Serial killer Olson threatens to sue federal government over benefits

[57Chevy]

Here's another one of those "gimme money now types" getting paid while doing time in prison.
Something is definately wrong with our justice system. I hope they pass the law quickly ;D
        ____________________________________________________________________

OTTAWA — Serial killer Clifford Olson is threatening to sue the federal government if proposed legislation to revoke Old Age Security and Guaranteed Income Supplement payments for convicts is passed.

The government was prompted to introduce Bill C-31 after it came to light a few months ago that Olson, 70, is receiving $1,100 every month in federal income supplements.

The cheques are deposited in a trust account while Olson serves his 11 consecutive life sentences in a Quebec penitentiary for the murder of 11 children in British Columbia in the early 1980s.

The bill, introduced by Human Resources Minister Diane Finley in early June, seeks to repeal the seniors' benefits for 400 federal prisoners serving sentences of two years or more, and the government is also negotiating with the provinces to cut off benefits for inmates in provincial jails, which house offenders serving less than two years.

(article continues)
Read more: Serial killer Olsen
          (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)

 

[Michael OLeary]

Posts claiming that preemptive capital punishment should be applied will be removed.  Warnings may accompany such moderator actions.  This is your warning.

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[vonGarvin]

I will make no claims for anything of the like of pre-emptive capital punishment; however, I do believe that state-sanctioned capital punishment should be reinstituted.  I would offer this not because Clifford Olson is threatening to sue, but I think that once in a while, unfortunately, people such as Mr. Olson, Mr. Bernardo and Ms. Homolka come along and commit heinous crimes that shake our society to its core.  Crimes so horrible and rehabilitation so remote that capital punishment may be the only way to protect our society. 

I would offer that following conviction, if the case calls for possible capital punishment as a sentence, that a new hearing be instituted to determine if the case in question merits carrying out that sentence.  The method of carrying out that sentence should be, in my opinion, be hanging.  It's quick and it's effective.

My  :2c:

 

[mariomike]

The method of carrying out that sentence should be, in my opinion, be hanging.  It's quick and it's effective.

The last execution in Canada was a back-to-back hanging at the Don in Dec. 1962. The chaplain reported that Arthur Lucas was semi-decapitated.:
http://www.openbooktoronto.com/files/images/dundurn-last-to-die.large.jpg
( page 180-181 for gruesome details )
I think the modern American methods are cleaner, and equally effective.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Posts claiming that preemptive capital punishment should be applied will be removed.  Warnings may accompany such moderator actions.  This is your warning.

Milnet.ca Staff

Respectfully, considering he murdered 11 children can we publically wish he gets the death penalty instead of wasting tax dollars?

 

[vonGarvin]

I think the modern American methods are cleaner, and equally effective.

This raises an interesting point.  Some will point out that hanging is "cruel and unusual punishment".  I would offer that yes, it is, and that's what makes it effective. 
Now, to explain, I'm not a sadist.  Punishment, to be effective must be both cruel and unusual.  It must be cruel in that it is perceived to be cruel by the person receiving the punishment.  In other words, it causes discomfort in some manner.  To a four year old, that may be a time out.  To a mass murderer, it may mean ending their life.  And of course the spectrum runs between that wide gulf. 
And it must be unusual.  That same four year old cannot receive that punishment of the time out all the time.  And we cannot go about killing everyone we suspect of murder.  It must not become commonplace to have punishment all the time.

So, "lethal injection" is more humane, but certainly not to the condemned.  I mean, they die no matter what, right?  My argument is that we try to make the punishments humane not for the condemned, but for us.  I say "screw our sensibilities".  If we find an execution to be humane, then we are missing the point.  It must cause us, society, a bit of discomfort when we send someone to death.  We must feel that we as a society can put our hands on our hearts and say "In this one certain case, we don't care if Mr. Bernardo (for example) is partially or fully decapitated by his hanging", as an example.  If we feel that it's humane, I fear that executions would become all too common.  And I argue that they must be a once-in-a-generation-or-so event. 

So, using the most recent examples of which I can easily recall without research, we would perhaps have had:
Mr. Olson circa 1980
Mr. Bernardo circa 1995
Mr. Pickton circa 2015

Perhaps Mr. Ng is in there somewhere as well.

But executions must be cruel as perceived by the condemned and society, and they must be unusual, noteworthy events.

Another  :2c:

 

[gaspasser]

I think I tried to say the same things here but in not so many words.  Perhaps my intentions were ill read and I was given a warning for speaking my mind.
My intention was to speak out about the fact that many folks over 65, who earned thier CPP and Old Age Pensions have to fight to get it, and people who are incarcerated get it with little hassles.  I strongly believe that pension payments for those convicted of heinous crimes should go to the families of the victims whose lives they've ruined. 
They say it costs over $65,000 per year to maintain a convict, few people have jobs and careers that pay that much! 

 

[mariomike]

They say it costs over $65,000 per year to maintain a convict, 

Perhaps even more. This is from 2006:
"It costs Corrections Canada $110,223 to keep a male inmate in a maximum-security institution for a year ($150,867 for a woman). Medium- and minimum-security inmates cost more than $70,000 a year.":
http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes2006/realitycheck/crimetime.html

 

[gaspasser]

Thanks for the added info.  My keyboard took a burp and ceased working so I had to end my last post in mid thought.
Taxpayers are already hit and complaining about government squandring, mishandling of funds et al.  Why hasn't anyone really taken offense to these costs?  I wonder if COs make that much money to protect these individuals ??
All I'm saying is...what do we do with criminals who cannot or will not rehabilitate? 
Somewhere, this thread got off track of the original post, obviously, people are taking a real offense at hearing the serial killers and rapists are sueing to collect old age pension.  Has the government gone astray over the rights of the individual??  And forgotten the rights of the masses??

My  :2c: again.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Respectfully, considering he murdered 11 children can we publically wish he gets the death penalty instead of wasting tax dollars?

Why don't you take Technoviking's lead and present an argument for the death penalty in the first place.

What matters here is that we do not need members of the public or the media coming here to find a thread where immature members of the CF (or those who were, or wish to be) start trying to come up with new and interesting ways to say "kill him" when it's not part of Canadian law to do so at this time.  The potential cost to perception of the views of CF members isn't worth the staff time to sort out a thread composed of hatred and immaturity which depart from reasoned debate.  At a time when there are enough on-line comments about insensitivity and cruelty by CF members involved in certain news stories, do we really need to perpetuate those misconceptions among the public? Is that what you, or anyone here, wants to do for the CF's image?

While you prepare your case, don't forget to address these situations.

 

[57Chevy]

BYT Driver........Nobody has to fight to get their old age pension.
What gets me is the fact that everybody has to spend their money to live by, Whereas these guys
just sack it all away, get free room and board, and are able to earn more money for mediocre jobs that they are entitled to do. These guys can save more money than the majority of people can put aside in their lifetime.  I consider that to be quite unlawful to the law abiding citizens.
Worse, is the fact that they are telling the government, "if you cut my benifits, I will sue you".
I wonder if their victims next of kin are able to sue these guys for compensation of their losses.
That would be one story I would follow very closely.

 

[gaspasser]

57, I stand by that!
The government should give these guys thier old age pension and then sign it over to the victims families.  My mom had a hard time getting her old age pension and gets rightly upset when a refugee claimant is handed more than that and lives here free.  (my info could be off some) And it really urks me that the prisoners get to save it somehow, whereas normal citizens need/have to spend it on, oh let's say, living.

Mike, yes HERE we must uphold the ethos and principles of the CF; which is only a little slice of the Canadian Society.  It just happens that HERE and in the CF we have a concentration of people who are upstanding citizens who get peeved at wrongdoers, evildoers and those who aid in further corrupting the system and step on the little guy. 

I agree that some people have been wrongly convicted and we as a society must make amends for destroying their lives as they knew it.  BUT, in certain cases where it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of multiply heinous crimes and there is no chance for rehabilitation, something must be done to free society of thier ilk.  I'm not up on my CCC and sentencing, but does Canada imposed chemical castration on sex criminals???

That being said, someone once said, and I paraphrase because I'm not sure of the exact wording, 'All that evil needs to perpetuate is for good men to do nothing'

And that's my opinion. 

 

[Michael OLeary]

Mike, yes HERE we must uphold the ethos and principles of the CF; which is only a little slice of the Canadian Society.  It just happens that HERE and in the CF we have a concentration of people who are upstanding citizens who get peeved at wrongdoers, evildoers and those who aid in further corrupting the system and step on the little guy. 

Which does not justify allowing Internet lynching parties.  If you feel that your conscience would be eased by posting such comments, I am certain you can find somewhere else to do it.  Here, we can try and expect people to debate the facts and get beyond unnecessary emotional outbursts.

I agree that some people have been wrongly convicted and we as a society must make amends for destroying their lives as they knew it.  BUT, in certain cases where it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of multiply heinous crimes and there is no chance for rehabilitation, something must be done to free society of thier ilk.  I'm not up on my CCC and sentencing, but does Canada imposed chemical castration on sex criminals???

Every one of those wrongly convicted individuals was convicted because the judge/jury felt that the case was proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[57Chevy]

I could add to my last post......Someone should take it upon themselves to make a class action
lawsuit and sue the whole lot, right across the board, for the breach of all the victims' basic
constitutional rights.
I did a short stint working in a federal prison and they are very well treated no matter the crime
they committed. And I can say that hard working Canadians pay good money for the "club med"
type vacations...........prisoners live it year round. It really stinks.

 

[mariomike]

I did a short stint working in a federal prison and they are very well treated no matter the crime
they committed. And I can say that hard working Canadians pay good money for the "club med"
type vacations...........prisoners live it year round. It really stinks.

"Killer bakes cookies at 'Club Fed': 'It's minimum security, maximum luxury,' says son of man shot dead by inmate seeking early parole under 'faint hope' clause":
http://www.thestar.com/article/172315

More on that:
"Our Prison Policies Suck": 
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/91624/post-905360.html#msg905360

I'm not up on my CCC and sentencing, but does Canada imposed chemical castration on sex criminals???

2006:
"Chemical castration of pedophile upheld by Federal Court:
OTTAWA - A convicted pedophile ordered to take medication to control his sexual urges has lost his bid to have "chemical castration" declared unconstitutional.":
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=3bea636f-3999-4b90-9997-6b5436f608ec&k=72044

 

[stealthylizard]

If said criminal has a family outside prison, I can understand OAS and pension going to them, but not the convict.

 

[ModlrMike]

Here's a thought... pay them the pensions, then charge them an equivalent amount for their keep. I don't think they have a constitutional right not to pay for the cost of their incarceration.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Why don't you take Technoviking's lead and present an argument for the death penalty in the first place.

What matters here is that we do not need members of the public or the media coming here to find a thread where immature members of the CF (or those who were, or wish to be) start trying to come up with new and interesting ways to say "kill him"when it's not part of Canadian law to do so at this time.  The potential cost to perception of the views of CF members isn't worth the staff time to sort out a thread composed of hatred and immaturity which depart from reasoned debate.  At a time when there are enough on-line comments about insensitivity and cruelty by CF members involved in certain news stories, do we really need to perpetuate those misconceptions among the public? Is that what you, or anyone here, wants to do for the CF's image?

Good point.
I see it as having to decide between being honest in an environment of my peers and sugar coating my answer so some media type doesn't wander in and steal a comment from me.
I know what you mean where people, perhaps with no idea how to express their anger over said lack of humanity, come up with creative, grotesque, graphic, inappropriate ways to punish them.  It's people venting their anger but yes the media loves that and would run with it.

Personally, I fight with myself over the death penalty. In a clear cut case of someone being guilty I think they should be put to death as cheaply as possible. Even as humane as possible, giving them a moments pain as "punishment" doesn't really matter, their gonna die anyways. I think they should then have their organs removed and given to other human beings.  In the case of this man he killed 11 children, how many kids at CHEO are waiting for organs? If the organs are too big for kids then how many parents are waiting for organs who have children who may loose a parent?

I'm not sure if that makes me a monster for suggesting that, I don't think it does.
What about people who are wrongly convicted? I think about that a lot when deciding if I am pro-capital punishment or not. I know I wouldn't want to be put to death for something I didn't do. And I am sure people HAVE been before too.  On the flip side how many people starve every day in our streets compared to how many inmates are sitting on death row who will be there the rest of their life, costing Canada $96'000 a year per person x 30, 40, 50 years?  It's a good debate.


I know where you're coming from about making comments that can discredit the CF. I agree. Graphic ways to kill someone, even if they are monsters, is bad PR. (I wouldn't let one of my soldiers talk about that in public thats for sure)
Thinking about it though, should we really be talking about politics here in the open?  Or what we think of our allies Generals, or how the CF decides to spend money? (Tacvest bed crapping).  That's probably getting off track though.

 

[GAP]

Thinking about it though, should we really be talking about politics here in the open?  Or what we think of our allies Generals, or how the CF decides to spend money? (Tacvest bed crapping)

Why in the world not....This is a free country, and yes CF members have an opinion AND a vote.

 

[aesop081]

Why in the world not....This is a free country, and yes CF members have an opinion AND a vote.

I think that was exactly his point..........