The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

Page GEORGETOWN HERAL THURSDAY FEB What OConnor Said in Death Penally Debate Hi OConnor Hal ton Mr Speaker many people Including many members of this House have spoken many word- on this molt personal of subjects I rise knowing that few if any members are likely to alter their thinking as result of my remarks or other remarks made during the course of this debate I also recognize that my views probably do not coincide with a significant number perhaps even a majority of the people In my riding With respect to the question whether members of this Rouse should vote according to their conscience accord lng to their own wishes or according to the wishes the dictates as expressed if they are able to be expressed adequately of the people In their ridings the argument was perhaps put best by the right hon member for Prince Albert Mr when he spoke in this chamber yesterday If I might be permitted to quote briefly from his remarks a reported at page of Hansard he said How can you take a stand In your in favour of something and than vol the other On a vote everyone 11 his consclanca be his guide A little further on as reported at page 78S he said Each one of you in this Houxe has the ty of voting according to your for no I cannot make the argument any better than that How ever I should like to assure my constituents through you Mr Speaker that I have read every letter telegram brief and petition they have taken the time to send me I have replied to each one individually There was no form letter nor evading of the question I have unequivocally stated my views to them whether we have agreed or disagreed The matter before us is one of primary importance and interest to every Canadian The question of taking human life either by the premeditated cold blooded act of one person in the name of revenge passion or greed or by the equality premeditated coldblooded act of all of us in the name of Justice In my judgment Is decidedly wrong in each case I emphasize that I feel it is wrong to eliminate a human life in either of these circumstances In fact there is no Justification save self defence for the taking of a human life under any circumstances Although I feel it should be incumbent upon those pro pounding the use of capital punishment to Justify its necessity the onus ail too often falls on the abolitionist to justify his stand So be it Mr Speaker for I feel that the abolitionist stand can be supported In this debate we must ask ourselves whether our desire to either retain or abolish the death penalty is based more on objective reasons or more on emotional instinctive reactions No doubt because the matter is of such an emotional nature in which we are all able to see ourselves as victims as friends or relatives of victims or even as murderers it is difficult to view the matter totally objectively But as lawmakers it is our duty to act reason ably and rationally as far as possible eliminating deci based or feeling or basic human instincts One of the questions most frequently put to me during this argument asks me to imagine the brutal staying of a loved one usually a daughter by a rupiit murderer They try to make it as heinous and as gorcy as possible They then ask How would you feel then Under those to rices I would probably wont to see the monster suffer a slow agonizing death During the agony anguish and anger immediately following the event I might well attempt to carry out that slow agonizing execution myself But is this a valid argument for capital punish Hardly We all feel revenge even hatred at times But these are debasing human emotions It is unbecoming of us either individually or collectively to experience them let alone use them as a basis for supporting the argument in favour of taking a human life A Park for Retired People This basic argument that of need to avenge a put in many forma We are told that if a man takes a life he gives up the right to his own life It is put In the form of the eye for an eye cliche from the Old Testament But do these arguments not really beg a further question The very largelooming query Why still re mains unan swered Why an eye for an eye and why a life for life Is It because the Bible says so as some would argue Surely the God and Christ whose life is portrayed in the Bible as one of love of forgiveness and mercy not now demand ing a life for a life and an eye for an eye Then there la the argument that society must be protect ed from the totally immoral brute without a conscience who would kill anyone near him for any reason I admit that this argument comes a little closer to a reasonable approach as opposed to an emotional one for the reten tion of capital punishment Certainly in accepting the protection argument we as a society are admitting defeat We are admitting our ina bility to deal with those among us who foil to maintain accepted standards of social behaviour Imprisonment in solitary confinement if necessary is sufficient protection Such an approach permits the possibility admittedly remote in most cases of the rehabilitation of the murder Of course under a system of total abolition there must be increasing emphasis on the reform aspects of our penal reform system No one should be granted his freedom until it can be determined that he is no more likely to commit a further serious crime than the average law abiding citizen Until psychiatric and social analytical methods become sufficiently sophisticated to make such a determination with absolute surety that Is important a man should remain behind bars In addition there arc Indications from recent studies that when hanging is the Inevitable outcome of conviction for murder many juries are reluctant to convict Thus If protection is the desired result we see that the opposite effect is sometimes achieved Perhaps the most slve and certainly the most often employed argument for re mention is that capital punishment acts as a deterrent dissuading others in society who may be inclined to murder someone Statistics are freely bandied about on both sides more often irresponsibly than objectively Adherents of both views fall Into the fallacy of predetermining their position and then going about gathering statistical support for it usually ignoring unfavourable information The reverse theimpencal approach study leading o conclusion obvi ously should be employed We have heard entire speeches dealing with statistics I hove read and analysed as many studies as most members of this House The important word in that last sentence Is analysed It is intellectually dishonest to seek support from cold figures without a close analysis of their true meaning For example the Statistics Canada figures for murder used liberally by retentlonlats show that since the partial ban in Canada has suffered a significant Increase in murders Ergo some would conclude the threat of the death penalty prior to 1967 deterred murderers This Is a lot of nonsense when you examine closely the figures in question An analysis of these increases which Includes the disposition of the cases in the courts and which takes into account that one man often kills many victims at once as many as in the boarding house arson case in Quebecindicates that the rise in premeditated murders which is the only type that could possibly be deterred by the fear of death is insignificant The overwhelming tisttcal evidence both in Canada and around the world concludes that murderers pay little attention to the self harming consequences of their acts If there does exist some fear of apprehension it results only in more The definitive study in this area which has been quoted on many occasions is that carried out Professor of University His study shows that the incidence of crimes for which the penalty has not been changed has Increased approximately the same as the murder rate has increased In fact the increase in murders is slightly less than the increase In other crimes of violence for which the penalty has remained unchanged If the death penalty were an effective deterrent would have Increased relatively more than other crimes during any period of abolition and particularly in the period of partial abolition over the past five years In many provinces such as Nova Scotia In 1668 Ontario from 1668 through 1970 Saskatchewan In 19G8 and Alber ta in 1068 homicide rates actually declined after cap tal punishment was legally suspended I suggest these facts speak eloquently against a link between the tempo rary suspension of and the overall increase in homicide in Canada It can be argued that the rise In crime general Is related to the total social situation to an increase in population and to changing moral attitudes but not to the application or non application of a particular penalty as studies have clearly indicated I have spoken Mr Speaker of the usual reasons for retention and have I suggest effectively rebutted them There are modifications of each of these three or four basic arguments I have yet to hear an approach of any persuasive value other than those discussed I spoke at the outset about the onus being on the proponents of the death penalty for establishing its necessity It should suf then for abolitionists to rebut the case and then rest their defence However there are very posi live arguments for abolition which can be effectively The taking of a human life for any reason by anyone Is a debasing despairing reaction which admits of the bllity of the killer including society to cope with the behaviour of the killer In dealing with a social deviate society should aim to protect itself from him and to rehabilitate him and not to perpetrate further deviation under the guise of legal murder Obviously that second objective rehabilitation Is entirely out of the question if we employ capital punishment The surest way to sure genuine respect for human life among Canadians is for the state to respect it Even though a murderer may have no respect or reverence for human life if we in turn kill him we exhibit no more reverence than he does Taking his life does not help his victim or his victims friends or relatives it brutalizes them and reduces them and all society to the level of the murderer All of what I have said has been more eloquently put by others in this chamber Suffice it to say that I am unequivocally opposed to the use of the death penalty Given this position we abolitionists face the conundrum posed by the governments motion before the By voting either for or against it we vote to retain the death penalty albeit to differing extents What is the answer The answer is not to abstain from voting That would be an abdication of our responsibility to our electorate The answer is to choose the lesser of the evils to vote for the continuation of the partial ban for a further five years at this stage of the proceedings In doing so I urge all hon members to seriously consider the motion to be put in committee which will totally abolish the death penalty and replace it with a mandatory 25year Jail term Such a course would surely satisfy those who base their on the requirement to protect society from the murderer I would urge alt members before voting to approach the question in a reasonable analytical fashion divorced from emotional considerations as far as possible When we allow basic human instincts and emotions to cloud our Judgment we make mistakes On this issue Mr Speaker we cannot afford to make a mistake Capital Punishment What the People are Saying A controversial issue In the news these days is the validity of punishment The trial abolition or capital punishment began December to cover a five year period The death penalty was reserved for the deliberate slaying of police or prison guards while per forming regular duties In there were in Canada In 1068 the figure rose to and then 337 in 1969 In 1971 thefigure soared to providing those in favour of capital punishment with ample ammunition This week The Herald con ducted a of Georgetown area residents to find out what public reaction was to capital punishment I don I believe it an eye for an eye Just right Mrs Main Street South I m opposed o hanging I dont think It helps in any way Mrs Richard Henry Street In light of whats happening In Toronto the recent murders of policemen maybe we should have punishment Mrs Ken Henry Street dont think it is the right punishment Mrs B Lear mo nth 80 Main Street South killed for it Mr Bernard Armstrong 16 dock Street I dont think the death penally docs anything The criminal really suffer for Ihe crime Sure he has a I Know I Can Make It Work Says Leo Wolf Husband Wife Team Duplicate Winners moment of tear before the sentence is carried out but then Its all over Karrle Williams IG7 Ray I awn Mm Tor It thats all III say Doug Marshall Strecl If a person goes out to commit murder he should receive a Just punishment for it The parole lets this criminal element back into the society but when they arc kept In prison we pay for it Betty Ban ton Stevens Crescent I believe in capital punish ment in certain instances like rope premeditated murder not for coses that The parole system is a mistake if a man is given a sentence he should serve it Mrs Weber I believe if you take a life you should forfeit yours but only If the crime was premeditated I dont sec why the police get special privileges in this matter Glen Main Street North I against it I dont think one human life should be taken for another Teresa Diamond Maclntyre Crescent The Herald invites your opinion on capital punish men I to The Mail Bag or phone in a concise comment to Started Business Downtown In Georgetown lost one of Its oldest businessmen when Henry of 14 George St died in Georgetown hospital February Mr established a shoe and repair business here In 1938 and had been a downtown merchant ever since His first store was located In the McGlbbon block and for some years he had operated on Main Street beside Silvers Depart ment Store A native of Lezajak Poland he was the son of Ignatlue Sienko and Joseph a and he served as a lieutenant with the Polish cavalry In World War I He came to Canada In and lived In New York Toronto and Winnipeg before he came to Georgetown He was a member of Calvary Baptist Church Brampton Gideons In ternational and Georgetown Horticultural Society His first wife Monica died in He remarried in 1957 and leaves his wife Jennie Fogg son Richard of Gloxinia Crescent Agincourt and daughter Irene Mrs Robert Olllvicr Henry Street six grandchildren Susan Sharon Stephanie and Stephen Sienko Janet and Maureen and a sister Victoria Sienko in Poland He was predeceased by another sister Mrs Kordal of New York City Rev Gary Simpson of Calvary Church conducted the funeral service at the Jones Funeral Home with interment in Greenwood Cemetery Pallbearers were fellow Gideons Howard Vlckery Paul Holm an Philip Bill Bailey Alfred Douglas and Ccc Roberts byZUHAIRKASHMERI Even visits over four years to the Chinguacousy planning board only to be told his application cannot be traced have not deterred the visionary Leo Wolf of Terra Cotta Last week Mr Wolf took this reporter on a slippery walk through his icecovered Wolf Park and described what he had planned there for which he wanted permission from the planning board A mobilehome park for the retired and semi retired spread out over his 36 acres which at present houses the Wolf Park with its campsites trout fishing pond swimming pools and picnic grounds Initially he wants to use about 10 acres to house about trailers SMALL GARDENS His plan is to create lots for each trailer about 100 feet by 40 feet where he will build a carport concrete slabs for the trailer and let the retired have their own small vegetable gardens This is not fixed he said am subject to township requirements and will even sell these lots if they want There are many retired people said Mr Wolf who would like to live in the country mobile home with their own small garden and so on He intends to provide hydro and water for each trailer and have two septic tanks for every two trailers He would also like to build a tall TV tower with cables running to each trailer Contrary to what people might say Mr Wolf is not talking out of his hat He was the one who owned and looked after the present Terra Cotta Park for six years from and built it up before ft was bought by the conservation authority He was the one who Jacked up the bell post in Belfountain which Mas tilting and ready to be done away with Mr Wolf selfemployed In his own construction business dug below ihe belt pillar and found it was resting on rocks at one I removed those rocks poured concrete below and jacked it up straight he said Ive got visions and plans for this mobile home park he explained enthusiastically And I know I can make it work Its only that I cant get up and speak before a lot of people at the planning board APPLICATION MISSING At a meeting or the planning board last Monday which was his 14th visit Mr Wolf was told his reioning application for the It was wondered by many how his item could be on the meeting so many times with a regular file on his proposal and no application Following this he was asked to make a new application and given a new set of forms to fill In about two weeks and before the next planning board meeting MR Wolf intends to apply again Several years ago when he made his first application a had been filed against is idea and it was rejected by the planning board Their main worry was their properties would be devalued he said But that cant be because our park does not border on anybody s home and if trailers are put in you wouldnt be able to see them from the main road The park is situated off the Sixth Line West or Terra Park Road and has quite a few hillocks to obstruct vision from the road FLOOD OF CHILDREN Mr Wolf dealt with the other objections one by one The foremost has been a mass exodus of children flooding the Terra Cotta Cheltenham schools Said Mr Wolf f I restrict the park to retired and semi retired and the latter arc normally those whose kids are grown up and married with perhaps one kid left where Is the flood of children Noise It is felt that this would generate a lot of noise in the countryside noise at times due to my park But nobody objects Then there will be no question of noise people will be living there He went on to add he had enough water to take care of all the trailers and would build a reservoir for water supply Lastly he main objection of most Terra Cotta and Cheltenham residents put forward at every kind of plan or development thought of tor he area It will destroy the beauty and peace of the rural character FOR DPR PEOPLE Said Mr and Mrs Wolf as If in a Joint statement I don t sec why retired people should not enjoy Terra as much as tourists coming here and littering up the place And I sec no reason why older people should not have the beauty of rural character around them For Mr Wolf park for old people is like doing a service He Intends to pursue his plans And if he can talk before an audience he says he will get a lawyer to talk for him But pursue he will Mr and Mrs Ron Reynolds were winners in a special competition last week at Georgetown duplicate bridge club They were one of teams playing in a mixed pairs tournament Bart Fisher and Phyllis Campbell were 2nd Adams and Terry Hansford and Mrs Arthur Kwci and Mr and Mrs Grant Real Following Mr and Mrs Reynolds in the North South group were the Adams Hansford team the Kwels Naylor with Muriel and Joe Maurer and Gloria and Ian Coats The CampbellFisher pair headed hast West with the Reals aid Cam Sinclair and Barbara Wood 3rd and a tie for between Marguerite Taylor and Paul Ron and Enid Ashworlh In beginners section Mr and Mrs Hoy were first and Mr and Mrs Irvine Hinds 2nd Doctor Explains Hypnosis to Club Boyd was the guest speaker at he Business and Professional Womens Club an Monday night at Hunters Inn His topic was hypnosis and Its use in modern day medicine Very few at the meeting had any Idea how helpful and far reaching this type of treatment could be Mrs Audrey Scott Introduced and Mrs Sharon MacMlllan expressed the thanks of the meeting and presented him with a gift Ihe club had been selling raffle tickets on a homemade quilt hairdo and set and four hours of free babysitting the doctor made the draw and Mrs Deforest Acton won the first prlie Mrs Margaret Fhnn Brampton second with Joan House winning the third prize In the business portion of the meeting the provincial con fcrenccinSauit Sic Marie May was discussed Several members are planning to at lend It was reported that in the near future the club will tour thennler Institute Mrs Daisy Horns reported on the meetings that had been held by liicllllics SAVE CALL Thrifty A DAY And Up WEEKEND PANEL TRUCKS AUTHORIZED AGENT Great Outdoors Texaco 184 Guelph St 8775087 We take the edge off asking start with las set something straight Were in the moncj Hum ncss We invest money to make money so that can lend money Its that simple But all of it isnt worth a plugged nickel if one doesnt use it Which brings us to you And jou to us if youre thinking about a loan Now the person II see at our place isnt some kind of financial ogre He won try input stare you down or check the heels on your shoes But most important hi wants to give jou that loan Thats one of the ways fie makes his money So you just tell mm how much how much you can afford each month then up to him to work out And without gcinngyci head And thats it No red tape No edge about asking sec we feel two heads are better than one figure if two people set out to achieve goals they might cornea little easier goals and our goals So with a Commerce loan you get more than You get a working partnership for achieving goals And that gives us still another edge over other banks Besides the edge asking in the first place for retired peopli as been before in EX a hoard for four years am intends to on for his park saying If hey don allow me now tailing plan premature the big eloper is what I I allowed to llltttl In Mrs will Ihe tin incmbirs attended Club You and the Commerce Together were both stronger