12

Ottawa: Parole is a privilege, not a right

Public safety minister vows to limit early releases


 

On Monday, the government introduced legislation aimed at reforming Canada’s parole system, making it harder for prisoners to get out of jail early. The effort is aimed at “fixing the problem of early parole” in Canada, says Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan. “Canadians are surprised to learn that unless the National Parole Board has reasonable grounds to believe these offenders will commit a violent offence, not another offence, but a violent offence once released, they must automatically release those prisoners into the community.” Van Loan points out that many prisoners in Canada are granted full parole after only one-third of their sentence is complete. That, he insists, is “a problem.” “The commitment I am announcing will move us one step closer to a system of earned parole in which release is a privilege, granted only to those who have shown they are committed to rehabilitation rather than a right granted to every criminal.”

The Gazette


 
Filed under:

Ottawa: Parole is a privilege, not a right

  1. And all the new prisons can be considered stimulus, right?

    • we'll just have less repeat offenders – sounds good in my books.

  2. unless Iggy puts you on parole, then it seems to be not only a privilege by but a veritable bash.

  3. Strange. That's twice in one day(!!) that I've seen something I whole heartedly agree with coming from a government source. Earlier today I read how we didn't need to have legislation for the sake of legislation.

  4. I feel that offenders that did not commit a violent offense should should be treated differently than offenders who have used violence. I have no problem allowing an offender who for example grew pot to be let out early. While a rapist or murderer should be held to a higher standard for their crime. Unfortunately the legislators will try to appear hard on crimminals so that they can gain political capital.

    • Just because a crime is "Non-violent", that doesn't mean it's not a serious crime. Take Fraud for example, there is no physical threat of Violence, but it's a serious crime. Fraud is Theft and your still hurting people regardless if violence wasn't used. It's true what the Minister of Justice said, Parole is a privilege and not a right, thats what it was meant for.

  5. My question: does the Conservatives' "tough on crime" stance actually make Canada safer, or is it merely designed to win swing votes from scared citizens?

  6. When offenders are denied parole and held on taxpayer dime until the mandatory end of sentence, we can be sure to have had a meaningful impact on crime, right? Having this loud-mouthed boor in charge of our country's public safety terrifies me.

  7. Parole should be removed completely. If you commit a crime and the punishment is 10 years you need to do TEN years nothing less. Otherwise what's the point of punishing someone when they know they will be out before the ink dries on the paperwork form the court.

    • I absolutely agree with you. Some Sentences should be without Parole, depending on the nature or circumstances of the case.

  8. I absolutely agree, Parole is a PRIVILEGE and NOT A RIGHT. Thats what it was intended for all along. What would be the point in granting Parole for a person who refuses to take responsibility for their actions or refuses to change. All you bleeding-hearts out there can say what you want, but it doesn't change reality. The National Parole Board of Canada has let many repeat offenders out on Parole when they A) Didn't deserve it in the 1st place -AND- B) They were very quick to re-offend the moment they were out of Jail.

    Personally, I like what the Conservatives are doing, they are going back to what the Judicial System was originally all about – Crime & Punishment, If you commit a crime, there must be Consequences. All the bleeding hearts out there sure screwed up the Judicial System and now Canada is a laughing stock when it comes to Crime.

    I also agree that some sentences should be without Parole depending on the nature or circumstances of the Case. 5 years in Jail should mean 5 years in Jail, it seems to me that people today just lack common sense, what a shame.

  9. this can not be right as far as the prisoner or parolee is released from the prison based on the prisoner giving  their word of honor to abide by certain restriction

Sign in to comment.