current forum:Winnipeg Urban Issues & Provincial Affairs

[Northender]

Well of course you are right to be angry about the situaiton, but I cannot imagine any government recommending harsh sentencing and jailing for 12 year olds, do you?

And so being realistic is all you have left.

[Outsider]

Well of course you are right to be angry about the situaiton, but I cannot imagine any government recommending harsh sentencing and jailing for 12 year olds, do you?

And so being realistic is all you have left.

No I can't see it happening.

But I can always dream.

[np_]

I'm not against increasing sentences because I feel sorry for the criminal. I'm against increasing sentences because they do nothing significant to reduce crime. Criminals generally don't think they'll be caught, so don't take into consideration the consequences of their actions. If I was going to commit a crime, and didn't care if getting caught meant a year a jail, do you think I would care if it was 5 years in jail?

Car thefts are down 75% in the past 5 years, which is likely almost entirely due to immobilizers. There is no way we could have achieved the same reduction by increasing sentences. I doubt you could find any crime, anywhere, with a similar reduction achieved just by increasing sentences.

Of course, you don't care about statistics. "Increasing sentences reduces crime" feels true, so who needs facts?

[Outsider]

If people think the Canadian or American way of handing out justice is not improving things, then it is time to see how some countries with much bigger populations than ours handle convicted criminals.
Maybe we we could try Hon Kong or China for instance.

[cancelbot]

I'm not against increasing sentences because I feel sorry for the criminal. I'm against increasing sentences because they do nothing significant to reduce crime. Criminals generally don't think they'll be caught, so don't take into consideration the consequences of their actions. If I was going to commit a crime, and didn't care if getting caught meant a year a jail, do you think I would care if it was 5 years in jail?

Well, I suppose if you were locked up for only one year, you would be able to repeat your offence a whole lot sooner than if you had to spend five years behind bars. What I think a lot of people find frustrating is the idea that the serial offenders you read about are put away for a year, re-offend, go back, reoffend, etc. The term "revolving-door justice" is not entirely inaccurate in some respects...

[cancelbot]

If people think the Canadian or American way of handing out justice is not improving things, then it is time to see how some countries with much bigger populations than ours handle convicted criminals.
Maybe we we could try Hon Kong or China for instance.

Ahh, China...where the mentally ill duped into being drug mules are executed by the state. Same with separatists.

I guess if trivial things like freedom, liberty and due process are unimportant to you, then the Chinese way of dealing with crime offers certain advantages.

[Outsider]

I'm not against increasing sentences because I feel sorry for the criminal. I'm against increasing sentences because they do nothing significant to reduce crime.
Car thefts are down 75% in the past 5 years, which is likely almost entirely due to immobilizers. There is no way we could have achieved the same reduction by increasing sentences. I doubt you could find any crime, anywhere, with a similar reduction achieved just by increasing sentences.

Of course, you don't care about statistics. "Increasing sentences reduces crime" feels true, so who needs facts?

How do we KNOW increasing sentences will not decrease crime?
I do know using the velvet glove approach that is happening now is not working.
Have we ever read in the paper that a perpetrator re-offended while he was on bail from previous charges? Well how does the chronic car thief steal another car while he is in jail?

[Outsider]

If people think the Canadian or American way of handing out justice is not improving things, then it is time to see how some countries with much bigger populations than ours handle convicted criminals.
Maybe we we could try Hon Kong or China for instance.

Ahh, China...where the mentally ill duped into being drug mules are executed by the state. Same with separatists.

I guess if trivial things like freedom, liberty and due process are unimportant to you, then the Chinese way of dealing with crime offers certain advantages.

MY freedom is important to me.
I want to be able to walk out to my car in a shopping center and not have to worry about being robbed of my car.
I want to be able to walk down the street without fear of being mugged for my jacket or cap.
I want to be able to go downtown and find that my car window was not smashed for a buck in my ashtray.
So if a chronic thief or mugger or murderer has to serve 5 or or even 25 years in jail for me to feel safe, then that is ok with me.

[np_]

I do know using the velvet glove approach that is happening now is not working.

You don't consider a 75% reduction in auto thefts in five years an indicator that the current approach is working?

Have we ever read in the paper that a perpetrator re-offended while he was on bail from previous charges?

What you read in the paper is a subset of what happens in the real world. "Man released from jail, doesn't steal car" is not news.

Well how does the chronic car thief steal another car while he is in jail?

He can't, but is he as likely, or more likely, to recommit after getting out? You can do a Google search for "prison term recidivism" or similar terms and find all sorts of studies. It appears that, at best, longer terms for car thieves has no effect on their likelihood to recommit. So rather than spending money to keep them in jail, why not spend the money on something that will make them less likely to recommit, or makes others less likely to commit in the first place?

[Outsider]

He can't, but is he as likely, or more likely, to recommit after getting out? You can do a Google search for "prison term recidivism" or similar terms and find all sorts of studies. It appears that, at best, longer terms for car thieves has no effect on their likelihood to recommit. So rather than spending money to keep them in jail, why not spend the money on something that will make them less likely to recommit, or makes others less likely to commit in the first place?

So what ideas did you have in mind?