Pubdate: Wed, 20 May 2009
Source: Campbell River Mirror (CN BC) & several other sources
Copyright: 2009 Campbell River Mirror
Contact: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Website: http://www.campbellrivermirror.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1380
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?199 (Mandatory Minimum Sentencing)

HARPER FOLLOWING U.S. ROAD TO FAILURE

After 35 years of experience with mandatory minimum sentences for
drug crimes, Americans are beginning to abandon this discredited
approach. Yet Stephen Harper's Conservative government now wants to
saddle Canadians with these expensive and ineffective laws.

Now before a Commons committee, Bill C-15 would impose a two-year
mandatory minimum for dealing drugs like cocaine and methamphetamines
in places where young people congregate. It would also impose a
six-month jail sentence for growing even a single marijuana plant for
the purposes of trafficking.

These minimum sentences may sound reasonable to most Canadians.
Indeed, federal Justice Minister Rob Nicholson told the Commons
committee last month that the bill targets "serious drug traffickers,
the people who are basically out to destroy our society."

But the committee also heard ample evidence that the mandatory
minimums would have the effect of filling our prisons with petty drug
felons, creating an even greater backlog in our overwhelmed court
system and wasting taxpayer dollars that could be used far more
effectively in the battle against drug addiction.

When questioned by New Democrat MP Libby Davies at the committee,
Nicholson refused to provide two vital pieces of information: What
evidence is there that this law will reduce crime? How much will it cost?

Canadians ought to be given these answers.

Of course, in a minority Parliament, the opposition parties could
kill this initiative. But while the New Democrats and the Bloc
Quebecois have voiced strong opposition to Bill C-15, the Liberals
have indicated they will support it when it comes back to the Commons
for third reading.

Why? Not because they think it is sound policy; they acknowledge in
private that it is not. Rather, the Liberals do not want to give the
Conservatives an opening to accuse them of being "soft" on crime.

This is craven politics at its worst.

- Oak Bay News
_________________________________________________


_______________________________________________
Theharderstuff mailing list
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
http://mail.psychedelic-library.org/mailman/listinfo/theharderstuff