MINIMUMS MANDATORY

Courts Have Been Suckered Way Too Many Times

The hand-wringing intelligentsia is at it again. Hogging the front
page of the Globe and Mail, lamenting the loss of Canada as we know it
while the feds continue to push and support supposedly expensive
legislation designed to take those who are a threat to others off the
street for minimum, specific periods.

Insisting on anonymity a squeamish judge said, "(we're) concerned that
when the occasional exception comes along, we cannot do the right
thing. There are cases where a mandatory minimum is simply too harsh."

Retired Quebec judge John Gomery has said such legislation is "a slap
in the face" to the judiciary.

Maybe, but the truth is that the courts have been suckered too many
times. This is Canada's way of saying we've had enough.

Still, the defence bar and legal eggheads insist minimum sentences can
be "downright cruel." Hmm. A man chooses to arm himself with a gun and
rape an innocent 14-year-old girl as she walks home.

That would be downright cruel. A guaranteed jail term is
firm.

Naturally defence lawyers don't like mandatory minimums. But that
smells more like business.

Civil libertarians worry that, "marginal offenders (are being or will
be) treated unduly harshly." Hmm. Using violence or intimidation to
live off the avails of prostitution of someone under 18 -- five years.
Importing and trafficking in unauthorized firearms -- one year.

Using a firearm while holding someone hostage -- four years. There are
no marginal players in such crimes. If the choice is to play with the
big dogs, prepare to get bitten.

Then there is the economic worry of mandatory minimums. More people in
jail costs more money, $80 million more per year says the shortsighted
intelligentsia.

Eighty thousand per con, per year. Hmm.

But out and about, one Level 4 car thief causes that much damage in a
few days, sometimes just hours.

A sexual predator, unless he is behind bars, is free to strike. It
doesn't matter how many peace bonds or other scraps of paper shackling
restrict him.

When he is free, he is able to act on his urges that draw him toward
women, little girls or young boys.

In a 2004 study published in the Journal of Biolaw and Business,
researcher Ray Wickenheiser calculated a financial cost for known
sexual assaults in the United States. Each one averaged $111,238.

Although the study was not focused on issues of sentencing, the
dollars related to each and every victim are no less real.

From a comfy campus or the plush appointments of an uptown legal firm,
some so-called authorities get bent out of shape hearing that a
"disenfranchised" soul convicted of dealing crack near a school, is
looking at a guaranteed jail term.

Yet on any given day these bookish worms, driving home to the burbs,
have no trouble casually looking over their "Maui Jims" beyond the
decay of troubled communities, ignoring the honest folks or the
seniors afraid to leave their homes. Over the heads of the children
turning to the street to support their brand new habit.

Decay and rot courtesy of crime with no punishment.

We wonder what's wrong with those who destroy lives and communities
through hard drug dealing and violence.

Maybe we should wonder instead about those who are skittish about
sending them to jail.

We need mandatory minimums.

We can't afford not to have them.