Should violent young offenders be punished harshly?

Should violent young offenders be punished harshly?
by Dahn Batchelor--article sent to a law journal in 2002
____________________________________________________________________

In the July 30, issue of Law Times, lawyer Helen Conway made some comments in her piece on young offenders which I feel compelled to address.

She takes issue with automatically trying and sentencing 16 and 17-year-olds as adults when they are charged with serious offences.

Why does she feel that when a 16-year-old murders an old lady, that that young killer should be treated as a wayward youth? Would Ms. Conway still have compassion for the young killer if the victim was her own mother?

Sixteen-year-olds are permitted to drive cars, they often live on their own, many have a grade 11 education and many are given fairly responsible jobs. We as a society have every right to believe that a 16-year-old knows the difference between right and wrong and that they know that when they stick a knife into someone’s chest, in all probabilities, their victim will die.

To quote Ms. Conway, “Part of being a young person means that they should be allowed to make mistakes…” unquote.

No-one should be allowed to make mistakes but if their “mistakes” involve deliberately stabbing or shooting human beings to death, then we as a society have every right to punish such killers by imprisoning them, irrespective of their age.

She is against mandatory jail time for anyone using or threatening to use a weapon.
She feels that a judge should have the discretion to assess the peculiar circumstances of the offence and the level of development of the young person.

I ask my readers this rhetorical question. If a 16-year-old shot you in the back during a robbery and you are a quadriplegic for life as a direct result, will you really care about the fact that he hated his father or mother, that he didn’t mean to cripple you, he merely lost control and that he quit school in grade nine? More importantly, will you feel that justice has been served if he gets probation because the judge feels that he is remorseful for what he did to you and he has agreed to return to school and it is his first offence?

Ms. Conway feels that 16-year-olds are different from adults and should be treated differently. Why, I ask, are they different? Do they not know that when they shoot someone, it is morally and legally wrong? Do they not know that people die if they shoot, stab or strangle them? Do they not know that when they sell drugs to other teenagers, they may bring death to these other teenagers? Do they not know that when they sexually assault a child or a woman, they are causing their victim great anguish and probably great pain also?

I am amused at the part in her piece in which she maintains that these wayward 16-year-olds, “are still learning, less mature, and should be held accountable differently than adults.” Try telling that to your thirteen-year-old daughter who was violently sexually abused by a gang of 16-year-olds to such an extent, it will take years of therapy to get her back to normal.

Ms. Conway maintains that there is evidence that tougher laws and harsher sentences for our youth do not work and yet in the same paragraph, she admits that youth crime is consistently decreasing. Do you think it is possible that Ms. Conway has not fathomed the fact that because our laws are tough and sentences are harsh, this is the reason why youth crime is consistently decreasing?

She objects to the publication of the identity of 14-year-olds found guilty of a serious offence. If a 14-year-old is found guilty of murder, he isn’t going to remain free in society so by the time he is released, his features will have changed in any case so her concerns are moot. As far as the publication of his name, ask yourself, how many people in Canada, know the name of the serial killer who killed 11 young people in Canada? It is my contention that most adults rarely remember the names of a young person who murders one person after a few years and by the time the young killer is released, very few people will connect his name with that which they read in the papers years earlier.

Just as most murderers who killed as adults are eventually released into society and manage to live normal lives after that, so will young offenders who kill and are eventually returned to society as young adults. Most people will have forgotten who they were, except for sex offenders, of course but that is only if the police publish the details of their offences after they are released.

For years and years, we have consistently listened to sob sisters who propose wishy washy solutions to problems that seem to get out of hand. It is my contention that when the problem gets out of hand, we have to exert more pressure on those who offend through violent means. We cannot remove this blight from our society by gently stroking it with a feather. We can only succeed in eradicating violent crime by scrubbing hard at the roots of the problem and if that means that young offenders who commit violent crime are going to feel the pain, so be it.