Good to see a more reasoned view Janet. You make …

Comment on Criminal lawyers oppose Country Liberals on mandatory sentencing by Ian Sharp.

Good to see a more reasoned view Janet. You make a good point about responsibility, howeverI don’t accept the mandatory sentencing aspect. Offenders do need to accept responsibility for their actions – I’m not sure locking people up always achieves this.
As for Keith’s comment, lock up all the crims, that begs the question: who are the “crims”? Shoplifters too? And where are you going to house all these jailbirds? Got the funds to build all the prisons you will need? And what about jail will do these people, thought about that? What happens when they get out of “crim school”? Shouting populism from the rooftops might make you feel good, but contributes nothing meaningful to our situation.

Ian Sharp Also Commented

Criminal lawyers oppose Country Liberals on mandatory sentencing
Russell Goldflam makes a lot of good points here … particularly about provocation. If an assault is committed as a result of provocation then it can be raised as a mitigating circumstance in sentencing (not as a defence). The Magistrate can then decide how much weight to give it when deciding the sentence. Many times the provocation will be slight and the Magistrate will ignore it, but there are times when it is real and worth taking into account.
Mandatory sentencing denies the Magistrate the ability to take all circumstances of a case into consideration when sentencing. Bad Law, made by politicians for electoral reasons. Takes discretion away from the courts and gives it to the police / DPP when they decide what charges to lay in a matter. No appeal against their decision, unlike sentences imposed by courts. Therefore reduces accountability. Not everyone understands the system well enough to appreciate this, we need to inform ourselves. This article from the Alice News is a good start.
Hard to believe that everyone who has commented has in fact read it. Thoughtfully.


Criminal lawyers oppose Country Liberals on mandatory sentencing
@Erwin … take your point, but wanted to highlight the illogical nature of Janet’s argument. Reminded me of the curfew debate last year,when Samih Habib, Eli Melky and Steve Brown all stated that anyone opposing their support for a curfew was in favour of kids roaming the streets and worse. Just a silly argument, but one they seemed to sincerely believe. We need people in the public debate who are capable and prepared to be rational in support of their point. The benefit of this is that occasionally such rational people can persuade their opponents, or be persuaded to alter their own stance. Result, a better outcome.


Criminal lawyers oppose Country Liberals on mandatory sentencing
Erwin, you have issued a yellow card to both Janet and Bob. Crikey. I think Bob’s response was mild given the [irrational] nature of Janet’s logic. You should moderate the comments for rationality I think.


Recent Comments by Ian Sharp

Big crowd at local School Strike 4 Climate Action
@ David: “We have politicians to act on these things.”
Crikey!
John Howard a very late convert just before 2007 election; The Ruddster creeping away from “the greatest moral challenge of our time”; Julia reluctant to bring in an emissions trading scheme, hounded as a “carbon taxing Juliar” by Abbott, Credlin, The Parrot and Hadley; Malcolm crucified twice for trying to do something that Tony wouldn’t – and now the farce of Barnaby wanting to rise again on the back of coal, and The Potato on his road to Damascus finally sensing the tide turning … and you blithely tell the kids “We have politicians to act on these things.”
They will roll over laughing at you. Rightly.


Big crowd at local School Strike 4 Climate Action
@ David: “We have politicians to act on these things.”
Crikey!
John Howard a very late convert just before 2007 election; The Ruddster creeping away from “the greatest moral challenge of our time” (although creeping conveys meaning as well); Julia reluctant to bring in an emissions trading scheme, hounded as a carbon taxing Julia by Abbott, Credlin, The Parrot and Hadley; Malcolm crucified twice for trying to do something that Tony wouldn’t … and now the farce of Barnaby wanting to rise again on the back of coal, and The Potato on his road to Damascus finally sensing the tide turning … and you blithely tell the kids “We have politicians to act on these things.”
They will roll over laughing at you. Rightly.


Liberals and Labor: Tweedledum and Tweedledee on Pine Gap
Pine Gap certainly has done a lot for our security over many years, but the rise of drone warfare raises new issues.
Watch the film Eye in the Sky with Helen Mirren and Alan Rickman if you are unsure about this. Good article Kieran, thanks.


96 trees chopped down to ‘duplicate’ highway
Pretty rotten section of the road to be riding a bike on, duplication will be a boon to Alice cyclists I think.
The trees will regrow, and will actually increase their intake of carbon as they do.


Visitor from afar to Alex’s backyard
Special indeed, thanks Alex.


Be Sociable, Share!