When You Have A Life Threatening Cancer Surgery Is Needed

Not pipe dreams like going after the manufactuers, which is not going to happen, building more basketball courts, throwing $$$$ at people who are beyond redemption and propping up the cottage industries of social in-activists.

January 6, 2007 Letters

Harsh penalties not the answer

Re Joe Warmington's "Blood paving T.O. streets" (Jan. 3): I was troubled by the Canoe Live question, "what automatic jail time would you add for crooks who use guns?"

Increasing penalties for "gun crime" is a poor contribution to the discussion.

A person who intends to act violently will act violently. If we target the use of a gun, and an aggressor chooses to use a knife or baseball bat, what have we achieved?

We need to say that violent behaviour itself is not acceptable, regardless of the weapon of choice, and implement measures to support that position.

People who commit crimes don't plan on being caught, and a survey of the gun-related murders from 2006 will show many have yet to result in an arrest, let alone a conviction.

Sure, tack on 25 years. What difference would it make to those who as yet escape justice? And yes, if a gun-crime perpetrator is finally jailed, we may prevent that particular perpetrator from committing crimes in the foreseeable future, but what about the deaths and pain caused by a first offence?

Do we really want to base our platform for change on the hope that penalties will act as a deterrent for the majority of the potential situations? Again, where's the deterrent factor for those who, in their mind, have no intention of being caught, or those who act in a flash of rage?

Kick ass.........