| May 27, 2006 CBC: Anti-Crime Bills FAQ CTV: Crime rates down significantly in 2006: police Getting tough on crime creates more criminals, and that's good for business! YayaCanada Experts agree that the government’s justice strategy would dramatically spike demand for costly prison space. Dominion: Criminologists fear a private prison boom in Canada Harper: "If we are to protect our Canadian way of life, we need to crack down on gun, gang and drug crime.... If you do a serious crime, you're going to do serious time" NUPGE: Private prison operators waiting to cash in on Harper policies A few days ago a group of criminal law experts presented a panel discussion in Ottawa on Stephen Harper's announced "crackdown" on street crime. Note Harper has made no mention of a crackdown on white collar crimes, or on domestic crimes, both of which are far more prevalent and much more "serious" but not as noticeable and therefore not a sexy enough sell to help garner votes. The panel of experts discussed the perception created for the public that serious street crime is prevalent, that deficiencies in the Canada Corrections system are the problem, and that more punitive measures must be taken. Indeed, although the term "crackdown" sends shivers up my spine, it appears to comfort the lesser informed and more government reliant mentality. Not to mention that it produces shivers of delight in correction officials who see more money coming their way, and in lawyers who covet jobs as criminal prosecutors, and most of all in greedy entrepreneurs waiting in the wings. Getting tough on crime is a money maker that comes straight out of the pockets of the taxpayer. This comes at a time when Statistics Canada is only reporting the crime stats up to 2004, but which, even so, show that overall crime has been steadily decreasing, not increasing, indicating that getting weak on crime may have had some good effect. That, however, can be remedied by more and longer prison sentences, because the truth is that while most blue collar crime is petty and minor, all it takes is a stretch in the hoosegow to turn out the more hardened variety of offender. And if you'd like to know about the efficacy of mandatory minimum sentences on drug offenders visit the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network. According to the law experts, most violent crimes occur in the home, where they can't be seen and don't receive hyped-up publicity. Yet the government is deliberately giving a sop to the voting public by vowing to crack down on street crime, playing on the perception that it is dramatically increasing. There is no dissenting voice in Parliament, of course, because this kind of talk wins votes for any party, and another election isn't all that far away. One of the panelists, Aaron Doyle, finds this "maddening". The public is made to believe that opposition to tougher measures comes from the radical left. But he says there are plenty of "big, heavy, scholarly tomes" of which the political establishment is well aware, that have shown that capital punishment, for instance, does not deter crime. Doyle's point is well taken. If killing all the caught killers makes no difference, then how much of a deterrent will mandatory prison sentences be? None at all, because as Doyle reminded us no criminal ever plans to get caught. Doyle reiterated that crime is decreasing, not increasing - even in the big cities, where the perception is that the streets are not safe. "In fact", he said, "the front page of the Ottawa Citizen on January 4, 2006 said that Toronto is getting safer!" But apparently people remember only the bad news. When the Ontario Attorney General linked street crime to "organized crime", the media ran with it, and the public swallowed it. Before Canadians entertain acceptance of a decision like this, they should at least find out what it's like in a detention centre, an unimaginable world unto itself where ordinary humane conditions need not apply; where prisoners put some of their food in a corner of the cell so the insects will go there instead of bothering them while they are sleeping; where minor offenders are tossed in with hardened criminals; where resentment of society is often honed to a white heat, or the opposite occurs and suicide becomes the way out. Our detention centres "are a shameful national secret", says Doyle. I say that Canadians need also to realize that it's a small step from putting more police on the streets, to using them against non-criminal activity as well. It's a small step from building more and bigger prisons to militarizing the police and incarcerating anyone deemed a "security" threat, such as crowds of peaceful protesters. We don't have our current freedoms because we all sat on our hineys and the man upstairs sent us good men and women to give them to us; we have freedoms because people took risks to achieve them, and others work their whole lives to preserve them. Canadians need to ask why our government is prepared to spend lots of money on prisons, but little or none on dealing with root causes (such as poverty, racism and cutbacks in social programs and education). We need also to give some serious thought to why there are no government funded think tanks working on peaceful alternatives to the wars and famines and political unrest that force people to seek refuge in foreign countries where many of the citizens hold attitudes of superiority toward them, like right here in the true north strong and free! Learn more: http://www.prisonjustice.ca/ Comments yayacanada |