Time for a truce in sentencing bidding war

10 comments on “Time for a truce in sentencing bidding war ”

• Comments are now closed

1. QoT 1

   12 January 2009 at 12:15 pm

   Jeez, Steve, next thing you’ll be trying to tell us that crims are human beings just like the rest of us!
2. leftrightout 2

   12 January 2009 at 12:16 pm

   Could someone please forward this article to Garth McVicar.
3. Mr Magoo 3

   12 January 2009 at 12:57 pm

   leftrightout:

   You are too slow mate. They have already responded with their own press releases around the same time:
   http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0901/S00048.htm
   http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0901/S00014.htm
   http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0901/S00010.htm

   These guys are not rational and sending them ANYTHING would be a complete waste of time.

   My favourite quote:

   “”The only evidence required is already available for everyone to see, violent crime is escalating and child abuse and drug abuse is rampant, the time for talk is over.'”

   This nearly had me in stiches. It reminds me of that very famous movie quote from “Canadian Bacon”

   “”There’s a time for thinking, and a time for action. And this, gentlemen, is no time for thinking!””

   Other greats:

   “It’s time to turn off that war machine, and turn on our children.”

   “The American public’s attention span is about as long as your dick.”

   “Let me level with you, sir. I would destroy any nation – even my own – if my president gave the order.”

   “Secretary of State: We were thinking, what could be a bigger threat than aliens invading from space?
   General Panzer: Ooh boy! Scare the shit out of everyone. Even me, sir!
   U.S. President: Jesus, is this the best you could come up with? What about, ya know, international terrorism?
   General Panzer: Well, sir, we’re not going to re-open missile factories just to fight some creeps running around in exploding rental cars, are we, sir?”
4. Hoolian 4

   12 January 2009 at 1:35 pm

   How wonderfully coincidental. A press release http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0901/S00036.htm from the nutters at Rethinking Crime and Punishment. Isn’t it amazing how similar Clinton’s post is to the complete garbage espoused by RCP you’d almost think they were one in the same. Its one thing to hold a baseless and irrational viewpoint, but it’s another to replicate it and claim it as an honest and original post.

   However, I’d expect nothing less from Clinton.

   [I hadn’t seen the press release. Great minds, eh? SP. Oh and Hoolian, learn some civility or fuck off back to Kiwiblog]
   
5. Pascal's bookie 5

   12 January 2009 at 1:38 pm

   Mr. M
   That first link is golden. McVicar really does operate in a self awareness free zone:

   Her comments were attacked by Kim Workman of Rethinking Crime and Punishment who accused the Government of pushing through legislation in absence of evidence-based research, good information and adequate consultation.

   But Garth McVicar from Sensible Sentencing has leaped to the Ministers defence saying the catch-phrases used by Mr. Workman were just failed old clichés that had caused the problems New Zealand now faced.

   “The only evidence required is already available for everyone to see, violent crime is escalating and child abuse and drug abuse is rampant, the time for talk is over.‘

   Mr. McVicar said the National / Act Government campaigned to get tough on crime and was elected in a landslide victory.’

   That is the only consultation required, the Government has the support of the people, the Minister has a mandate to do exactly as she has said she will do.’

   “I can understand why these so-called criminal justice professionals are starting to squeal, they are responsible for the mess our country is in they have driven criminal justice policy and it has been a dismal failure.‘

   “The evidence is there for all to see.‘

   (emphasis mine)
6. Gooner 6

   12 January 2009 at 2:29 pm

   I agree with you Steve and I have been classified as a ‘hard’ rightie. Politicians get involved in bidding wars on a myriad of issues and it’s bad, bad, bad for the country full stop – crime/justice or whatever else.
7. Ianmac 7

   12 January 2009 at 2:57 pm

   Great post thanks Steve. But in NZ I think we have to get over two hurdles at least:
   Public Perception: Media and Politicians have painted such a threatening position that to undo this will be extremely hard. (8 people in my living room strongly believe that prison is a cushy hotel and cannot see the loss of freedom, and being controlled by others as an unpleasant experience.)
   Political One-upmanship: Who would be the political clever-dick willing to lead a re-think about the real issues? John Key? Judith Collins?
   One Criminal lawyer spent a month or so in jail and said the most frightening (effective?) time was the first 28 days. After that he just normalised with the system. Longer time became an institutionalised blur.
8. Matthew Pilott 8

   12 January 2009 at 3:40 pm

   Something Collins said irked me – that it wasn’t about study and research, but about ‘public perception’. If the public perception is at odds with reality, should the government act based upon perception, or try and change it?

   In this case, perception is that we’re too soft on crims, and that they need to be locked up for longer, and also that parole and Home D are putting people at a greater risk.

   The reality is that the former does nothing, and that the two latter are safer options – lower reoffending rates, therefore a safer public.

   The lawnorder stance is to take the hard line – irrational folk such as McVicar refuse to see or accept this, and retort with ‘perception’ based responses – as evidenced by PB and mr M. In influencing a perception that puts society at risk, McVicar and co are consciously acting to put the poblic in greater danger.

   Hypothetically, McVicar can pat his back next time someone is put in hospital by someone who received a prison sentence instead of home detention – while obviously not directly responsible, he could take pride in knowing it wouldn’t have happened without his influence.

   Hoolian, you’re embarrassing yourself. ‘However, I’d expect nothing less from Hoolian’ (oh gosh how witty I sound now). Steve, you’re going soft in your old age, if someone who’d never made a sensible contribution accused me of plagiarism I wouldn’t suffer to have it happen again.
9. Rex Widerstrom 9

   12 January 2009 at 5:19 pm

   Hoolian, I spotted the SMH article last week and sent it to The Standard, so I’m afraid you owe SP an apology. And thanks to The Standard for picking up on the issue.

   Matthew Pilott, you’ve identified a vital point that RCP and many similar groups seem to overlook – and that’s that by not implementing effective sentencing and rehabilitation strategies, politicians are putting society at greater risk.

   Leaving aside how we may feel about the criminals for a moment, it’s simple common sense that if someone leaves the system (not necessarily prison) genuinely rehabilitated then the rest of the community is no longer at risk from that offender.

   Our present system doesn’t achieve this, with recidivism rates across the Western World of somewhere around 50% with some notable exceptions which can reduce to less than half that. And the exceptions are systems which treat the issues sensibly and without emotion.

   That doesn’t mean, as McVicar seems to think, “going soft” on criminals and not locking them up at all. It means, however, that if we’re going to lock them up then we owe it to society to do everything we can to use that time to rehabilitate them. Here’s what the mother of one young offender wrote recently (and to be honest, I was somewhat surprised by it). I’ve edited it for length:

   Just to update you on how its been since my son come home. Man! THIS has been one of the BEST weeks of my life!… My son has come out a totally different person. He is ‘clean’ thanks to drug rehabilitaiton inside. He has a totally different outlook on life, thanks to ‘time’ inside.

   I’m sure alot of ex offenders could agree, time inside allows you plenty of time to think of where you’re life is heading and where YOU want it to go in the future. This my son did. And my God in Heaven, it has been a hell of a tough journey, but I’m SO glad he went inside! He now has a focus on where he wants his life to go. He has a brlliant ‘business’ idea that is currently underway and that I am confident will be a huge success given the right education on running a business and learning a marketing program which he is ready to learn.

   On the day that we picked him up, we had arranged a family bbq. He got up in front of us all and gave the most humble, confessional, heartbreaking speech that he had been preparing for 3 months prior to his release. He had us all in tears…

   BUT at the end of it all, I have to honestly say I’m GLAD he spent time inside! I love who he is now, who I am now, and who we ALL as a family are now thanks to this experience.

   But that’s someone who spent most of their time in a privately run Australian prison which is remunerated partly on long term results – i.e. the fewer of its inmates who come back into the system, the more money they get paid. Therefore they’re highly incentivised to ensure that the time spent inside isn’t simply looking at a brick wall, expanding your network of criminal associates, and plotting your next offence.

   The fact that McVicar won’t stop ranting and spewing bile long enough to contemplate the point Matthew makes about the safety of the wider community shows just what a danger he is. It’s time someone stood up to him directly, which Kim Workman appears not to want to do (and probably for good reason).
10. DeepRed 10

    17 January 2009 at 1:45 am

    I doubt the McVicars of this world will ever come to their senses, unless there’s some kind of Los Angeles ’92 or Greece ’08.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS