A crime debate without facts or arguments

[Shwa]

A crime debate without facts or arguments

Good article by Gardner, who hopefully has a little knowledge on the topic, or would seem to have. What is interesting is his take on the modern conservative tactic to subvert evidence in favour of political gain.

Ministers did not discuss or debate the evidence. They did not engage. They just asserted. And smiled when the critics howled.

The reason the government took this approach is that it works. Not "works" in the sense of producing effective public policy. It's about the worst possible way to do that. But it is politically effective.

What is interesting is to see how this party political method has played out among conservative supporters, as evidenced by some of the commentary right here on MLW. That they can only assert, but lack the evidence to engage.

Research is a drag. Assessing evidence is boring. Marshalling arguments takes work. And the Conservatives have made it absolutely clear that they have no intention of engaging in a meaningful, evidence-based discussion about crime policy.

[Topaz]

I've watched the senate hearings on the crime bills and they were told over and over again by experts that their drug crime bills that puts people into jail rather than sending them to hospitals were they can get support for their addictions. NO, they rather put them in jail and throw away the key and send the bill for to the provinces! You are going to see people going to jail for minor things and the worse part is there's so much packed within this crime bills, I'm sure Canadians liberties will be in jeopardy.

[eyeball]

I think it's going to be really interesting to see how BC reacts to the idea that we should pay back $1.3 billion to Ottawa plus pick up the costs of building jails and filling them up with thousands of British Columbian's for pot.

Good luck with that.

[jacee]

Good article. The problem lies with CPC voters who don't give a damn about frivolous things like 'truth' and 'evidence' but only believe their knee-jerk 'gut instincts' that tell them they'll feel better if they can assert their power and indulge their sadistic pleasure by punishing someone.

The leading critics are "sociologists criminologists, and defence lawyers," Brodie noted. Eggheads and shysters. The public doesn't respect them. So let them howl"Politically, it helped us tremendously to be attacked by this coalition," Brodie said. "So we never really had to engage in the question of what the evidence actually shows about various approaches to crime."

Evangelicals like Harper and financial/corporate elites seem to share this 'need to punish' pathology. And of course overworked, underpaid private sector employees are easily brainwashed into the same mentality of blaming and wishing punishment on others.

This stupidity approach, or 'ideology' if you prefer, is one of the best reasons to shake up the electoral system with proportionate representation to try to break ideological approaches and instead have governments that must collaborate across ideologies to write laws that are effective and not just political games.

Billions of OUR dollars being spent on ineffective methods, just to satify a pathological political constituency.

It's a political initiative, not governance, and it should be paid for by the CPC party, not by taxpayers.

Edited September 23, 2011 by jacee

[PIK]

How come nobody talks about how much repeat offenders cost society? How many people have been murdered, raped or assaulted by people that should be in jail, and not being released by soft liberal judges?

[jacee]

How come nobody talks about how much repeat offenders cost society? How many people have been murdered, raped or assaulted by people that should be in jail, and not being released by soft liberal judges?

And you think this bill will 'fix' that?

[eyeball]

How come nobody talks about how much repeat offenders cost society? How many people have been murdered, raped or assaulted by people that should be in jail, and not being released by soft liberal judges?

How come nobody talks about your beloved Harper Government lumping people who smoke pot in with murderers and rapists?

Wtf is it about getting the state off the people's backs that you so-called freedom-loving right-wingers who voted for these sphincters don't get? You're going to just stand there and let them piss all over your most fundamental principle?

Sorry but...you also said something about being soft?

[CitizenX]

How come nobody talks about how much repeat offenders cost society? How many people have been murdered, raped or assaulted by people that should be in jail, and not being released by soft liberal judges?

How come nobody is talking about what causes crime and how the money would be better spent. Ohhh yaa lots of people are, it's just that Harper hates things like facts.

Edited September 23, 2011 by CitizenX

[Scotty]

I've watched the senate hearings on the crime bills and they were told over and over again by experts that their drug crime bills that puts people into jail rather than sending them to hospitals were they can get support for their addictions. NO, they rather put them in jail and throw away the key and send the bill for to the provinces!

Let's examine the suggestion by your 'experts' for a moment.

Put druggies in hospital instead of jail, where they can get support for their addictions(?)

I'm going to assume you mean 'support to combat their addictions'. Can they not get that now? I'm guessing they can. So they choose not to. Or perhaps there are waiting lists - but that's a provincial responsibility. Are hospitals set up to hold people against their will while they get training? Nope. So since they evidently don't want it now, how are we going to make them get it in hospitals? Furthermore, and I'm sure you'll correct me here if I'm wrong, but if you don't want treatment then it's not going to help. You can't force someone to get help with kicking their addiction.

And oh by the way, while they're in jail, shouldn't they be able to get help with addiction problem?

Oh wait, they can!

Corrections Canada Substance Abuse Programs

Note that 80% of criminals have some form of addiction problem. Do we send them all to hospitals? Hospitals which are crowded already?

[Scotty]

How come nobody talks about how much repeat offenders cost society? How many people have been murdered, raped or assaulted by people that should be in jail, and not being released by soft liberal judges?

Justice has estimated the figure at about $47,000,000,000 per year, not counting the $11,000,000,000 spent on security.

On top of that is the not insubstantial sums spent on tracking down and arresting, representing, convicting, processing, and jailing the same guys over and over and over and over again. Not all criminals are repeat offenders, but those who are tend to use up vast amounts of resources as they go through the revolving door of the judicial system.

[Scotty]

Good article. The problem lies with CPC voters who don't give a damn about frivolous things like 'truth' and 'evidence' but only believe their knee-jerk 'gut instincts' that tell them they'll feel better if they can assert their power and indulge their sadistic pleasure by punishing someone.

I don't feel any sadistic pleasure in punishing people like Clifford Olson and Paul Bernardo. I think perhaps you're telegraphing too much about your own psychosis.

I do feel that justice sometimes requires stiff punishment for offenders, especially violent offenders and repeat offenders.

And I really could not possibly care less if limp-wristed left wing academic and media hand-wringers claim that's unfair or counter-productive. The soft sciences, otherwise known as the 'limp' sciences, are only science by the broadest of generous interpretations. Generally their studies represent the left-wing ideological viewpoint of the authors, people who weren't smart enough to take the more difficult and challenging courses in university.

Edited September 23, 2011 by Scotty

[Scotty]

How come nobody is talking about what causes crime

I'll bite. What caused Clifford Olson to kill all those children? Not enough federal transfer payments for social services?

[Smallc]

I'll bite. What caused Clifford Olson to kill all those children?

That's an excellent question actually. It isn't likely that he just did it because. At the root of much crime is poverty, addiction, and/or mental illness.

[jacee]

I don't feel any sadistic pleasure in punishing people like Clifford Olson and Paul Bernardo. I think perhaps you're telegraphing too much about your own psychosis.

I do feel that justice sometimes requires stiff punishment for offenders, especially violent offenders and repeat offenders.

And I really could not possibly care less if limp-wristed left wing academic and media hand-wringers claim that's unfair or counter-productive. The soft sciences, otherwise known as the 'limp' sciences, are only science by the broadest of generous interpretations. Generally their studies represent the left-wing ideological viewpoint of the authors, people who weren't smart enough to take the more difficult and challenging courses in university.

Show me where in the new crime bill that it addresses any of your concerns.

Edited September 24, 2011 by jacee

[Topaz]

The EXPERTS were doctors and mental health doctors who told the senators that most drug users have a HEALTH problem and should be treated as such. IF the government was doing such as good job on this help for them then these experts wouldn't have been before the senators saying more is needed and changes to the way these people are treated. These users are addicted to the drugs and so they break the law to support their habits.

[Scotty]

That's an excellent question actually. It isn't likely that he just did it because. At the root of much crime is poverty, addiction, and/or mental illness.

Olson isn't mentally ill. Nor is Bernardo. I don't buy poverty as the root of crime either, not in Canada. I'm not saying no one is stealing stuff to feed himself or pay the mortgage, but I don't think it's the norm. Besides, violence isn't necessary if all you're doing is trying to alleviate your poverty. And cruelty, what explains that? Some people are just assholes.

What do you call it when some guy brushes against another guy's shoulder in a club, and the guy who gets brushed thinks he's being 'dissed', starts a fight, and winds up stabbing or shooting people? Poverty? Addiction? Stupidity?

Drugs are the big problem. Hard drugs sap you of the ability to work even while demanding large sums of money. We ought to be forcing people into rehab, locking them up, and not letting them go until they're over whatever drug they're addicted to. But we've never put nearly as much money into rehab as we ought to have. That's a provincial responsibility, though.

[Scotty]

Show me where in the new crime bill that it addresses any of your concerns.

Hey, it's not the crime bill I would have designed. But I'm all for harsher sentences for criminals, especially repeat criminals. Let's look at some of the stuff in it, courtesy CBC.

Additional penalties to combat serious and organized drug crimes, particularly when they involve youth, including increasing the maximum penalty for possession and production of drugs such as marijuana from seven to 14 years, factoring in security, health and safety concerns arising from marijuana grow-ops.

Barring legalization, which isn't going to happen, I'm all for harsher penalties for drug crimes. I know you guys think grass is fine. I'm kind of a big shrug on that. I don't care one way or another really, as long as you're not smoking on my property. But grow-ops are run by some seriously hostile people. Anything that puts them away longer is fine with me.

An increase in mandatory minimum penalties and sentences, including those for child exploitation.

I'm not generally much of a fan for minimum sentences. I wish we could instead appoint judges that don't have their heads up their asses and aren't more concerned with the criminal than with the welfare of society.

The elimination of house arrest (conditional sentences) for a new list of serious offences.

I've seen people get house arrest for violent offenses. I don't consider being housebound to be a real punishment. It was a naive (stupid) idea and should only have been used for the most minimal of crimes - shoplifting, for example. I'm in support of eliminating it. Get creative in sentencing, but telling someone to stay home is not good enough. Further, its existence means that judges consider it on the low end of sentencing scales, so that means a minimal sentence in actual jail convinces some of these puddinghead judges that they're being tough, when in actuality they're giving out a minimal sentence.

A higher cost and more strict eligibility criteria for applying for a criminal pardon, and an elimination of pardons for some serious or repeat offences.

This is basically political. I don't think it really matters one way or another.

New offences concerning the distribution of pornography or the use of telecommunications to facilitate sexual crimes against children.

Another political one. It's unnecessary, but thumping the pulpit about the evils of porn are always good sound bytes for politicians.

Measures to protect the public from violent young offenders, including in some cases adult sentences and the lifting of publication bans on the names of violent young offenders.

Definitely in favour of this. I know that teenagers are morons, which is fine, until they stick a knife in someone. I'm not so old I don't remember that at sixteen I knew damn well not to stick knives in people.

Expanded criteria for the public safety minister to consider when granting a transfer for a Canadian offender back to Canada.

Probably based on Khadr. Shrug to me.

Support for victims of terrorism by providing the means to launch a lawsuit in a Canadian court against an individual or organization that carried out a terrorism attack, including listed foreign states known to have sponsored terrorism.

Another one I don't care much about. Sue Al Quaeda if you want. Good luck with that.

Changes to the parole system to give victims a greater role and "increase offender accountability" with new sanctions and powers for police when release conditions are broken.

Parole is too easy. It used to be for exceptional cases. Now it's routine, even if you've made no real effort at rehabilitating yourself. With a high recidivism rate I see no point in letting a lot of these guys back on the streets sooner just so they can commit more crimes. I'm in favour of this.

Immigration reforms to combat the exploitation and abuse of foreign exotic dancers, sex trade workers, low-skilled labourers and other potential victims of human trafficking.

I don't know that this is a major problem, but I don't see how this harms, and it could help in a number of cases.

[Scotty]

The EXPERTS were doctors and mental health doctors who told the senators that most drug users have a HEALTH problem and should be treated as such. IF the government was doing such as good job on this help for them then these experts wouldn't have been before the senators saying more is needed and changes to the way these people are treated. These users are addicted to the drugs and so they break the law to support their habits.

Tough.

If these doctors are so concerned let them go cry to the provinces. They're the people in charge of health care, including mental health and addiction treatment.

The feds are in charge of dealing with criminals, and that's what they're doing. There is addiction treatment in prisons. But most of these people don't want it anyway.

[Smallc]

Olson isn't mentally ill. Nor is Bernardo. I don't buy poverty as the root of crime either, not in Canada.

Since the majority of crime is committed by poor minorities......and I don't accept the idea that it's because they're minorities. A lack of education though, that's another factor I forgot.

I'm not saying no one is stealing stuff to feed himself or pay the mortgage, but I don't think it's the norm. Besides, violence isn't necessary if all you're doing is trying to alleviate your poverty. And cruelty, what explains that? Some people are just assholes.

No, but there are a variety of factors that come with poverty. Often, there is a lack of moral and family support, and people turn out badly. I'm not saying they can't change that, but many don't.

What do you call it when some guy brushes against another guy's shoulder in a club, and the guy who gets brushed thinks he's being 'dissed', starts a fight, and winds up stabbing or shooting people? Poverty? Addiction? Stupidity?

Obviously, he's retarded....

Drugs are the big problem. Hard drugs sap you of the ability to work even while demanding large sums of money. We ought to be forcing people into rehab, locking them up, and not letting them go until they're over whatever drug they're addicted to. But we've never put nearly as much money into rehab as we ought to have. That's a provincial responsibility, though.

Couldn't agree with you more there.

[Scotty]

Since the majority of crime is committed by poor minorities......and I don't accept the idea that it's because they're minorities. A lack of education though, that's another factor I forgot.

Most poor minorities are immigrants, so there's lack of education, communication skills and job skills, and there's a cultural factor in that they come from hard and nasty cultures which makes it easier for them to commit violence. Maybe we should stop bringing losers into Canada, maybe? Maybe we should make them wait longer, like we used to, before they can apply for citizenship? Maybe we should boot their asses out the door when they turn into failed immigrants?

No, but there are a variety of factors that come with poverty.

You've written that ass backwards. What you mean is there are a variety of factors which CAUSE poverty. A guy is a lazy, good for nothing punk, and so he doesn't study, doesn't graduate, doesn't get any job skills, and can't work. That's why he's poor. So blaming his ensuing criminality on poverty is a mistake. His criminality is because he's a lazy, good for nothing punk. We all knew guys like that in high school. They were out back smoking pot behind the gym, or partying, doing coke, or hash or a variety of pills instead of going to school. They took high school as a joke, and dropped out early. Big surprise their lives turned to crap. Especially when you add in drugs.

Often, there is a lack of moral and family support, and people turn out badly. I'm not saying they can't change that, but many don't.

True enough, but when it's too late once they've turned out badly and decided crime is the way to go. They're not going to quit at that point until you make it not worth their while any more. Being kind and gentle and understanding isn't going to do a damn thing. Kicking their asses might, or might not. But hey, if they're in jail they're not breaking into my house.

[BubberMiley]

We ought to be forcing people into rehab, locking them up, and not letting them go until they're over whatever drug they're addicted to.

They tried to make me go to rehab, but I said no, no, no.

[Smallc]

Most poor minorities are immigrants, so there's lack of education, communication skills and job skills, and there's a cultural factor in that they come from hard and nasty cultures which makes it easier for them to commit violence.

I was actually talking about aboriginal people more than anything, not immigrants. Much of the crime in Canada is related to aboriginal issues. There aren't all that many immigrant issues and crimes when it all comes down to it. But yes, it could be a cultural thing.

You've written that ass backwards. What you mean is there are a variety of factors which CAUSE poverty. A guy is a lazy, good for nothing punk, and so he doesn't study, doesn't graduate, doesn't get any job skills, and can't work. That's why he's poor.

Often, that's a good description of the parents of poor children. Often those children turn out the same way...because that's all they know how to do. Again, I'm not saying they can't change it, I'm saying, again, that they don't, and that there are probably things that could be done.

True enough, but when it's too late once they've turned out badly and decided crime is the way to go. They're not going to quit at that point until you make it not worth their while any more.

That's right, so we need to intervene before that, even if that means taking more children away, or making it much more difficult to go on social assistance.

[Scotty]

I was actually talking about aboriginal people more than anything, not immigrants. Much of the crime in Canada is related to aboriginal issues. There aren't all that many immigrant issues and crimes when it all comes down to it. But yes, it could be a cultural thing.

Aboriginal crime is not much of a factor in central Canada. It's very big out west, though. You've got broken communities with lots of young people with nothing to do but drugs and sex. That equals lots of addicts and lots of single mothers on welfare with punkasses for fathers. And over the last ten or fifteen years the aboriginal have been forming drug gangs which are as violent as any of the minority street gangs in downtown Toronto. In Toronto, in Montreal, Ottawa, Vancouver, the gangs are immigrants.

Often, that's a good description of the parents of poor children. Often those children turn out the same way...because that's all they know how to do.

And what can you do about that? Kids grow up in a welfare house, surrounded by welfare houses. Their parents aren't much to write home about, and neither are the parents of their friends. That's going to produce a group of kids who are unlikely to be growing up to become class valedictorians. A once a week visit from a social worker isn't going to change that.

Used to be, kids who grew up to dirt poor families could always find some crappy job to do. But now the low skill jobs are fading, and going to immigrants, and there's always welfare. So that's what they do. They grow up until they're old enough to apply for welfare themselves, and go on it. And as the say, the devil finds work for idle hands. So a number of them turn to crime. Mostly that's low level, but the nastier ones find a way to prey on others. Education is the only answer, but the quality of schools in some of these areas isn't very good, in large measure because the student body is not terribly interested in what they're being taught, nearly completely undisciplined, and has little pressure from parents to succeed.

[Smallc]

In Toronto, in Montreal, Ottawa, Vancouver, the gangs are immigrants.

But pretty much every city in Central Canada has crime at or below the average. Western Canada is crime in Canada. For example, I'm in North York Centre right now. More than half the people here are immigrants. It's quiet...and boring.

Education is the only answer, but the quality of schools in some of these areas isn't very good, in large measure because the student body is not terribly interested in what they're being taught, nearly completely undisciplined, and has little pressure from parents to succeed.

Some of the areas may have bad schools, but I came from one of those areas (I wasn't one of the poor kids though), and my school was just fine.

[jacee]

Most of the repeat offenders - the revolving door syndrome - doesn't occur in federal prisons but provincial correctional facilities. Drug possession, B&E's and other robberies, all usually less than 2yrs. The rehab programs in provincial facilities are not as extensive as in federal prisons, and shorter stays don't allow time.

I don't see much in this bill to address any real problems.