- Nancy Flight is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Justin Everett is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- John Westover is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nora Etches is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Edward Henderson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Bharadwaj Chandramouli is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Dean Chatterson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Marius Scurtescu is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Robert Parkes is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- James Murton is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Susan Doyle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Vincent Strgar is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Helen Spiegelman is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Subir Guin is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Kimball Finigan is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Joanne Manley is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- David Leach is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Joel Berger is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Heather Sapergia is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Dittmar Mundel is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
Can You Really Be "Tough on Crime?"
What we're all missing in the hoopla over conservative courts.
The Conservative government aims to stack the courts with law-and-order, tough-on-crime judges; that was the story that dominated Ottawa last week, after The Globe and Mail published an A1 feature demonstrating that the committees that vet judges were being crammed with conservative partisans.
The story had competing newspapers and politicians bickering all week. In Parliament, the Liberals accused the Tories of abusing the division of powers. While in the press, The National Post charged that the Liberals did the exact same when they were in power.
Later in the week, the prime minister himself weighed in. "We want to make sure we are bringing forward laws to make sure that we crack down on crime, that we make our streets and communities safer," Stephen Harper said in the Commons Wednesday (according to The Globe and Mail). "We want to make sure our selection of judges is in correspondence with those objectives."
But while reporters, columnists and editorial boards concerned themselves with a game of who stacked whom, few were asking what seemed the more relevant questions. Namely, how exactly does a judge "crack down on crime"? And, when they do whatever it is they do, does it actually make the streets safer?
One of Canada's smartest writers on crime policy is the Ottawa Citizen's Dan Gardner. (Read his column "Crime is more puzzling than rocket science" for a good example.) Gardener is currently on leave, working on a book, so I e-mailed him to ask for his thoughts on the situation.
"Every political spinner knows that getting journalists and the public to use terminology that frames an issue in the way your side wants it framed is half the battle in politics," Gardner told me. "'Tough on crime' is a classic example of this form of manipulation.
"The package of policies that goes under the banner of 'tough on crime' is indisputably tough on those criminals who are caught and convicted," he went on. "But the label 'tough on crime' forces us to equate that very limited fact with being tough on crime itself."
Those policies -- longer sentences and less parole, for example -- are very popular with sections of the voting public. But, as Gardner told me, there is very little evidence that they actually deter crime.
"Heaps of criminological research shows that increased likelihood of arrest does deter criminals," Gardner said, "but increased punishment does not.
"To summarize a very complex subject: sending more criminals to prison for longer produces only very modest reductions in crime at enormous cost. If we had limitless pots of money to spend, maybe that would make sense. But here in the real world, where every dollar spent on guards and barbed wire is a dollar not available for education, health care or (if you prefer) tax cuts, it's just plain dumb."
If what Gardner says is true, and there's no reason to believe it isn't, why does the "tough on crime" myth still exist? Why do we let politicians and pundits get away with equating policies that are harsh on criminals with those that are harsh on crime?
At least part of the problem, in Gardner's mind, is reporters who are "stupid, lazy or both."
"It takes time, effort and a few brain cells to find and study policy research," he said. "Anyone who reads a newspaper or watches TV knows there are far too many reporters who prefer to simply repeat the lines in the press release -- "the minister says the new law will ensure sunshine and lollipops for all Canadians" -- and then move quickly on to the politics of the matter.
"That's another problem: we pay way too much attention to politics. I suspect the quality of reporting on public policy would immediately improve if we loaded every political reporter, analyst and talking head into a barge and sank it in the Ottawa River." ![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
- Bill C-38: the Environmental Destruction Act
- Canada's Economy, Deconstructed (by a 12 year-old)
- Is the 'Living Wage' Enough?
- What About Just Guaranteeing Everyone a Basic Income?
- Van Dongen No Hero to Me
- Republicans, get in my vagina!
- Tories admit to closing enviro research group because they disliked results
- Does BC Stand for Ban Clotheslines?
- 'Cagey' Clark's Pipeline Prevarications
- I Breast-fed My Preschooler. Big Whoop
- Bill C-38: the Environmental Destruction Act
- Seven Ways to Help Folks Fall in Love with Cycling
- It's no yolk: Breakfast crew share $21.4M Lotto 6-49 jackpot in Ontario
- Is the 'Living Wage' Enough?
- North Island College Cutting Down on Face Time
- Gov't Moving to Keep Farm Disease Outbreaks Secret
- 'The Coca-Cola Case'
- 'Cagey' Clark's Pipeline Prevarications
- Meet BC's 'Changemakers' of Aboriginal Learning
- BC Hydro Management Process Flawed: Internal Audit
- Does Simon Fraser University Need a Men's Centre?
- Seven Ways to Help Folks Fall in Love with Cycling
- Politicians with Hair on Their Faces
- Now Is the Time to Talk up Big Ideas
- BC's Emerging Green Faith Movement
- Why Blackberry's Embrace of HTML5 Is Good Karma
- Is the 'Living Wage' Enough?
- Van Dongen No Hero to Me
- I Breast-fed My Preschooler. Big Whoop
- Gov't Moving to Keep Farm Disease Outbreaks Secret
13
Login or register to post comments
BC Mary
5 years ago
Whew! FIVE out of 5 for today's story, Richard Warnica!
" ... reporters who are stupid, lazy or both" and (I'd like to add this) who don't believe they have a duty to fulfill the public's right to know.
True, reporters need editors to approve and support investigative reporting and to publish it.
But since editors were once reporters themselves, all the more reason for a bit more idealism in the ranks, eh?
Heck, even cigarettes, scotch whisky, and cynicism are old-fashioned now, so wouldn't it be great if journalistic stupidity, laziness, and contempt for the public went out of style, too?
relayer
5 years ago
Hail Mary! Amen, sister....
Hail Mary!
Amen, sister....
West End Bound
5 years ago
Great job, Richard! I
Great job, Richard!
I especially liked Gardner's quote:
[i]At least part of the problem, in Gardner's mind, is reporters who are "stupid, lazy or both."
"It takes time, effort and a few brain cells to find and study policy research"[/i]
maestro
5 years ago
Crime...eh?
Lets' see.
Traffic Jam the other day...trying to get on the Highway.
It's approx. 2PM , in theory = before rush hour.
Why?
Saw some Highway Maintenance vehicles ahead.... 1st thought = that must be it. However, once we got up to the cause of the congestion point we some senior citizen with an older import Pick - Up full of assorted items, pulled over by the RCMP.
Oh, I see a " vehicle check " ....of course on a sunny day....around a blind corner...that was 100 % worth an approx. 100 vehicle lineup.
Then , also seeing the cops in other fishing holes doing seatbelt checks.....while in the same time period news of established ecstasy labs, grow-ops, murders, brothels etc. being found and closed...at least the ones they know about.
A better story on the crime and punishment front is the UNreported crimes. I personally have caught people red - handed.
Conclusion: the Police and the Justice system are, effectively a waste of time .
Solution lately...HIRE MORE POLICE !
Why?? Feed the cancer some more ?...Where is the connection to a cure?
Every time the sh!te hits the fan...ie crime sprees,...it always seems to be about 10 + cops being requested .
Is this in the political butt- cover handbook?
Tougher judges... yeah right!!!... even a tough judge is up against court appeals and precedents ...and a society and a system that almost inherently rewards various failures and expects the rest of us to perpetuate it , fiscally and otherwise.
I seem to recall hearing Prosecutors have an unoffical benchmark of $1000 (value of the stolen items)before they will consider a formal prosecution . So when the Cops show up for a " B and E" , its simple to start a paper trail for insurance reasons . However, this actual filing of an insurance claim may screw up your insurance rating, you then move to high risk...thus higher premiums, if not allowed insurance period.
Thus you may dial 9-1-...and say forget it...(and not dial 9-1-1).
Again, how much goes UNreported...the " Truth and the Justice System " is seriously skewed, Top TO Bottom.
JC7
5 years ago
Justice
I use to think it was the legal representation of Irony.
Took me a long time to realise it
is just another form of Capitalism.
alex johnstone
5 years ago
political framing
Great article. I would like to see more discussion around political framing of the justice system and alternative frames.
murdock
5 years ago
FEAR!
you name it, if we fear it it will be used to motivate, motivate, motivate...
Crime is a great fear to work on, unless you do not watch television, then you laugh at the jesters, and their shills (in the media), whom are trying to scare everyone into a crazy course of action.
Reasonable judgement, cannot come while you are afraid.
nightbloom
5 years ago
Yes
...is the answer to the question posed in the title of this piece.
Crime is real, not a theoretical abstraction. In the absence of personal conscience, morality and ethics, our decrepit society is left with one final disincentive: consequence. Gardner doesn't actually address this unalterable fact. This piece is abundant whiney criticism yet totally AWOL on solutions. Everyone in law enforcement & criminology acknowledges that the system is flawed, perhaps even a total failure. But treating honest citizens to a veritable parade of criminals who carry out their activities without consequence right under our noses is an insult to everyone who gets up every Monday for an insufficient paycheque. It's actually amazing how brazen it has become now - honest citizens now have to look away, tiptoe and otherwise meekly yield to open criminality in broad daylight. What else can they do, when laws are no longer enforced and justice has become meaningless?
Clear Cut
5 years ago
Richard Warnica
With top-notch investigative reporting like this, it's no wonder you were promoted to senior editor.
anarcho
5 years ago
More BS
Tough on crime = need for scape goats for socially induced problems. Furtheremore, the "common criminals" are street corner delinquents along side the pinstripe bandits and war mongering, piratizing politicians.
speedo
5 years ago
Here's a thought: people are
Here's a thought: people are not deterred from doing bad things by the severity of the punishment but by the likelihood of getting caught. "Getting tough on crime" is a conservative thought-cliche that's as devoid of imagination as it is of usefulness.
nightbloom
5 years ago
Quote:Here's a thought:
By that logic (which I don't necessarily disagree with) what is needed is more effective and interventionist policing.
Anomalous
5 years ago
Wake Up
The continual frivolous rhetoric from politicians regarding criminal justice policy must come to an end. The never-ending accusations of one being “Soft” on crime as representing a detriment must vanish. Let’s extinguish this irrelevant pendulum. We as the citizenry must stop incessantly accepting and supporting the notions of “tough” on crime. All the research suggests that this is not the way to reduce crime or “make our streets and communities safer”. Contrarily, it degrades social cohesion and erodes the bonds that keep the idea of a community vaguely alive where the answer to "safe streets" truly rests.
Are we ever going to wake up?