Enclave posted...
My point is that the legislation that put the mandatory minimum into place was completely pointless legislation that was only done purely to make Stephen Harper and the Conservatives look tough on crime for passing legislation that doesn't actually accomplish anything.
This is super typical legislation you see come out of "tough on crime" conservatives the world over.
There's absolutely no need for a mandatory minimum here, sentencing guidelines and judge discretion already solves the non-existent problem.
Poilievre accidentally gets to this point when he said:
"Their conclusion actually should have been that the sentence should have been met much more than the one year and nine months that the two dirtbag offenders received"
Putting aside the fact that the court can only consider the questions put before it, ruling the mandatory minimum constitutional wouldn't have done anything here because one year and nine months is
more than a year
.
If you think one year and nine months wasn't long enough then the solution is clearly tougher sentencing guidelines but Poilievre wants to act the tough guy in front of the media so he immediately promises to overturn this ruling despite it not being the problem.