Every article I have ever read by Canadian journalist Heather Mallick has been distinctively “progressive.” While I am certain she in no way now considers herself a “conservative,” I was nevertheless shocked by the opinion she expressed in her Toronto Star piece of July 3 in which she actually defended the previously mentioned Harper government’s 2011 edict on mandatory minimum sentences.
While convicted murderers are automatically confined to prison for 25 years, the Conservatives decreed that each additional murder after the first should entail another 25, meaning that mass murderers would spend the rest of their lives behind bars with no chance of parole. In late May, Canada’s Supreme Court ruled that consecutive punishments “bring the administration of justice into disrepute” and are “cruel and unusual by nature.”
Mallick is appalled. Implying that she once was such, she declares “I am no longer a crime apologist.” “Victims matter,” she says! What she refers to as the “heartless court” has given Alek Minassian, who killed 11 innocent people with his van in 2018, the right to apply for bail while still a relatively young man. While there is no guarantee they will be successful, 23 multiple murderers may now escape what were formerly lifelong sentences due to the “compassion” of our Supreme Court.
The piece of human excrement cited by Mallick who most appalled me was Derek Saretzky of Alberta who in 2015 killed three females, one his 2 year old daughter Hailey whom he strangled, dismembered and cannibalized, before burning her remains! Is my disgust with this animal what the Left customarily refers to as an expression “hatred” or a simple matter of justifiable, moral outrage?
In her final sentence Mallick responds to the Supreme Court Decision with the following: “As individuals, we are of little worth.” Her entire article implicitly invokes both the Rights and Moral Obligations of the Individual which are cornerstones of the “conservative” ethos, while showing little sympathy for those who, for whatever socio/economic reason, violate both. As I have said, this does not make her a “conservative,” but it is certainly a step in the right direction!