SINGAPORE HAS THE RIGHT STUFF IN THE WAR ON CRIME

THIS week I'm mad as hell. My 102-year-old aunt-in-law, a Yankee of
independent spirit, lives alone in her own house and has been robbed.
The scoundrel stole $200 in her petty-cash box and then grabbed her
bottle of sherry, as well.

Now she's anxious, has to lock her door, making it harder for friends
and neighbours to drop by and check on her. Recently another elderly
Vancouver woman was robbed and injured in a similar way. She cried,
"He's a low-down beast and he needs the lash."

Her advice reminded me of a visit to Singapore several years ago. I
went to Singapore tired of hearing from bleeding hearts that
punishment does not deter crime.

Before landing in Singapore I was handed a card in the airplane that
read, "Welcome to Singapore." Printed below in bright red letters was
the warning: "Death for drug traffickers under Singapore law." No if,
ands or buts about this welcome. I then spent several days
researching Singapore's laws and its crime rate. In the 1970s
Singapore had a serious problem. The use of heroin was spreading to
young people. And former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew decided to nip
the trend in the bud. He introduced the death penalty for major drug
traffickers and some offences were also punishable by caning.

The government realized that nothing would work if drugs were easily
available. So black-market areas of drug abuse were flooded with
police 24 hours a day for up to nine months (cities in Canada take
note). Addicts were sent to treatment centres, major drug dealers
were hanged and small-time pushers imprisoned.

Criminals quickly realized that not only were these new laws harsh,
but also police intended to enforce them. Moreover, caning made a
distinct impression on their backsides and their heads.

Many in North America consider this type of punishment brutal, a
return to the dark ages. But officials in Singapore told me that only
five per cent of criminals became repeat offenders after meeting the
cane (officials and do-gooders take note).

Singapore also has strict gun-control laws. Anyone who possesses a
firearm to commit a crime is liable to life imprisonment. As a
result, there are few bank robberies in Singapore (there were 146 in
Toronto in 2004).

I can already hear readers complaining that my job is to write about
medicine, not crime. But anxiety and depression come in a variety of
packages. And my wife's elderly aunt now lives with anxiety that is
just as real as patients worrying about a stomach ulcer.

Singapore officials have said that North Americans have become
"irresponsibly permissive." How true! And this attitude starts early.
Consider how we allow students, hardly out of diapers, to rule the
classroom, insisting they have their rights, but ignoring any
responsibility (school boards take note).

This namby-pamby permissiveness results in drug trafficking,
addiction and finally murder when punishment is soft, delayed or non-existent.

Idiocy today knows no bounds. One of my patients who works in a
Toronto hostel for women told me that hundreds of dollars in
government welfare cheques arrive there each month. But as soon as
the money arrives, many of these women are out on the street using it
to buy crack cocaine. And it's these women who often give birth to
brain-damaged children who are disabled for life. Bernard Shaw was
right when he wrote, "When extraterrestrial beings land on Earth they
will instantly declare it a lunatic asylum."

So my congratulations to 89-year old Mary Campbell in Vancouver. But
it shouldn't be left to a senior citizen to suggest caning is what
her attacker needs, if he's ever caught; not more social workers to
tend to his psyche or a comfortable jail cell.

I believe my wife's 102-year-old aunt would also favour a good
thrashing for the thug who robbed her. After all, it's annoying
enough to lose your pocket money. But when an evil villain has the
audacity to abscond with your sherry, he should hang by the thumbs in
the city square.