Child killer Olson reaps the benefits

[auntAgonist]

Every month, the most notorious child killer in the country gets $1,169.47 transferred to a trust account in his name.

Though he will likely die in jail, where he has no living expenses and where the average annual taxpayer cost of keeping a maximum security male incarcerated was $121,294 in 2006-07 — the most recent statistics on Corrections Canada’s website — Clifford Robert Olson is a Canadian, over 65 — he turned 70 on New Year’s Day — and eligible for a pension.

As a federal inmate who has spent much of his time in segregation since he was admitted into federal custody Feb. 17, 1982, Olson likely has little income to claim, which explains why he was approved for not only the Old Age Security (OAS) pension and the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS), but the maximum monthly benefits for both — $516.96 and $652.51 respectively.

It is a reminder that, criminal as he may be, having killed at least 11 boys and girls, Olson still has his rights as a Canadian, whether you agree with it or not.

Kevin Gaudet does not.

“I think that OAS is very similar to a welfare program and I don’t think prisoners should be getting welfare under any name so no, he shouldn’t be getting this kind of cash,” said Gaudet, federal and Ontario director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. “Cut him off.”




More...




http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2010/03/21/13305371-qmi.html

[daleo]

1. He can't spend the money anyway

The trouble with taking OAS away from this convicted killer is that it could open the door to using pension as a form of social control in much less obvious cases. I could easily see Conservatives wanting to take pensions away from persons convicted of any crime. Eventually they could see pensions as something that could be confiscated to repay bad debts, fines, etc.

The way things are going, OAS might eventually cover student loans.

[Posteritatis]

2. Yep, I can see that happening too

Obviously there's going to be exceptions to the idea of rights being for everyone - the very concept of prison is such an exception after all - but I'd love for the list of those to be as close to zero as possible. It's just so very easy at times to call for adding extra layers on top of people for being in prison or something, just because it feels good, but I really don't like the road that could potentially go down.

[offog]

7. I agree with daleo.

"The way things are going, OAS might eventually cover student loans."

I've got an outstanding student loan I'll never be able to repay because I'm disabled and living in poverty. Retirement is my light at the end of the tunnel. I did go through bankruptcy some years back, but have still had collection agents bug me.

We shouldn't make big drastic changes to laws/policies based on one or two sensational cases. Trying to correct one wrong can lead to very big wrongs for a whole lot of people. Remember the law of unintended consequences, and there are always untended consequences to everything.

[shockedcanadian]

8. I am so glad I read this posting...

As the posting here brought a variety of reason beyond what I stated to this person.

I just had a debate with someone on this subject and I was second guessing my position afterwards when I read what this man had done; it angered me to think of a serial child murderer that I actually got a headache. I don't know if this man would make it to trial if I knew he killed my child, it is obviously a strong emotion illiciting crime.

Now I admitted that I didn't know much about this guy (still don't), but I defended his right to OAS. Basically my argument was that if he did the crime and was found guilty, than the court should sentence him and hold him to the punishment. If he is entitled to OAS he is entitled, you don;t take away other more costly tax supported benefits such as healthcare because one is a convicted criminal, OAS is no different. I have to admit, I wouldn't judge anyone for NOT wanting him to receive his OAS, as the horror of what he has been convicted of does not leave most with much pity...if any.

Not that it matters, but there was a time I was a strong believer in the death penalty, but with so many wrongful convictions I have had a change of heart. Also, Daleo makes a good point, once you start deprieving convicted criminals of one entitlement, the ball will start rolling. Then it will be denial of entitlements for anything imaginable, as long as you are not in favour with that particular regime. The less arbitrary a law is, the better I feel.

[HeresyLives]

3. How is he any different than any other lifer?

[daleo]

4. There is particular revulsion against a multiple child killer

But public policy shouldn't be based on cherry picking highly exceptional cases, and generalizing from them. It results in bad law.

[HeresyLives]

5. Well we have several of them.

Paul Bernardo will get a pension one day.

Thing of it is, it won't do them any good.

[JBoy]

6. When they sentence these lifers they need a monetary penalty as well

Or a fat outstanding civil claim that gets the proceeds of their estate after they're dead.

[shockedcanadian]

9. Just as I post this...

I read a link that makes a lot of sense in support of cutting them off.

http://www.torontosun.com/news/columnists/greg_weston/2010/03/24/13348051-qmi.html