14 October 2008
22 Sep
It is about time. Most of the violent crime in our cities today is committed by “young offenders”. Anyone 14 or older should not be excused due to his or her age; young people today mature much sooner than in previous generations, and they certainly know the difference between right and wrong. When they kill or assault someone, they know exactly what they’re doing. And when you’re old enough to do the crime, you’re old enough to do the time – and to be named and shamed in public for what you did.
Stephen Harper’s plan for tackling those “young” killers and robbers will resonate well with most city people across Canada, because Canadians are sick and tired of violent youth crime:
The law will ensure that persons aged 14 and older who are convicted of serious violent offences (first- or second-degree murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, aggravated sexual assault, or other serious violent offences for which an adult would be liable to imprisonment for more than two years and in the commission of which the offender causes or attempts to cause serious bodily harm) are automatically subject to enhanced youth sentencing [up to 14 years for violent offences, and maximum enhanced youth sentences of life for first- or second-degree murder]. Further, upon conviction they will be named and a publication ban will not apply.
Bravo and bravo again!
In case anyone doubts the seriousness of violent crimes committed by teenagers should look at these stats:
While some crime rates have declined in recent years, violent crime among youth continues to be a serious social problem. In 2006, violent crime committed by young offenders was up 30 per cent from 1991. Almost 40,000 youth were accused of serious and violent crimes in 2006.
- Almost 160 were accused of murder or attempted murder.
- Almost 31,000 were accused of assault.
- More than 2,100 were accused of sexual assault.
- More than 4,500 were accused of robbery.

Conservative Party
Liberal Party
New Democratic Party
Bloc Québécois
Green Party
Christian Heritage
Progressive Canadian
Marijuana Party
Marxist-Leninist Party
Canadian Action Party
Communist Party
Libertarian Party
First Peoples Party
Western Block Party
Animal Alliance Party
neorhino.ca
14 Responses for "Tackling violent youth crime — long overdue!"
Most violent crime is committed by people under the age of 18? Young people are more mature today than they were a generation ago? Werner non partisan? There’s no evidence to back up any of those three things.
If a 14-year-old is old enough to bear the full weight of our criminal justice system they should be old enough to vote. You can’t argue that a child should be forced to take responsibility for their actions in one breath and say that they’re incapable of making a political choice in another.
Before someone says that a 14-year-old is incapable of making a nuanced decision but is capable of telling between the right and wrong of murder/assault, consider this — if we held the capability for nuanced decision making as the standard for suffrage, a larger percentage of our over-18 population would be ineligible to vote.
You can’t have it both ways. If the government has the right to lock them up and reveal their names, they have a right to affect that system.
Waterloo Votes 2008: Part 1: Kitchener Centre…
Hill and Knowlton have again released their flash-based election predictor. Political junkies will have a whale of a time feeding in various numbers to see what brings about a Conservative minority, a Liberal majority, or whathaveyou. The results are….
Werner, one little detail: it does not work !
Do your homework before posting something like this. The longer you send kids in jail, the higher the crime rate will be. Proven by studies in every country in the world with our american neighbor being a top example. Young offenders can be rehabilitated better than adults, because yes they are kids and can be influenced positively like negatively. Lock up those 31,000 teenagers accused of assault for 5 or 10 years each in a federal prison and then you can be sure you’ll get 31,000 hardened criminals (well raised in jail at the best school of crime). Need proof? the Québec law for young offenders, which prones rehabilitation, is being studied from countries abroad because it is so effective. Let’s not go backwards, repression is a simplistic and non-effective solution; that is why we abolished death penalty a long time ago.
By the way, I totally agree with the wise post of Mark McAllister.
Strange how the Conservatives believe that a 14 year old can be dealt with as an adult in a criminal situation, but from all other legal perspectives cannot vote, nor have sexual relations, etc.
In addition, it is interesting that they believe 14 is the appropriate age for defining youth in the “rest of Canada” and 16 for the province of Quebec. Werner, how would you explain the difference?
It makes for a nice sound bite, but the research shows overwhelmingly that it doesn’t work.
Tout à fait d’accord avec les commentaires 1, 2 et 3.
M. Patels,
J’espère que vous comprenez le français et que vous répondrez à ce message.
Votre analyse ne fait aucun sens et, contrairement à votre description personnelle, me semble grandement partisane.
Premièrement, je tient à souligner que votre argument sur la maturité (“young people today mature much sooner than in previous generations”) se base sur votre impression personnelle et me semble plutôt biaisé.
De plus, votre argument sur le fait que les ados savent se qu’il font lorsqu’ils commettent un crime est tout autant biaisé. Lorsqu’un mineur commet un tel crime, il agit souvent par impulsion et ne calcule que très rarement les années de prisons que son crime peut lui valoir.
La criminalité au Canada est en baisse (lisez le premier fait saillant de ce rapport: http://www.statcan.ca/francais/freepub/85-002-XIF/85-002-XIF2008007.pdf) La criminalité chez les jeunes est demeurée relativement stable depuis plusieurs années. Bien qu’une hausse fut constatée en 2006, ce fut la première depuis 2003!
Les conservateurs préfèrent jouer aux durs avec les jeunes contrevenants. Mais nous savons bien que la technique qui enregistre les meilleurs rendements pour la réintégration des jeunes contrevenants est la réhabilitation, et non pas l’incarcération. L’étude de Louis-Georges Cournoyer et Jacques Dionne vont clairement en ce sens. Depuis que le Québec applique ce type d’approche, les résultats sont très positifs!
La répression est une valeur chère aux conservateurs et l’idéologie semble primer sur la logique scientfique… Ça sera quoi si les conservateurs sont majoritaires? Le créationnisme?
Martin:
You quote the example of the USA, but Japan has far tougher sentencing than the USA and has a much lower crime rate than either Canada or the USA. Hell, Japan executes some young offenders.
So I suggest that you do your homework before posting as well. When you claim that “studies in every country in the world” show something, I shouldn’t be able to find a single example of the opposite, but the onus is on you to prove your point.
Mark:
Choosing a political party to support is a far trickier decision than knowing that murdering someone is wrong. Do we really need to debate this?
Ask any 14 year old if murder is wrong. Then ask them who the leader of the opposition is. Chances are they can tell you why the first is wrong but will just stare blankly at the second question.
So yes we can have it ‘both ways’. Young people are mature enough to understand that murder and other serious crimes are wrong. But not mature enough to understand the complexities of political issues facing the nation let alone interested in politics at all.
Dr Leo Spaceman:
Biologically there’s been plenty of concern that children are maturing physically much faster recently. I can’t post links in my comments though so I can’t cite it.
Pierre:
Pardon if I respond in english to your comment.
First of all, you cite data that shows that while overall crime has been in decline in the last 10 years or so it also shows that crime by youth has not, and has increased slightly. Moreover you haven’t disproved his assertion that since 1991 crime is up 30% with respect to youths. Your data actually proves it. That means that whatever we are doing now has not reduced youth crime. The large drop in overall crime is likely the result of an increasingly old population and not because of anything we’ve actually done.
As I’ve argued elsewhere the system is focused on rehabilitation now and not on incarceration. And that workers inside the system tell me the whole thing is a joke. Kids inside the system don’t take it seriously and gangs that use the kids know that their records’ll be expunged once they reach 18.
At some level, we must balance our needs to protect society from young offenders with the opportunity for them to be rehabilitated. Because that’s what rehabilitation is, an opportunity, not a right.
I’ll look at the study you cite, but not knowing it off hand I cannot comment on the results.
Let’s take an example to test those theories:
The 2002 snipers of Virginia/Maryland Lee Malvo (17 years old) and John Muhammad (above 30 at least). To those who know that case, do you think Malvo would have killed 9-13 people if he had never met his adult mentor who trained him to shoot and chose the victims? Muhammad was telling him fairy tales of creating an utopian society in Canada and he was naive enough to follow him.
Furthermore, isn’t that always why 14 years old kill? Following adults and listening to them?
Some have killed (or committed other crimes) as they were involved with a street gang run by an adult in his late twenties. Those street gangs are often working for the Hell’s Angels by the way. Organized crime knows how easier it is to use teenagers than do the dirty job yourself and risk doing time.
Other teenagers kill for money. Not to buy video games or CDs but most often to buy drugs that their “physically matured” body needs since they met that “friend” who gives 40% of his income to the Hell’s Angels. Those guys will generously hire you as a prostitute if you can’t afford their medicine.
One can wonder how a 14 years old boy is capable of killing. It might be because for his entire life he saw people being killed on television, in movies, in video games and listening to music and it seemed like it wasn’t so bad killing people. Of course, that education wasn’t free, but at least, the money he paid for his DVDs didn’t go to the organized crime but instead to a billion dollars “legal” industry that creates thousands of jobs.
Psychological (when it’s not physical) abuse can also push teenagers to kill but those cases will never appear in statistics as it’s almost impossible to proof in court.
At 14, and even at my age, it is not that clear that killing is wrong with all those exceptions to that rule. You can kill in self-defense, you can kill when you’re a cop and you’re shooting bad guys, in Afghanistan, you can kill for democracy…
What I try to say is: if we want to reduce youth violent crime in our society, it may be a good idea to put children in jail but not at 14. At three! We most protect them from us by locking them away from this society. Hassidic Jews have understood this a long time ago!
Seriously, statistics will show the problem but won’t explain it nor will it give the solution. Each crime has multiple causes and personal decisions of the murderer is one of them. Locking him away will only prevent HIM from killing again. Another will replace him as the factors that made him a killer are left unchanged.
In the end, is it really fair to put a 14 years old in jail for life and letting the people that affect society the most go free?
This is a little off topic, but I’ve noticed that that recently publication bans seem to be more common (exluding youth crime). It really takes away from the transparency of the courts. It also is becoming more difficult to enforce (Adscam for example). Has any a party proposed changes that will ensure that publication bans would be of last resort in adult legal proceedings?
Yeah… that many were accused. How many were CONVICTED?
I wonder where Harper is getting his statistics. All the reports I have seen say the opposite of what he is saying.
Leave a reply below or start a thread in the discussion forums
Note: Sometimes people try to portray more support for their candidate or their perspective in the comments section by posing as different people. If you attempt to do this, we will delete all of your comments.Update: despite the above warning, people are attempting to use multiple aliases, so we are now moderating all comments to check against possible abuses. We apologize for this inconvenience, however we will work to get comments posted as soon as possible.