C

An excellent find Molson!

Here we see that the RCMP and regulators are making an effort, but indirectly and without coming right out and saying it, there is huge trouble with our legislation in this country. The way laws are written, some very confusing and others contradictory after you wade through pages of amendments and subsections not to mention the complications one finds when he is told that another set of laws has priority over the laws he is reading. Our current legislation and founding laws are now so complex, that some lawyers have trouble with them.

In a move over the years to make laws stick in court and charges, the definitions along with the ands,ifs, and buts, has made a mockery of our legal system where many laws can be maipulated and lets crooks walk. This frustrates the RCMP as well as other officers of the law, where they will have substantial evidence in a case, only to see it tore up on a technicality or thrown out by a judge because of their presentation. It takes away the incentive of these officers to protect the public, where they say, "whats the use?". If one were to take an outside of the box look at the judicial system, its so easy to identify the problems, but they are rarely fixed, and as new problems arise, the roots get further from being examined. IMO, in a case such as this, it would be easier to throw all laws out the window and start anew with simple ones and make the consequence of crime a costly one, not what it is now, a cost of doing business.

Give these crime units the power to have jurisdiction over all aspects of our society and the power to levy heavy jail terms to deter corruption. Fines are no good, they are rarely paid and in many incidents the corrupt only offend again, taking advantage of someone else. And if some fines are paid, the amount collected rarely sees the victims, so in a sense, the victim is robbed again by the judicial system, by keeping the fines to fund a judicial system that isn,t very effective at protecting citizens in some areas. Perhaps jail terms should be determined on the value of crime caused to victims? When a sentence is handed down, don,t state the amount of time to be served, base it on how long a corrupt one will work in prison to repay these funds to its victims. If a corrupt one caused 2 million dollars damage to victims, if the corrupt one has 1 million in his pocket, take the one million and sentence him to prision until he makes 1 million plus jail costs, then release him, dont have 5 and 10 year sentences and the victim never gets a cent.

just some thoughts and opinions.