GET TOUGH, BUT REAL

Here's a great idea.

Let's, as Canadians, write both houses of our government, yes there
are two, and tell them what our priorities are surrounding crime.

Because they're only half getting it.

Ending double credit for pretrial custody? Good.

Mandatory jail sentences for people who grow and sell as few as five
marijuana plants? Bad.

A pair of Conservative "we're the toughest of the tough on crime"
bills went before the Senate Justice Committee last week and were
both greeted with suspicion from Liberals in the Senate, which
produced nothing but outrage from the Conservatives.

And the circle of life continues.

But lost in the din of the usual name calling that would put
kindergartners to shame is what has the makings of real political discourse.

The notion here is that Canadians surely want the justice system to
stop mollycoddling criminals, by ensuring they do as much time in
jail as possible.

But at the same time the debate also needs to be had whether certain
crimes actually warrant jail time. trial for violent offences, and
sex crimes are the kinds of people Canadians don't mind seeing
clogging our remand centres.

But when it comes to small-time drug dealers, especially marijuana,
Canadians would rather tell lawmakers to deal with people doing real harm.

So yes, the Senate is well out of line for gutting legislation ending
2-for-1 credit for pretrial custody.

You know they're wrong when even the NDP thinks so.

But the Conservatives have lost the plot for including in a bill --
which also targets organized crime operations and pushers who peddle
to kids -- such a low jail threshold for small-time growers.

Even worse is the unfair notion of forcing dealers in small centres
into jail while allowing those from cities with drug courts, a truly
valuable tool, to skirt prison for completing the program.

It's time someone told the Conservatives it's possible to be tough on
crime without putting everyone in jail.