Timeline for If a lesser crime imposes the same or greater sentence as a more severe crime, is the punishment considered cruel?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2020 at 8:31 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Feb 9, 2016 at 0:23 | history | edited | Zizouz212 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Quick, general answer cleanup
|
| Jan 27, 2016 at 14:56 | comment | added | Zizouz212 | @Breakskater Sure, I'm just writing an exam in a few minutes, so I'll do that when I am finished :) | |
| Jan 27, 2016 at 14:52 | comment | added | Breakskater | @Zizouz212, can you edit your answer to provide a link to the R v Smith case? | |
| Jan 27, 2016 at 14:50 | vote | accept | Breakskater | ||
| Jan 27, 2016 at 4:29 | comment | added | Breakskater | Attempted murder can never be more severe than murder, and murder (loss of life) will always be more severe than possessing/selling any amount of pills because life is infinitely more valuable. If drugs were intentionally wholesaled to a criminal organization so they could be resold for murder weapons then that is a circumstance/aggravating factor that should increase the severity and penalty of the crime. There should be a direct relationship between severity and punishment, like an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth - which is restrictive as much as it is permissive. | |
| Jan 27, 2016 at 4:11 | comment | added | Breakskater | @Zizouz212, I don't know all the facts but the officer dared the teenager to take a step forward, probably because the officer was angry from being taunted, then, when the subject stepped back to the front door, it didn't look like he stepped forward, the officer shot him. At a safe distance away, shot him again multiple times. I don't want to decide a verdict without doing a thorough investigation, especially where death is involved. The officers could have viewed him as a major threat potentially carrying an explosive in his bag and that's why they didn't want to enter the bus. | |
| Jan 27, 2016 at 3:55 | comment | added | Breakskater | @Zizouz212, in other words, there should not be a one-size-fits-all penalty. The severity and punishment of a crime should be circumstantial. What lead up to the crime? Like in the streetcar shooting, what caused the officer to fire at the subject? In the video, there wasn't any great threat to the officer. They could have easily went in the side door and tasered him since they had the streetcar surrounded. The knife would have fell out of the subject's hand. The streetcar shooting is a matter of was it murder or attempted murder, which one is more severe. | |
| Jan 26, 2016 at 1:28 | comment | added | Zizouz212 | Pardon me for going on, but even here in Toronto, there was a trial about a police officer who fatally shot a teenager on a streetcar. He was charged with second-degree murder, and attempted murder, but was only convicted of the latter charge. (The officer shot two rounds of bullets). Was the attempted murder charge more severe than the second-degree murder charge? The second volley of bullets is definitely what killed the teen. Read more about it and tell me what you think: cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/james-forcillo-verdict-1.3414974 | |
| Jan 26, 2016 at 1:23 | comment | added | Zizouz212 | Even to put the example in your question to effect: were the drugs being trafficked to a criminal organization that wished to kill multiple people, of which you were aware? Would that still be less severe than a single count of first-degree murder? While the former would also be first-degree murder, there's two arguments in place. That being said - I've got a law exam tomorrow, and I should probably be studying and getting some sleep :) | |
| Jan 26, 2016 at 1:20 | comment | added | Zizouz212 | @Breakskater But that's the issue. The severity of a crime can only be an opinion by civilians like you and myself, but not in the eyes of the law. Yeah, damages can be a level of severity, but it can only be a factor: The amount of damage something causes can't be the deciding element. Would aggravated assault that severely injures someone (rendering them quadriplegic) be more severe than manslaughter? Think about that, and you'll learn to realize that it's a difficult question to ask. What about crimes that are irreparable? Are there limits? Were there factors like duress? And so on. | |
| Jan 26, 2016 at 1:16 | comment | added | Breakskater | @Zizouz212 IMO, the severity of an offence would be measured by the amount of damaged it caused. Obviously killing someone is irreversible so it would be considered more damaging than theft of something that could be returned, therefore the punishment for theft should be less severe as it resulted in less damage than the murder offence | |
| Jan 25, 2016 at 22:01 | comment | added | Zizouz212 | @Viktor Thanks for pointing that out (I need to start looking at the tags -_-). That's actually a good question, and I'm actually not sure what the answer would be. I'm not even sure what the use of a notwithstanding clause would have in practice -> It can introduce a law and make it not subject to the constitution, but the judicial system seems like a different matter. You've got me :) | |
| Jan 25, 2016 at 21:55 | comment | added | Viktor | Putting this in so people know this concerns Canda. Btw what happens if the legislature uses a nonwithstanding provision in the law? | |
| Jan 25, 2016 at 21:02 | history | edited | Zizouz212 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Jan 25, 2016 at 20:57 | history | answered | Zizouz212 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |