25-06-2023, 07:42 PM
Just as they did back in 2022.
https://www.national.org.nz/national_lau..._offending
And in 2021
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/n...P3MI6HELU/
I suppose they're working on the principle of 'It worked last time'...
It might perhaps work better if they did it properly. This is a bit long, but makes excellent sense.
https://www.1news.co.nz/2022/07/13/opini...wont-help/
A community where people are struggling, where poverty is not uncommon, where so many of our whānau are doing it hard.
There are many within our community that do not see a space for themselves in mainstream society. Who through their struggle to survive, have been told that the Government, those in power and the community at large do not care for them.
A reality that we struggle to face is that poverty, inequality and social exclusion create the environment where some within our community feel so other, so desperate, so excluded from mainstream society, that the only hope they have is found within collectives that are out of step with the community at large.
And calls for more police and harsher punishments, while ignoring the reality that we have chosen to allow inequality and poverty to grow, is a perverse abdication of our collective responsibility for one another.
We have allowed a society to be created where it is acceptable for young people to sleep on our streets.
Where it is acceptable for parents to go to bed hungry, because without starving themselves they wouldn’t have enough to feed their kids.
Where it has become acceptable for some whānau to live in mouldy, cold and damp homes, in order to pay off the mortgage of a landlord who doesn’t want to invest in the repairs needed to make their whare liveable.
It is possible to decide that we care more about our people, than we do about the status quo.
And if we want to prevent crime within our communities, if we want to safeguard our young people from seeing gangs as the only hope they have for survival, then we must make a choice to do away with the trite and cliché tough on crime rhetoric.
Getting smart on crime means we invest in our communities, we eradicate poverty,"
https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/07-09-2...-right-way
The problem is that, in anything more than a very short-term sense, it doesn’t.
The evidence from around the world tells us that imposing longer prison sentences for offenders, particularly those under 25, does not cause crime rates to fall.
As the US-based National Institute of Justice found in 2016, harsher punishments usually have no deterrent effect on young would-be criminals. In fact, longer prison sentences often cause crime rates to rise over time, such is the effect imprisonment has on those consigned to it.
Here are five ways to do that:
[b]Increasing police resourcing and training[/b]. The National Institute of Justice research tells us that while the prospect of tougher sentences is not a deterrent to people breaking the law, an increased chance of getting caught certainly is. We need to increase police numbers, train them well and back them with better resources.
[b]More funding for organisations to ensure our kids get to school regularly[/b]. Fewer than 60% of teenagers now regularly attend school in New Zealand. The connection between truancy and crime among high school students is clear and obvious. Organisations like Community Patrol New Zealand, as well as the Māori and Pasifika Wardens, do so much good in our communities. They are well-placed to partner with the government to ensure our kids get to class and stay out of trouble.
[b]Compulsory vocational training as part of more custodial sentences[/b]. One of the key problems with sending young people to prison is the complete absence of options they have to contribute to society once they’re out. Work drastically reduces the chances of repeat offending and more importantly, gives dignity.
[b]Funding for post-sentence pastoral support[/b]. Custodial sentences are isolating experiences, and tossing a person back into the community with no support system once they’ve served their time makes it much more likely that they’ll turn to crime again. Look at the prevalence of 501 deportees in the Auckland CBD if you don’t believe me. Funding for community-based support people and mentoring at organisations like the Citizens Advice Bureau, local marae and the Auckland City Mission would provide much-needed guidance to people integrating back into society.
All of this has echoes of a “social investment” approach to criminal justice. Advocates of social investment know that its application to areas like criminal justice not only makes us a safer and happier country, but also has a strong economic case behind it.
There are, of course, exceptions. But for the most part, use of the five tools above would drastically improve criminal justice outcomes in New Zealand. Fewer people would offend, and fewer victims would feel the effects of their offending.
That’s really getting “tough on crime”.
https://www.national.org.nz/national_lau..._offending
And in 2021
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/n...P3MI6HELU/
I suppose they're working on the principle of 'It worked last time'...
It might perhaps work better if they did it properly. This is a bit long, but makes excellent sense.
https://www.1news.co.nz/2022/07/13/opini...wont-help/
We’re a community that is experiencing extreme inequality, where some have and others do not.
"A community where two people can live in a six-bedroom mansion on one street and a whānau of 14 can pack into a mouldy, cold and damp three-bedroom house on the other.A community where people are struggling, where poverty is not uncommon, where so many of our whānau are doing it hard.
There are many within our community that do not see a space for themselves in mainstream society. Who through their struggle to survive, have been told that the Government, those in power and the community at large do not care for them.
A reality that we struggle to face is that poverty, inequality and social exclusion create the environment where some within our community feel so other, so desperate, so excluded from mainstream society, that the only hope they have is found within collectives that are out of step with the community at large.
And calls for more police and harsher punishments, while ignoring the reality that we have chosen to allow inequality and poverty to grow, is a perverse abdication of our collective responsibility for one another.
We have allowed a society to be created where it is acceptable for young people to sleep on our streets.
Where it is acceptable for parents to go to bed hungry, because without starving themselves they wouldn’t have enough to feed their kids.
Where it has become acceptable for some whānau to live in mouldy, cold and damp homes, in order to pay off the mortgage of a landlord who doesn’t want to invest in the repairs needed to make their whare liveable.
It is possible to eradicate poverty.
It is possible to decide that we care more about our people, than we do about the status quo.
And if we want to prevent crime within our communities, if we want to safeguard our young people from seeing gangs as the only hope they have for survival, then we must make a choice to do away with the trite and cliché tough on crime rhetoric.
Getting smart on crime means we invest in our communities, we eradicate poverty,"
https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/07-09-2...-right-way
"The frequent reaction to a rise in criminal activity is to clamour for the government to “get tough on crime”. I’ve heard it frequently during my career as a lawyer in New Zealand and the United States. Usually, it means a call for harsher sentences for offending and a more aggressive approach to prosecution. Political figures of all stripes have advocated for these measures in 2022, on the basis that they would remove ram raiders from society and keep violent criminals off our streets. This, they say, makes us safer.
The problem is that, in anything more than a very short-term sense, it doesn’t.
The evidence from around the world tells us that imposing longer prison sentences for offenders, particularly those under 25, does not cause crime rates to fall.
As the US-based National Institute of Justice found in 2016, harsher punishments usually have no deterrent effect on young would-be criminals. In fact, longer prison sentences often cause crime rates to rise over time, such is the effect imprisonment has on those consigned to it.
Being “tough on crime” really means addressing the causes of crime, and preventing repeat offending. It means stopping criminal activity at its source, and rehabilitating those who do offend, particularly at a young age, back into society.
Here are five ways to do that:
[b]Increasing police resourcing and training[/b]. The National Institute of Justice research tells us that while the prospect of tougher sentences is not a deterrent to people breaking the law, an increased chance of getting caught certainly is. We need to increase police numbers, train them well and back them with better resources.
[b]More funding for organisations to ensure our kids get to school regularly[/b]. Fewer than 60% of teenagers now regularly attend school in New Zealand. The connection between truancy and crime among high school students is clear and obvious. Organisations like Community Patrol New Zealand, as well as the Māori and Pasifika Wardens, do so much good in our communities. They are well-placed to partner with the government to ensure our kids get to class and stay out of trouble.
[b]More funding for early-intervention mental health support in the criminal justice system[/b]. There is a strong link between poor mental health and criminal activity. Compulsory mental health support as part of a corrective sentence gives offenders a significantly better chance of getting on the right path after they do their time.
[b]Compulsory vocational training as part of more custodial sentences[/b]. One of the key problems with sending young people to prison is the complete absence of options they have to contribute to society once they’re out. Work drastically reduces the chances of repeat offending and more importantly, gives dignity.
[b]Funding for post-sentence pastoral support[/b]. Custodial sentences are isolating experiences, and tossing a person back into the community with no support system once they’ve served their time makes it much more likely that they’ll turn to crime again. Look at the prevalence of 501 deportees in the Auckland CBD if you don’t believe me. Funding for community-based support people and mentoring at organisations like the Citizens Advice Bureau, local marae and the Auckland City Mission would provide much-needed guidance to people integrating back into society.
All of this has echoes of a “social investment” approach to criminal justice. Advocates of social investment know that its application to areas like criminal justice not only makes us a safer and happier country, but also has a strong economic case behind it.
By contrast, putting more money into well-trained police, mental health support and vocational training in prisons will dramatically reduce the cost of crime in the long run. Quite simply, fewer people would commit fewer crimes that cost the taxpayer money. Those who would otherwise be engaged in repeated criminal behaviour are instead far more likely to hold down jobs, pay tax and contribute to New Zealand.
There are, of course, exceptions. But for the most part, use of the five tools above would drastically improve criminal justice outcomes in New Zealand. Fewer people would offend, and fewer victims would feel the effects of their offending.
That’s really getting “tough on crime”.
in order to be old & wise, you must first be young & stupid. (I'm still working on that.)