Should people be extradited

[Ricky]

There is a case going on here about the Canadian born Marc Emery, who sold marijuana seeds by mail. The problem is that He started to sell them also to people in America. So now the US is trying to get the Canadian Government to extradite him to the US, so he can serve time there (its not against the law to sell them here). Which will most likely mean a life sentence.

At the moment nothing has been fully decided, but its something that is taking months to decide.

Here is a video that talks about it and has some back story, if you are only interested in the case start at minute 2:58



btw if you have the chance to watch the whole documentary, its called "prince of pot " by CBC, Its very interesting.

[zeromerc]

I am of the opinion that extradition should only be practiced in case of a capitol crime for the country it was commited in and kidnapping.

I have not seen this video but if he is living in that country and abiding by their laws then no. It should not happen.

I will watch the video later but I doubt my opinion will change.

[noobsensei]

Should "people" be extradited? Uhh well it depends on the crime and the country, obviously.
Should this particular guy be extradited? No.

[Deleted]

Let me start by saying I had never heard of extradition before. So if I say something which is wrong, then correct me.

Now, I think it is ridiculous. Extradition basically says: One of your residents made us a thing that you are completely ok with, but we don't like it. Send him to us so we can punish him for what you let him do.

While this concept may be good for countries in which laws are not mature yet, most developed countries have a mature system of laws. If one developed country was to suddenly switch laws with another, very few things would happen, and both countries would continue to work.

To conclude, extradition in developed countries doesn't make sense to me, although I would understand why it was done in more extreme cases (like murder, for example).

[noobsensei]

Mar 18, 2010 9:43:31 GMT -5 @ptmb said:

Let me start by saying I had never heard of extradition before. So if I say something which is wrong, then correct me.

Now, I think it is ridiculous. Extradition basically says: One of your residents made us a thing that you are completely ok with, but we don't like it. Send him to us so we can punish him for what you let him do.

While this concept may be good for countries in which laws are not mature yet, most developed countries have a mature system of laws. If one developed country was to suddenly switch laws with another, very few things would happen, and both countries would continue to work.

To conclude, extradition in developed countries doesn't make sense to me, although I would understand why it was done in more extreme cases (like murder, for example).

That is not how extradition works in most cases. Usually, it's used to send a person back to the country where they committed the crime. So for example, if someone commits murder in Portugal, then flees the country and comes to the United States before the Portuguese police can arrest him. The Portuguese find out where he's hiding and ask the US police to arrest him and send him back to Portugal.

But I agree with you that it's ridiculous in this case. The guy was in Canada when he committed these crimes. The fact that he used the US Mail is not a good enough reason to extradite him in this case. It doesn't make sense to extradite people to a country where they might have never even travelled.

[zAkAtAk]

Mar 18, 2010 23:05:23 GMT -5 noobsensei said:

That is not how extradition works in most cases. Usually, it's used to send a person back to the country where they committed the crime. So for example, if someone commits murder in Portugal, then flees the country and comes to the United States before the Portuguese police can arrest him. The Portuguese find out where he's hiding and ask the US police to arrest him and send him back to Portugal.

But I agree with you that it's ridiculous in this case. The guy was in Canada when he committed these crimes. The fact that he used the US Mail is not a good enough reason to extradite him in this case. It doesn't make sense to extradite people to a country where they might have never even travelled.

Pretty much what I was going to post. Extradiction usually occurs when one flees a country from which they have commited a serious crime.

[The Doctor]

No one should ever be extradited to a country with inhumane treatment of prisoners, or capital punishment, They should never be extradited to a country with questionable justice systems. That means no extradition to third world countries, USA or Japan. Otherwise I dont see a problem with it.

The only problem with that reasoning is that if one were to commit a crime in USA, like the example, you would be able to go free just because you did it in an other country. In which case laws that prohibit citizens from breaking national law on foreign territories should be used, I dont know how many countries that have these kind of laws, but I know for a fact that Sweden does, and I think that UK have similar laws.