ZB ZB
Opinion
Live now
Start time
Playing for
End time
Listen live
Listen to NAME OF STATION
Up next
Listen live on
ZB

John MacDonald: Does the government really think this is going to work?

Author
John MacDonald ,
Publish Date
Tue, 22 Oct 2024, 12:51pm
(Photo / File)
(Photo / File)

John MacDonald: Does the government really think this is going to work?

Author
John MacDonald ,
Publish Date
Tue, 22 Oct 2024, 12:51pm

Sometimes you just have to resort to cliches, because there are times when there’s just no other way to say it. Or no better way to say it.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over-and-over and expecting different results.

That’s how I feel about the Government strengthening its Three Strikes law to make it easier to keep repeat offenders in prison for longer.

Which means that instead of 3 Strikes kicking-in after someone’s first sentence of two years or more, they’re going to be in the running if their first sentence is just one year or more.

So, if someone commits a crime with punishments longer than one year (the first time around) and then goes on to commit two more crimes and gets sentences of two years or more for each of them - the third time, the judge has to give out the maximum sentence. No discounts.

Until now, the 3 Strikes was only going to kick-in after someone committed their first crime that had a sentence of two years or more. Now it’s going to kick in if their first crime gets a sentence of just one year, or more.

And the reason I think it’s insanity is the same reason that Julie-Anne Kincade thinks it’s insane. She’s a King’s Counsel and Vice-President of the Law Association, and here’s what she had to say to Mike about this a couple of hours ago:

She says there's no evidence that Three Strikes works in the way that people think it will work. She says it doesn't deter people, and some people might be sent to jail just because they don't have a house where they can serve home detention.

Julie-Anne Kincade is also concerned these changes to the Three Strikes laws could men negative outcomes for innocent people too.

"I'm also very concerned about the lack of parole. Parole is an incentive for good behaviour and it incentivises people to engage with psychologists and take programmes. To understand their trigger points.  

"Under this regime, the most serious offenders won't be allowed any parole. They won't be given any rehabilitation and then they'll be chucked out on the street without the strong support that parole system gives people to make sure they transition back into our society. This is actually going to achieve exactly the opposite of what they want to achieve."

If the aim is to reduce violent crime then the Government is barking up the wrong tree with this one. Because if it didn’t work the last time we had it —which was between 2010 and 2021— do you really think it’s going to work now? Of course it’s not.

And the reason it didn’t work last time we had it is because laws like this don’t take into account other factors like mental health, intellectual disability, the age of the offenders, and any addictions they might have.

The same thing happened in California after they brought in a Three Strikes law in 1994. In fact, it saw so many more people end up in prison that it nearly bankrupted the state. They, eventually, saw the light and got rid of it. 

Not here in New Zealand, though. The fact it failed last time obviously isn’t a concern for the Government - which is only doing what it’s doing to keep the crowds on the sidelines happy.

Take your Radio, Podcasts and Music with you