Clear Full Forecast

The Written Word: Rafe Mair, Oct.16th

By Rafe Mair

Monday, October 16, 2006 03:44 AM

    

I’m getting a bit tired of the Harper government – I’d be a hell of a lot more annoyed at them but the ongoing gaffes of Liberal leadership hopefuls always seem to distract me.
The latest pronouncement by the PM that three time offenders – and he specifically mentioned sex offenders – will go to jail permanently. A sort of three strikes and you’re out system. Amongst other things he doesn’t tell us what sort of offences he’s talking about. A little old lady or a little old man who shop lifts three times is removed from the seniors home and sent to the slammer?
The notion is that while long time jail sentences will cost more in incarceration expenses, they’ll save the taxpayers money in the long run. This is what I especially detest about the “hang ‘ em high folks, all of whom seem to be Tories. They offer no evidence for their policy but rely upon the gut feeling of many Canadians that “something” must be done.
Let’s examine what evidence we have. In the United States – California has a “three strike policy” - they have the largest per person incarceration in the world and still have the world’s highest crime rate. Why is this? Because too little is done to rehabilitate. It is overwhelming testimony that there is more to fighting crime than jails and long sentences. Unfortunately, jail sells while rehabilitation is seen to be mollycoddling.
Secondly, on the question of deterrence one need only look back to the days in London where, while they were publicly hanging a pickpocket, his colleagues, the thieves and cutpurses, were working the crowd.
On the question of sex offenders, Harper is not only out to lunch he’s begging for more trouble for innocent Canadians. Most pedophiles are very sick people. And they should be treated as such. There is a procedure in place now which only requires a little tweaking. After a pedophile is convicted the judge, upon being satisfied that the convicted person is a pedophile SHALL find him Not Guilty but order him detained at Her Majesty’s pleasure. This means that the offender gets treatment but can only be released after an exhaustive process. We do this now for offenders deemed unable to form the intent to commit the crime they’re charged with. It’s no jump at all to place pedophiles in the same category and deal with them accordingly.
This requires thought and taking what at the outset would be politically awkward decisions.
As long as the Tories appeal to the bottom feeders of the nation we will never come to intelligent methods for dealing with crime.

Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

Its all talk so get over it.....
I'm liking the Ignative and Kennedy candidates as the forerunners over the Bob Rea underhanded campaign for liberal leadership.
To suggest that putting someone in Jail will not decrease crime is absurd. The person who is in Jail is out of circulation. The people who continue to commit crimes would do so whether or not this individual went to Jail. I think that we can assume that all the present prisoners in jail are not committing any crimes at this point in time.

What are our alternatives. We now have a system where we allow someone to commit the crime of shoplifing, however we do not want to put this person in jail because it would cost us a fortune, and all he stole was a loaf of bread. So we give him a warning and let him go. We might post his picture in the store where he was shoplifting. Now what is the consequences of this action.

(1) The cost of consumer goods rises to offset the cost of the stolen merchandise, and the cost of the increase in insurance to the store because of the thefts. So in effect the consumer is now paying for the cost of the shoplifter, but we are not putting him into jail because it would cost to much. (Something wrong with this picture) The shoplifter continues with his stealing.