Pubdate: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 Source: Ottawa Citizen (CN ON) Copyright: 2006 The Ottawa Citizen Contact: http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/326 Author: Randall Denley Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/decrim.htm (Decrim/Legalization) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?199 (Mandatory Minimum Sentencing) POLITICIANS GETTING THE MESSAGE ON CRIME Get-Tough Policies Show A New Determination To Punish The Criminals, And Help The Victims Finally, Canadian politicians have gotten the picture on crime, and they're getting up a posse to do something about it. This week, Conservative Stephen Harper, Liberal Dalton McGuinty and even New Democrat Jack Layton all argued for a tougher approach to crime and action on Canada's drug problem. Ottawa Mayor Bob Chiarelli got in on the act, too, in his own tiny way. Only Prime Minister Paul Martin was missing in action, having earlier fired a blank when he called for a ban on all handguns. Harper hit a political home run with his call for stronger sentences, more police and a crackdown on drug trafficking. People are fed up with the focus on rehabilitating the criminal, not helping the victim. They are fed up with sentences and prison procedures aimed at getting the criminal back on the street as soon as possible. They are fed up with being told that drugs are benign, even when they can see the damage done to their own kids. Harper's plan to address these problems is right in line with popular thinking. Ontario Premier McGuinty made many of the same points, and he got it right when he called for more police, more prosecutors and tougher sentences for gun crimes. The best way to fight crime is to charge criminals and send them to jail. Too bad he fell into the trap of supporting Martin's handgun ban. We're lucky the killers in Toronto aren't using knives. The Liberals would be confiscating our cutlery. The three-point plan of Bob Chiarelli and Ottawa police Chief Vince Bevan seems sophomoric compared to the substantive suggestions of Harper and McGuinty. The chief announced a gun amnesty, but warned that police will check to see if any of the guns turned in are stolen or were used to commit a crime. Hey, really, really stupid criminals, here's a chance to convict yourselves. The effect of this gun amnesty will be to get a few old guns out of closets. What serious criminal is going to turn in his illegal handgun? There is also a Gun Crime Stoppers Program, but it doesn't do anything that the existing tip line can't do. Finally, the chief has created a gun crimes "task force" consisting of five officers. By comparison, the police are still devoting 45 people to traffic enforcement. Chiarelli and Bevan want us to believe they aren't just jumping on a bandwagon, but one has to wonder. The mayor informed us that 161 gun crimes were committed in Ottawa last year. He didn't know how that compared to 2004, but the chief helpfully supplied the number. Turns out gun crimes last year were actually down from the 188 of 2004. The chief did suggest the 2005 crimes were more serious because more of them involved assault with discharge of a firearm or pointing a gun. Apparently the 11-per-cent reduction in gun crimes constitutes a crisis requiring immediate action in the same week that all the big boys were on the same topic. Not everyone is enthusiastic about the new focus on crime. Criminologists were quick to tell us that nothing the politicians are proposing will solve the problem of crime. Not that they know what will, of course. Let's be realistic. Politicians and proposals won't end crime. Nothing will. So long as there are people who are violent and dishonest, there will be crime. What's at issue is more the Canadian attitude toward crime and the effort we are willing to make to suppress it. We do need to remember the practical limits of things such as mandatory minimum jail sentences. There are already four-year minimums for 10 major gun crimes, and these would deter a rational person, but the people committing gun crimes aren't all rational people. If they were, they wouldn't be pulling the trigger. Word is probably out on the street that first-degree murder means 25 years in jail, but that doesn't seem to be slowing down the shooters, either. The new eagerness to act is certainly motivated by election considerations and the need to respond to the mess in Toronto. It just might also be a sign that Canadians are getting past some of the simplistic thinking that has made us overly skeptical of the value of police, courts and jails as tools of crime suppression. It's impossible to ignore the fact that drugs underlie much of the crime and violence we see in our cities, but for years we have been told the real solution lies in drug legalization. Once crystal meth is available at the neighbourhood convenience store and crack cocaine in vending machines, the drug gangs will be out of business and peace will reign. Maybe, but the most ambitious drug legalizers only talk about ending marijuana laws. That still leaves lots of products for drug dealers to retail. So-called wars on drugs are costly and don't end illegal drug use, but the same might be said of the efforts to stop any kind of crime. We have been told over and over that the elimination of poverty will end crime. Until that happy moment comes, every party is stressing more youth programs on the premise that the kid shooting hoops won't shoot you. The programs are useful, but they aren't a substitute for law enforcement. The battle against crime is a never-ending one, and it's as old as civilization. The important news from Harper and McGuinty this week is that there is a new determination to keep up that fight. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman