Pubdate: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 Source: Toronto Sun (CN ON) Copyright: 2006, Canoe Limited Partnership. Contact: http://torontosun.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/457 Author: Mindelle Jacobs Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mjcn.htm (Marijuana - Canada) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/coke.htm (Cocaine) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/decrim.htm (Decrim/Legalization) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?199 (Mandatory Minimum Sentencing) IS PUNISHMENT OUT OF FASHION? These are not good times for those who oppose tougher and more sweeping mandatory minimum sentences for people convicted of gun offences. Homicide rates have been climbing -- shootings are the most common method to dispatch one's enemies -- and politicians sense that the public's had enough. During the last federal election campaign, the Conservatives, the Liberals and, hey, even the bleeding-heart NDP pledged stronger penalties for gun-related crimes. Ever sensitive to the public mood, politicians know full well that Canadians are fed up with the tame sentences given to many violent offenders. Consequently, there hasn't been a public outcry over Bill C-10, the Tories' draft legislation which would bring in a system of escalating penalties for gun offences. Nevertheless, behind the scenes, there have been objections raised in front of the Commons justice committee which is currently studying the bill. A couple of weeks ago, the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies made an impassioned plea against mandatory minimum sentences. Fixed terms don't deter crime but bloat prison populations instead, the association told the committee in its brief. 'Root Causes' "Simply put, mandatory minimum sentences do not address some of the root causes of crime -- such as persistent poverty, unemployment, lack of educational opportunities and social marginalization," it argued. Even the existing mandatory minimum sentences for firearms crimes "offend" Charter guarantees such as the right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, it said. Never mind the cruel and unusual punishment suffered by the families of the more than 200 victims killed by gun-happy thugs across the country last year. We don't want to stigmatize all those poor killers. Good grief. Why can't we have mandatory minimum sentences for gun crimes and tackle the root causes of crime? Keep the bad guys behind bars, where they can't hurt anyone else -- at least temporarily -- while working on our underlying social ills. As the Canadian Police Association pointed out to the Commons justice committee, chronic offenders work the justice system to their advantage. "Canada's police officers have lost confidence in a system that sees violent offenders regularly returned to the street," the association said in its brief. Tougher penalties may not deter criminals, but at least stiffer sentences will keep some of the worst criminals off the streets for a few years. Otherwise, why jail anyone for anything? Is punishment so hopelessly old-fashioned? Legalize Drugs Governments are too chicken to take such a radical step, but if we wanted to engineer an immediate, dramatic drop in crime, we'd legalize drugs, demolishing the profit motive. For the most part, it's not poor people gunning each other down -- it's greedy, rich punks fighting over drug turf. In a paper on our failed drug war a few years ago, the Fraser Institute wondered why we spend so much money on drug prohibition in an effort to save a small hard-core group of drug users from themselves. We should be asking ourselves the same thing. It is drugs -- not prohibition -- that boosts crime, the institute noted. If we were smart, we'd divert the money we're spending on drug prohibition into treatment programs for addicts. "It's not clear why marijuana or even cocaine should be illegal and alcohol legal," says Peter Rosenthal, adjunct professor of law at the University of Toronto. He, too, believes it's time to consider legalizing drugs. Uncle Sam would have a fit. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake