\’Sensible\’ Sentencing
March 23, 2008 – 11:52 am
I’ve been thinking about the good and bad in 2007. One of the worst of the year is Garth McVicar’s so-called ‘Sensible Sentencing Trust’, set up to advocate for victims’ rights.
Now if that was all the Trust occupied itself doing, I’d have no problem. But they consistently act as a political lobby group, trying to convince politicians (who are vulnerable on this issue) to give tougher sentences.
Today (Boxing Day in New Zealand) is supposed to be ‘white rose’ day, where people are encouraged to wear white roses to remember the victims of recidivist drunk drivers. In actuality, it crates a platform for McVicar to witter on about the much tougher penalties these people deserve. Clever. Boxing Day is a ‘no-news’ day, which is why he chose it. This group is dangerously politically savvy.
The problem is, tougher prison sentences cost this country in a variety of ways, and never do any good. ‘Oh, but if a recidivist drunk driver is in jail, (s)he isn’t on the road killing people’. True. But a lifetime disqualification would achieve the same result, and allow the putative prisoner to contribute to society rather than costing us upwards of $100,000 per year to incarcerate.
But what about the right of victims to see the criminal punished? Sorry, but it is society that sends someone to jail. The victim has no more right to exact punishment than the rest of us, and that is as it should be. And punishment is only part of what is required to deal with someone committing a criminal offence.
Think. A hundred recidivist drunk drivers in jail for (say) two years longer than normal, as a result of McVicar succeeding, costs the taxpayers twenty million dollars extra. This is money that would be better spent on education or policing. Don’t put people in jail when a less extreme measure will remove the risk they pose. Instead, keep them in society. I’m in favour of requiring them to work for the community, or even their victim. Constructive solutions come from a desire to redeem; destructive solutions from the desire to punish. We should take a leaf out of Finland’s book and minimise our prison population to those whose freedom would pose a risk to society.
McVicar claims we’ve been part of a ‘liberal experiment’. I don’t think we’ve been nearly liberal enough. Find other ways to heal yourself than ‘an eye for an eye’. Think outside the square. Remember the victims, yes, but don’t forget the needs of society in your desire for revenge. And whenever the Sensible Sentencing Trust appear on the media, how about listening to them with a little more skepticism?
Related articles:
- Asking rape victims to pay only adds insult to injury
- Living An Honourable Life
- Losing Weight After Pregnancy
- Free Weight Loss Advice That Really Works!
- Inspirational Quotes #6
| Note: |
| This site and its services, including the information above, are for informational purposes only and are not a substitute for professional medical or health advice, examination, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health professional before starting any new treatment, making any changes to existing treatment, or altering in any way your current exercise or diet regimen. Do not delay seeking or disregard medical advice based on information on this site. |
