is my first post on these forums. i have had many discussions with one of my friends about this. we both just recently joined the reserves, but we hang out with different groups of people most of the time. all of my friends aren't necessarily supportive of me joining the army, but aren't against it. when i told them they just basically said "oh that's cool". but a little bit more on topic, is buddy's friends are (for some strange reason) against him joining the army. one of them actually said "you're stupid why did you join the army? you should join the peacekeepers"! and they think the C.F. is in Iraq!! I just think we need some forces people (not necessarily recruiters) to come into our highschools and EDUCATE people on the Canadian Forces and their role. i was appalled by how many people (i only know of a handful of people this naive) that know so little about the army. the worst part is, they believe that they're misconceptions on the military are right. most of what we hear about the military in the media is american news, and it's usually about the numbers of casualties, bombs dropped, or prisoners tortured; i have yet to see any BIG news that is a positive image for the military, or any on the canadian military (other than when the four canadians were killed by the american pilot {RIP}, again a negative image)
people honestly believe that the canadian forces are in Iraq, which is an example of why we need to EDUCATE our teens, and not just in history class.
this is my first post on these forums. i have had many discussions with one of my friends about this. we both just recently joined the reserves, but we hang out with different groups of people most of the time. all of my friends aren't necessarily supportive of me joining the army, but aren't against it. when i told them they just basically said "oh that's cool". but a little bit more on topic, is buddy's friends are (for some strange reason) against him joining the army. one of them actually said "you're stupid why did you join the army? you should join the peacekeepers"! and they think the C.F. is in Iraq!! I just think we need some forces people (not necessarily recruiters) to come into our highschools and EDUCATE people on the Canadian Forces and their role. i was appalled by how many people (i only know of a handful of people this naive) that know so little about the army. the worst part is, they believe that they're misconceptions on the military are right. most of what we hear about the military in the media is american news, and it's usually about the numbers of casualties, bombs dropped, or prisoners tortured; i have yet to see any BIG news that is a positive image for the military, or any on the canadian military (other than when the four canadians were killed by the american pilot {RIP}, again a negative image)
people honestly believe that the canadian forces are in Iraq, which is an example of why we need to EDUCATE our teens, and not just in history class.
Is he going to fight a war for it? That is context in which I used it and meant it.Wesley H. Allen said:
Well, parents are allowed to spank their kids in Canada. I'm not talking about spanking.
Maybe, or maybe it would build resentment and increase their activity. I'm sure there's one thing it would do, and that's breed a desire not to get caught again. Perhaps by becoming less interested or less active, or perhaps by becoming more skillful and more stealthy. I think there is quite a gulf of distinction between government mandated beatings and spankings by a lawful guardian. The thing that most troubled kids are missing is good *guidance*. We can teach them that a good pounding solves any problem (which is actually quite a regular theme amongst inmates), or we can teach them how to bring themselves up with explainations for their questions. Certainly there are beligerants in any situation, but most kids are easily reachable, if anyone cared enough to try. It really doesn't take a whole lot of effort. I've seen it in action first hand. I've seen kids practically begging for a positive comment because their parents have nothing good to say about them. Positive encouragement goes a long way and can make the difference. If that makes me a 'snivel', so be it. I think some people are just looking for an excuse and an outlet to take their own personal aggressions out on, but that's just speculation, of course.
No, thanks.
I agree but I doubt that there is going to be much support for that in academia. They're probably going to view it as a recruiting effort. Generally speaking, (yes, I love generalisms), teens I know have an absolutely terrible understanding of history, geography and their government. They can barely write in English and have a poor vocabulary. They tend to be mediocre at math and beyond that, it's all popular culture trivia.McFarlane said:
EDIT: Grammatical error. Bed time. :blotto:
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I am as well, and I gotta say most kids of today are complete idiots. I am part of this generation, and so far am sickened by what this generation is becoming. Even today I saw this movie Bumfights at a friends, and was completely sickened by it, it basically was these guys that made a movie were they track down bums and pay them money to abuse each other or themselves. I was even more pissed off at the fact that most anybody could rent that movie in any video store, as well as the fact the guys producing it are making a fortune. One of the guys was holding down people against their will and marking them with felts as a "tag". I was sickened through the whole thing and wondered why in the hell any people including my friends could watch such garbage. The fact that most of the audience is teens, and they are paying to watch people abuse other people just disgusts me. While I am joining the Canadian Forces to help protect my country, as well as kill for her if she ever needs me I will never get pleasure from seeing another human being abused by another for a cheap laugh. What bothered me the most was that people don't seem to care, it's as if we don't know right from wrong anymore. Hell even Howard Stern was shocked at the images they produced. These people aren't even really people in my own opinion. I want this country to have better common morals then this, I don't want to see the age were human life is something which can be so easily abused. In some ways I'm joining the forces because I am getting so sick of what is happening around me, and I want to get into the forces, make a difference, and become part of a better community.
Sorry for the rant, but this is how I feel about this generation and it pretty well says it. I don't think being soft will do this generation any good. :threat:
Personally, I'm surrounded by other kids from age 15-19 every day, and you see so many diffrent people acting in diffrent ways about vandalism. Really, most of the kids that are actually DOING this stuff are just looking for something to believe in, and they think its a good way to associate with other kids their age. A few days ago, a bunch of kids were going around posting up anti-war protest signs around the school. I understand that completely, but when i talked to them and they were planning on harassing a bunch of reservists (they had no idea i was applying), i was absolutely disgusted, and told them they should leave us alone to do our jobs! Theres been alot of vandalism around here in Halifax having to do with anti-war demonstration, but not many have been caught, and those who have, haven't really been punished... its a shame...
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Dare,
If these individuals were really "crying out" and "looking for something to believe in" they would have found it by now. They are, quite simply, not otherwise gainfully occupied, and too lazy to actually research the multi - faceted anti - war movement. In short - they have nothing better to do.
The young person who does some reading or asking their educators will quickly find that the best way to support an anti - war movement in Canada is through their elected representatives, who are more than willing to listen.
But I digress.
If you truly believe that trying to reform these "troubled little souls" is the best way to alter their behaviour - you do it. But don't say "it's society's fault" and walk away. Corporal punishment has been used by EVERY civilisation in recorded history. Why? It is effective, expedient and has a deterring effect. And no, we are not "better" than that, there were idiots in biblical times through to the present.
Not filling out your profile (at least a bit) is indicative of the same attitude these vandals have, that of concealing your identity/character, but not your controversial (probably intentionally so) viewpoints.
And finally, supposing the little turds that did this were caught - what method of correction would you advocate?
If these individuals were really "crying out" and "looking for something to believe in" they would have found it by now. They are, quite simply, not otherwise gainfully occupied, and too lazy to actually research the multi - faceted anti - war movement. In short - they have nothing better to do.
The young person who does some reading or asking their educators will quickly find that the best way to support an anti - war movement in Canada is through their elected representatives, who are more than willing to listen.
But I digress.
If you truly believe that trying to reform these "troubled little souls" is the best way to alter their behaviour - you do it. But don't say "it's society's fault" and walk away. Corporal punishment has been used by EVERY civilisation in recorded history. Why? It is effective, expedient and has a deterring effect. And no, we are not "better" than that, there were idiots in biblical times through to the present.
Not filling out your profile (at least a bit) is indicative of the same attitude these vandals have, that of concealing your identity/character, but not your controversial (probably intentionally so) viewpoints.
And finally, supposing the little turds that did this were caught - what method of correction would you advocate?
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Dare said:
Probably hard to come to a concensus on. Some groups think being forced to pay income tax
is tyranny. Others think not having 100% health care funding is tyranny.
As an example, Let's say a democracy did have corporal punishment in it's criminal legal system.
Is that tyranny, or would that be the laws and rules that society chooses to
apply to it's members?
Re: the 1952 Guelph riot. That was regarding men in jail already.
A better example might be section 43 of the criminal code, Corporal punishment of children
in institutions and schools (prior to various changes and court rulings).
Rules on behaviour deserving the paddles or strap would vary in each institution or school (board),
but it's probably safe to assume there have been instances of children being paddled for vandalism.
True, but only because Canadian laws were adapted from the English law. As already discussed, they did pass
the democratic process. I think we can put that to bed.
Re:
Those two lines seems rather contradictory.
OM
A sniper comment to me is more of a quip than a flame. To me a flame (and to my recollection always has been) a full out attack, but anyways, I think I'll just have to agree to disagree on this issue. I understand where you're coming from on it, I just think that democratic and human rights have not always been the mainstay of our justice system and that society in general did not always have a say in the legal system of the empire. The cause of democracy that has been fought for, is not even fully realized at home yet. I do believe that corporal punishment, in general, is "Extreme harshness or severity; rigor." Tyranny is not always dressed in a swastika or a hammer and scythe. Whipping is pretty severe and harsh, I'm sure you can at least admit to that.
Similar threads
