Conservatives Closing Kingston Penn
#1
Posted 19 April 2012 - 03:07 PM
Built in 1835, Kingston Penitentiary is one of the oldest prisons in continuous use in the world. Located in Kingston, Ont., the facility has four units that can accommodate 421 inmates, but currently houses 346.
Read more: http://www.canada.co...l#ixzz1sWiSecYK
http://www.vancouver...4960/story.html
#2
Posted 19 April 2012 - 07:16 PM
#3
Posted 19 April 2012 - 07:32 PM
Chantal Hebert says it's about relocating jobs out of non-Conservative ridings. They're getting rid of 1000 spaces and some of the prison expansions are going into Vic Toews own riding, she says.
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free and civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as their religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."
Thomas Jefferson
#4
Posted 19 April 2012 - 07:53 PM
Then, while critics are waiting to prove basic math, crowd the existing prisons even more by closing a few of them. By the time the stats are out on how C-10 panders to the security industries, Canadians will be clamouring for more prison spaces to alleviate the `inhumane' overcrowding. Along comes Harper with his `private' partners to save the day and build `new' and `improved' prisons. (when money-saving renovations to Kingston and others were all that was necessary.)
Bill C-10 will require new prisons; mandate incarceration for minor, non-violent offences; justify poor treatment of inmates and make their reintegration into society more difficult. Texas and California, among other jurisdictions, have already started down this road before changing course, realizing it cost too much and made their justice system worse. Canada is poised to repeat their mistake.
#5
Posted 19 April 2012 - 08:10 PM
Exactly.I see this as a necessary step towards Harper wasting billions on the private prison industry knocking at Canada's door. It's typical create-a-crisis politics. First, change the laws so more people are in prison for longer times.... still waiting to see stats on C-10 since it's only been weeks.
Then, while critics are waiting to prove basic math, crowd the existing prisons even more by closing a few of them. By the time the stats are out on how C-10 panders to the security industries, Canadians will be clamouring for more prison spaces to alleviate the `inhumane' overcrowding. Along comes Harper with his `private' partners to save the day and build `new' and `improved' prisons. (when money-saving renovations to Kingston and others were all that was necessary.)
Bill C-10 will require new prisons; mandate incarceration for minor, non-violent offences; justify poor treatment of inmates and make their reintegration into society more difficult. Texas and California, among other jurisdictions, have already started down this road before changing course, realizing it cost too much and made their justice system worse. Canada is poised to repeat their mistake.
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free and civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as their religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."
Thomas Jefferson
#6
Posted 19 April 2012 - 08:31 PM
I know that. Obviously. Point is this statement by the government contradicts their position on the need to get tough on crime.The Omnibus Crime Bill was just passed. It's impossible to know the effect of a crime bill that just went through a couple weeks ago.
From the article-
Despite tough new law-and-order legislation many thought would result in a spike in the prison population, Toews argued the projected increase never materialized.
According to recent data from the Correctional Service of Canada, Canada's federal prison population stood at 14,893 at the end of 2011. This is significantly fewer than the 17,189 the government predicted would be locked up by then.
They're not even talking about the omnibus crime bill. I mentioned it in addition to these points, it's even more unnecessary.
#7
Posted 20 April 2012 - 04:53 AM
#8
Posted 20 April 2012 - 06:21 AM
I know. I'm saying Vic Toews is an idiot.I know that. Obviously. Point is this statement by the government contradicts their position on the need to get tough on crime.
Edited by cybercoma, 20 April 2012 - 06:33 AM.
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free and civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as their religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."
Thomas Jefferson
#9
Posted 20 April 2012 - 06:40 AM
Let's just hope the Feds don't try to transport all those serial killers to their new location in a cargo plane. And if they do let's pray Nick Cage is on the plane.
http://upload.wikime...ternational.jpg
#11
Posted 20 April 2012 - 06:57 AM
Of course not. They've been talking about closing Kingston for years. What they didn't do was talk about replacing Kingston in or near Kingston. They also sold it as a cost-saving measure, when they're going to need to build at least 500 new spaces to offset the closure.So, do people think that buildings should never go out of use? How is housing people in a nearly 200 year old prison a good thing?
Of course, they're expanding the prisons in Vic Toews riding.
Hebert may have been right about jobs, but I'm more concerned that the Conservatives are yet again importing American-style politics into Canada. Keeping in mind the CPC plans on redrawing the ridings, I'm not sure if this works here or not and I sure as hell hope it doesn't:
Edited by cybercoma, 20 April 2012 - 06:59 AM.
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free and civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as their religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."
Thomas Jefferson
#12
Posted 20 April 2012 - 07:53 AM
So, do people think that buildings should never go out of use? How is housing people in a nearly 200 year old prison a good thing?
It really doesn't matter where they are housed because its still cost over $100,000 per person, which was pointed out in a senate committee hearing meetings. So the question is how much does it cost to transport them and the maintenance of the new place vs the old. Also you would have to included the cost of EI for those who lose their jobs.
#13
Posted 20 April 2012 - 08:46 AM
Smallc only includes politically expedient costs.Also you would have to included the cost of EI for those who lose their jobs.
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free and civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as their religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."
Thomas Jefferson
#14
Posted 20 April 2012 - 11:38 AM
Much as I dislike the concept of a "prison industry", I know that this will hurt Kingston.
#15
Posted 20 April 2012 - 12:54 PM
So, do people think that buildings should never go out of use? How is housing people in a nearly 200 year old prison a good thing?
Well,there is the fact that place might such a total shitehole that potential incarceration in said shitehole might be deterrent enough for someone about to commit a crime..
Edited by Jack Weber, 20 April 2012 - 12:54 PM.










