Letter: Safer streets (canada)

[WAGCEVP]

Letter: Safer streets


PUBLICATION: National Post
DATE: 2004.01.07
EDITION: National
SECTION: Editorials
PAGE: A15
BYLINE: Robert S. Sciuk
SOURCE: National Post

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Safer streets

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Making Toronto Safer, editorial, Jan. 5.

Toronto Police Chief Julian Fantino does indeed have an axe to grind with the federal Justice Ministry, if not the judiciary. The problem is not that we don't have enough firearms law, nor that we have too little policing, but rather we have a justice ministry which allows the plea bargaining away of mandatory sentences which are supposed to be meted out for firearms offences under our existing Criminal Code.

Our judiciary could, with a simple policy change, start handing out harsh consecutive sentences to violent offenders, and thus send a message that Canadians are not prepared to tolerate firearms violence, period. By making the time suitable to the crime, and dropping such guilt assuaging measures as the Youth Criminal Justice Act, early parole, mandatory supervision, faint hope and failed deportation orders, then criminals would start to think twice before taking a firearm on their next spree.

Knowing that violent offenders would not be back on the streets in mere months, informants might not be so reticent to co-operate with police, fearing swift and fatal retribution from violent criminals.

Canadians have never needed the fundamentally flawed and completely inept Firearms Act, and could instead get a real bang for the buck by enforcing the criminal laws we've always had on the books, and using the sentencing process as a real deterrent to crime.

It seems that there exists an element within the justice system who are more concerned with rehabilitation and recidivism than deterrence and public safety. In my humble opinion, it doesn't really matter if violent criminals are rehabilitated or not -- as long as they stay in jail.

Robert S. Sciuk, Oshawa, Ont.

 

[WAGCEVP]

Letter: Gun Laws (re: Safer Streets)

Letter: Gun laws
Date: Jan 8, 2004 9:22 AM
PUBLICATION: National Post
DATE: 2004.01.08
EDITION: National
SECTION: Editorials
PAGE: A17
BYLINE: Leonard Hamm
SOURCE: National Post

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gun laws

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Safer Streets, letter to the editor, Jan. 7.

I agree with letter writer Robert S. Sciuk, who believes that lack of enforcement
of criminal statutes and plea bargaining lead to an increase in handgun violence.

As a long-time citizen of the state of Virginia, I can point to a successful campaign,
undertaken by the city of Richmond and adopted as a statewide measure, that has
reduced handgun crimes. This consists of a mandatory five-year prison term for anyone
caught in possession of an unlicensed handgun.

There is no plea bargain allowed; carry a gun, go to jail. Signs to that effect
are posted on highways entering the state. This works.

By contrast, the District of Columbia, the nation's capital, which abuts northern
Virginia and has the strictest gun control regulations in the country, has intermittently
carried the well-deserved mantle of "Murder Capital of the United States."
And, predictably, it has a revolving door court system where plea bargains and reduced
sentences are considered the most efficient way of dealing with an overwhelming
caseload. Let's hear it for appropriate and unavoidable punishment.

Leonard Hamm, Point Roberts, Va.