Why the three strikes law is needed

September 29th, 2010 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

The Dom Post reports:

The career criminal who killed Kapiti man Raymond Piper has 175 prior convictions, including for serious violent offences. …

Last year Anderson was convicted of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. …

Anderson has 175 previous convictions since 1977, many for serious assaults and for threatening to kill, assaulting police, dishonesty and drug convictions.

I’m pretty sure at least three of those 175 convictions would be for serious offences which now carry a strike. If after his third serious offence, Piper had been sent away, I dare say there would be scores less victims and Raymond Piper would probably be alive.

Tags:

75 Responses to “Why the three strikes law is needed”

  1. Graeme Edgeler (3,274 comments) says:

    Couldn’t this post just as easily be headlined:

    “Why real opportunities for rehabilitation need to be offered to prisoners”?

    If after his third offence, this guy had been rehabilitated, and had never committed another offence, the would have been many many fewer victims that three strikes would ever have saved, and we’d have saved a lot of money too!

    We must do something! Three strikes is something. We must do three strikes!

    [DPF: Once you invent the magic rehabilitation wand that can alter brainwaves and turn bad people good, let me know. Until then I'd like the bad violent thugs locked up so they don't rack up 175 offences, eventually killing someone]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Brian Smaller (4,026 comments) says:

    When the discovery of Piper’s body was announced on TV news I used it as a learning moment for my kids. See, another reason to never hang around with scumbags and crims.

    Graeme – you are right – but exactly what sort of rehabilitation would work for an Anderson-type?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. pacman (50 comments) says:

    I believe in rehabilitation but as a career criminal dealing drugs (maybe making a reasonable income) and having a high social standing in his circle of friends do you think he really wants to do 50+ hours as a house piler to clear 40k/year?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Rich Prick (1,630 comments) says:

    “what sort of rehabilitation would work for an Anderson-type?”

    Brian, rehabilitation for this sort come in various gauges.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    Graeme – you are right – but exactly what sort of rehabilitation would work for an Anderson-type?

    IMHO early on (5 convictions?) he would have been a much different person to the one he is at 175 convictions, so perhaps not best to judge the ease of rehabilitating the type of guy he is now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Graeme Edgeler (3,274 comments) says:

    Graeme – you are right – but exactly what sort of rehabilitation would work for an Anderson-type?

    I’m not really appraised of his situation, but mostly my point was that people can take a factual situation like this and use it to back up whatever they like.

    For Anderson, it notes drug convictions. I would anticipate that this, and probably alcohol, will be long-standing factors in much – probably most – of the offending. If we’d gotten him off drugs and alcohol 20 years ago, I imagine his rap sheet would be very different.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Lipo (229 comments) says:

    Or Graeme

    Maybe a headline that reads something like

    Rehabilitation – Does not work for all Crims
    Something else needed

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. gravedodger (1,528 comments) says:

    My total opposition to capital punishment is still strongly held as my moral stance on killing a fellow member of the species is not an option although pieces of kuri tutae such as this continually challenge that stance.
    Having said tha,t had this mongrel been in my pack in days past, and I owned a few mongrels that earnt their food, He would have ceased to diminish the available dogtucker some time ago.
    Thankyou David Garrett, it will take a while before the true advantages your 3 strikes act gives us the rewards we wish for but my real fear is that the bloody socialists and their softc*ck supporters will reverse the 3 strikes before the true value is apparent to us as a society.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Inventory2 (10,168 comments) says:

    Let’s not forget that Anderson was also a patched Mongrel Mob member, who had endeavored to start a Mob chapter in Marton with the intention of eliminating the Hell’s Angels in Wanganui. There are some people for whom rehabiliation will simply not work.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. emmess (1,394 comments) says:

    No no no, everyone stop being such rednecks.
    Because of what David Garrett did 26 years ago, we need to give this guy a 176th chance.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,830 comments) says:

    David, they’d have just got some other bugger to knock him off.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. the bird is the word (69 comments) says:

    Graeme, you are actually making the argument to try to rehabilitate someone who has 175 convictions…

    You need to realise there are some people who cannot be rehabilitated. Here’s one of them…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Murray (8,841 comments) says:

    Fuck me first comment and hes the victim.

    We need a noose not more soft cuddles for this type.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. YesWeDid (1,041 comments) says:

    DPF, how about you apply your own reasoning to the 3 strikes law, let’s see a cost/benefit analysis (one of your favourite arguments when you don’t agree with something)?

    Look you have more chance of winning lotto than being murdered and the best way to avoid being murdered is to pick better friends and associates.

    Longer sentences might appeal to the red-neck element of society fed on a daily diet of crime on TV news but unless you lock people away forever you have to release them eventually and then what? There has to be some element of rehabilitation in our criminal justice system and this should have the same emphasis as the draconian views of the SST and others.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    Inventory2, there are posts above that opine on the timing of such rehabilitation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    We need a two-tier prison system. This is a hobby horse of mine.

    I also think we need to provide for the idea that prisoners are incarcerated until such time as they’ve served their sentence AND have proven themselves rehabilitated and ready for re-inclusion into civil society. In that sense they’re not ‘released’, but rather they ‘graudate’ from prison.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Fot (252 comments) says:

    Sorry, I find it hard to get upset or angry about scum killing scum.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    There has to be some element of rehabilitation in our criminal justice system

    There is plenty of rehabilitation focus in our criminal justice system. Actually loads of it… but it receives very little visibility outside the justice system. Not sure why this is. Perhaps it’s because there’s no concequence for failed rehabilitation -the prinsoner is still released in due course, and those responsible for the rehabilitation efforts continue to be paid.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Gwilly (156 comments) says:

    Rehab is beyond career criminals of this type. Yes, this is a good example where 3 strikes would apply and prevent this tragedy. Personally I’m more of a two strikes person.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Why real opportunities for rehabilitation need to be offered to prisoners”?

    What we need is fewer lamers whining about the expensive and ineffective concept of rehabilitation while citizens are dying at the hands of pathological criminals.

    The idea of collective responsibility is a large part of the psychology that drives these bastards.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    He seems to have done a deal to get his 17 yr old son off a charge..Why was he allowed to do this? Perhaps revealing where Raymond Piper’s body was was the currency. Noone actually knows that Raymond Piper was ”scum”..he was very young , a father and a loved family member.
    What hope does the killer’son have with a father like that?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Put it away (2,888 comments) says:

    I hope you crim-cuddlers are all proud of this murder you commited.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. david (2,553 comments) says:

    @Graeme Edgeler – Does it say that he has had a drug usage or alcohol usage problem?

    Unless I missed something, he may be totally drug free but has been a dealer and contributor to the suffering and misery of thousands and their families over the years. If true then there is no way he should have been able to accumulate that number of convictions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. david (2,553 comments) says:

    Reminds me of that line from Alice’s Restaurant … “and the Judge said “Son, ….. have you rehabilitated yourself?” ….. and I was fined $10 and had to pick up all of the garbage”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. RRM (9,638 comments) says:

    I hope you crim-cuddlers are all proud of this murder you commited.

    Sigh.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. bhudson (4,736 comments) says:

    Lipo / Graeme Edgeler,

    “Prisons do not rehabilitate all criminals, ergo we must stop sending criminals to prison”

    Imagine what society would be like if we took that approach. Oh, that’s right, we do…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Graeme Edgeler (3,274 comments) says:

    @Graeme Edgeler – Does it say that he has had a drug usage or alcohol usage problem?

    It does not. Hence my statement “I’m not really appraised of his situation”. I would be very surprised is alcohol was not a factor in the offending.

    Unless I missed something…

    You didn’t. Do you really expect a media report to give the full picture? Given that something like 80%+ of violent crimes have alcohol or drugs as a factor, I think my assumption that this guy has had a problem is probably more likely than yours that he’s one of those clean drug dealers…

    Maybe a headline that reads something like

    Rehabilitation – Does not work for all Crims
    Something else needed

    Pretty much my point – you can make these facts fit any theory.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Sigh”

    Sigh what?

    If you weak kneed bowls of custard stopped publicly undermining those who are resolute about the need to get psychopathic criminals off the streets this murder (and many others like it) would not have happened.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Graeme Edgeler (3,274 comments) says:

    “Prisons do not rehabilitate all criminals, ergo we must stop sending criminals to prison”

    Imagine what society would be like if we took that approach. Oh, that’s right, we do…

    No we don’t. We keep sending more and more criminals to prison. We currently have the highest rate of incarceration we have ever had. We do not currently have the highest rate of crime we have ever had. You can argue about why this is (chicken or egg…), but to suggest we stopped sending criminals to prison ignores reality – they’re going to prison more often and for longer than ever before.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. RRM (9,638 comments) says:

    Sigh what?

    If you weak kneed bowls of custard stopped publicly wah wah wah wah wah wah wah wah wah…

    Sensible debate of the issues… only on Kiwiblog.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. MikeMan (171 comments) says:

    I have said it before and I will say it again there is a 7.62mm (or 0.308″ for those old buggers) solution for this sort of idiot.

    Why lock him up for 30-40 years when a handful of rifle bullets achieves the same end result at a tiny fraction of the price.

    175 convictions and 3 strikes = not getting out anyway.

    I’ll save the 40K+ a year thanks.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Sensible debate of the issues… only on Kiwiblog.”

    Dodging responsibility for their words and actions- typical of the waffling commies and trolls who plague debate on Kiwiblog.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. RRM (9,638 comments) says:

    This leftie supports 3 strikes and has never cuddled a criminal.

    Next off-topic BS ad-hom?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. starboard (2,489 comments) says:

    what sort of rehabilitation would work for an Anderson-type?”

    Brian, rehabilitation for this sort come in various gauges

    ..yeap..first gauge would be my 12 gauge pump action shottie…scum bastards like this deserve to die. 175 previous convictions !!!!!!!!!! How much is enough !!! Where do we draw the line? No rehab for this turkey..he’s a leech on society …injection time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. MikeMan (171 comments) says:

    Graeme Edgeler (1,622) Says:
    September 29th, 2010 at 12:26 pm
    “Prisons do not rehabilitate all criminals, ergo we must stop sending criminals to prison”

    Imagine what society would be like if we took that approach. Oh, that’s right, we do…

    No we don’t. We keep sending more and more criminals to prison. We currently have the highest rate of incarceration we have ever had. We do not currently have the highest rate of crime we have ever had. You can argue about why this is (chicken or egg…), but to suggest we stopped sending criminals to prison ignores reality – they’re going to prison more often and for longer than ever before.

    How are you measuring this?

    Absolute numbers?
    Percentage of population?
    Percentage of convictions?

    The first one is at best misleading. The third one would be the interesting one.

    I would also like to see the sentence as a % of the maximum over a year as well.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Next off-topic BS ad-hom?”

    Next load of time wasting incoherency?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. RRM (9,638 comments) says:

    I don’t really expect you to understand it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. bhudson (4,736 comments) says:

    Graeme E,

    “…they’re going to prison more often and for longer than ever before…”

    As a % of # convictions I think you’ll find it’s less (for example, you’ll have heard of Home Detention – you know, the sentence that was never supposed to be allowed for any crimes of violence…)

    And I think you might also find its not longer than before. On the face of it, as a headline, it might look like that as the previous govt gave an impression of getting tough on crime by increasing sentences, however the mandatory parole provisions make that a complete farce.

    In terms of actual time served & % of convictions Graeme you might find that fewer are being sent to prison and for a shorter time

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Pete George (23,296 comments) says:

    “In terms of actual time served & % of convictions Graeme you might find that fewer are being sent to prison and for a shorter time”

    That doesn’t add up. Our prison population keeps increasing significantly. Severity of crimes and length of sentences are increasing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Graeme Edgeler (3,274 comments) says:

    On the face of it, as a headline, it might look like that as the previous govt gave an impression of getting tough on crime by increasing sentences, however the mandatory parole provisions make that a complete farce.

    There is automatic release (not parole) only for those serving short-term sentences. For those serving long-term sentences, there is no mandatory parole.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. berend (1,673 comments) says:

    I think it’s going to be put up or shut up time for Graeme. The next person convicted of serious assault will be handed over to Graeme for rehabilitation. He knows what to do, because he faults society for not doing it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. burt (7,994 comments) says:

    The answer appears to be quite simple. The scum bag should just join the Labour party and start crying that it’s not fair that he is punished because he’s not the only person doing violent crime. The Police will shrug their shoulders and say it’s not in the public interest to prosecute and he can move on. Oh if he stole anything he can just pay it back if he feels like he needs to.

    The other problem that is solved by not prosecuting him is that we don’t need to think about changing the parole laws again to manage the prison population and hide the high imprisonment stats when we file our OECD key indicators reports.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. berend (1,673 comments) says:

    Graeme: We currently have the highest rate of incarceration we have ever had.

    And we have a lot of other things we didn’t have in the past. More people are being taken care of by the government than ever before. You know, governments in the past promoted families, consisting of one mom + one dad, for a reason.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. burt (7,994 comments) says:

    Graeme: We currently have the highest rate of incarceration we have ever had.

    Monty Python had the answer: The only way to bring the crime rate down is to reduce the number of offences.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Graeme Edgeler (3,274 comments) says:

    I think it’s going to be put up or shut up time for Graeme. The next person convicted of serious assault will be handed over to Graeme for rehabilitation. He knows what to do, because he faults society for not doing it.

    You clearly haven’t read a thing I’ve written.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. berend (1,673 comments) says:

    Graeme, you wrote: “If after his third offence, this guy had been rehabilitated, and had never committed another offence, the would have been many many fewer victims that three strikes would ever have saved, and we’d have saved a lot of money too!”

    So clearly you have the magic wand or know about things no one else knows. You offer this as a real possibility. If that option does not exist, your entire argument has failed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    You know, governments in the past promoted families,

    In what way?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Murray (8,841 comments) says:

    You can’t rehabilitate rabid. You shoot it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Graeme Edgeler (3,274 comments) says:

    So clearly you have the magic wand or know about things no one else knows. You offer this as a real possibility. If that option does not exist, your entire argument has failed.

    My entire argument was that DPF’s argument wasn’t a particularly strong one, and that one could use the same facts to reach precisely the opposite conclusion.

    I do not see how my not having a magic wand affects its validity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. wreck1080 (3,799 comments) says:

    He is an evil looking character.

    I bet , you could predict his criminality from age 1 , or even in-utero.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Graeme Edgeler (3,274 comments) says:

    In what way?

    There was Family Support. And the Family Benefit. Different tax rates depending on how many kids you had, etc.

    Now there’s just “working for families”. Completely different.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Graeme Edgeler (3,274 comments) says:

    You can’t rehabilitate rabid. You shoot it.

    No-one was really talking about rehabilitating this guy now. There was some discussion about rehabilitating him in 1980.

    Bloody Muldoon. Typical socialist.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. James Stephenson (2,087 comments) says:

    Sigh.

    Erm, I think that was a dig at the “John Key’s a murderer for not lowering the BAC limit” argument….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. gravedodger (1,528 comments) says:

    @ fot 11 45 Its not the scum killing scum that causes angst, it is the costs and resources we are liable for, in giving him due process.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    Monty Python had the answer: The only way to bring the crime rate down is to reduce the number of offences.

    O/T – Bit like Labour’s answer to reducing hospital waiting lists … just turf everyone off. Job done!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. berend (1,673 comments) says:

    Graeme: My entire argument was that DPF’s argument wasn’t a particularly strong one, and that one could use the same facts to reach precisely the opposite conclusion.

    You cannot reach the opposite conclusion if there is nothing else that can be done. As you are now in retreat, thank you for admitting that three strikes is, unfortunately, the only tool we have at the bottom of the cliff.

    And yes, thank you David Garrett.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    There was Family Support. And the Family Benefit. Different tax rates depending on how many kids you had, etc.

    Now there’s just “working for families”. Completely different.

    Cheers Graeme.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. bhudson (4,736 comments) says:

    Pete,

    congratulations. You hit it right on the head….

    “severity of crimes and length of sentences are increasing.”

    As the length of sentences is directly linked to the severity of the crime, what you are saying is that the severity of crime is increasing. The severity of the crime is also the key determinant of type of sentence – i.e. incarceration or not. Therefore, as you accurately point out, it is the increasing severity of the crimes committed that is increasing the number of people in prisons.

    Pete has pointed out folks that it is the people choosing to commit more serious crimes that are driving the instances of imprisonment in NZ. It is not the failing of imprisonment itself.

    Well done Pete – your acknowledgement of the personal responsibility of criminals over the responsibility of society’s chosen penalties is both refreshing and inspiring

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. CJD (334 comments) says:

    The rehabilitation arguement is a redundant one. I have a lovely dog, a real family pet. If he turned mean and attacked someone he would be put down. The State has a responsibility to protect it’s citizen and their property from criminal behaviour.
    The rehabilitation arguement should be centered at training puppies when they are young, identifying those that have the potential to grow up as vicious animals and training them correctly. Once a dog has matured and in some cases become a problem animal it would be lucky to get one chance let alone three.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. adze (1,982 comments) says:

    I am against capital punishment and always have been on principle. But we can ask only one question: Can this person be rehabilitated? If the answer is no, life imprisonment with no parole, or a bullet. Hand wringing about incarceration rates is pointless until a workable alternative is found.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. backster (2,122 comments) says:

    The only democratic state I am aware of where rehabilitation works is Singapore.Unfortunately our Judicial system prepares young offenders for a lifetime of crime by doing the exact opposite of Singapore and giving them virtually no punishment for the first 20 or so offences as an induction to their criminal career, and accepting all sorts of dubious stories as justification for the offences committed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Pete George (23,296 comments) says:

    It is not the failing of imprisonment itself.

    But any imprisonment is a failure of society. It’s impossible to prevent all failures, but some things would help:
    - better early childhood education and intervention where necessary
    - more jobs that pay better
    - proper care of people with psychiatric problems
    - better personal responsibility shown to be practiced by everyone

    If those were done better we would have less crime in the first place.

    And I’m for the Krazy two tier prison system – a rehabilitation intensive first level, and a second level for hardened, unresponsive criminals

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Graeme Edgeler (3,274 comments) says:

    You cannot reach the opposite conclusion if there is nothing else that can be done. As you are now in retreat, thank you for admitting that three strikes is, unfortunately, the only tool we have at the bottom of the cliff.

    And now we are back to where I began:

    We must do something! Three strikes is something. We must do three strikes!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “some things would help”

    Fewer communist ignoramuses preaching fatuous collectivist nonsense on Kiwiblog.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. kowtow (7,921 comments) says:

    Prison does work, you just have to lock the bastards away for long enough,simple.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Rex Widerstrom (5,327 comments) says:

    Graeme Edgeler points out (with surprising patience):

    No-one was really talking about rehabilitating this guy now. There was some discussion about rehabilitating him in 1980.

    Precisely. If we invested in rehabilitation back when this guy was starting off we might have prevented more victims. We might not, if he’s a psychopath. But most offenders aren’t. Rehabilitation combined with a no-nonsense “broken windows” approach to offending when an offender is still potentially salvageable works.

    wreck1080 suggests:

    I bet , you could predict his criminality from age 1 , or even in-utero.

    Why yes, let’s start culling babies! Such noble sentiments place us well above these “scum” with no respect for life.

    Before it gets taken down, have a look at the video of a recent story on Australia’s Channel Nine. It’s the one called “Saving our Kids”. Some of the kids dealt with by Youth Insearch had never been hugged; had never had anyone tell them they were worth a damn; had never been told they were loved, by anyone. Now imagine that was your life.

    And before the scoffing starts, I’m not talking about hugging someone on their 175th violent conviction. For him jail, and for a very long time, is the only answer. I’m talking about kids from terrible homes, with heartbreaking lives, who’ll almost inevitably turn to crime unless it’s dealt with early.

    MikeMan suggests:

    I have said it before and I will say it again there is a 7.62mm (or 0.308″ for those old buggers) solution

    How very macho. And how very futile… at least for all the victims he’s accumulated. No doubt it’d make you feel good though, just as harming others no doubt made him feel good. Perhaps what really scares you about these types is that you recognise there’s not that much difference between you.

    It’s all very well to dribble excitedly about loading guns and killing your fellow humans, but does anyone have the courage to do what Youth Insearch are doing, and stop the criminality? Will anyone here, I wonder, us the link above to donate even the cost of a “7.62mm bullet” to the work they do? Or will we just wait till another cohort of young people, doomed from birth, harm more of us so we can bay for their blood?

    edit: Ah, I see while I was writing this backster has summarised it succinctly above.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. CJD (334 comments) says:

    Kowtow-also instead of taxpayers forking out $90K+ per prisoner, let the buggers do productive work to pay for their stay. If they owe money to the State when they come out-tough luck!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. berend (1,673 comments) says:

    Graeme: And now we are back to where I began:

    We must do something! Three strikes is something. We must do three strikes!

    No, you didn’t begin there. You said rehabilitation was an option. You retreated from that position as you were unable to make any satisfying argument that it would work. And I would love to hear from you what the other options are.

    I maintain that the state has no other option than to lockup people longer if they offend again.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Mark (1,421 comments) says:

    The three strikes law has been proven to be ineffective in the states and there is no evidence to suggest it will wotk here. We aready ahve one of the highest imprisonment rates amoungst 1st world countries. We imprison white collar criminals instead of making them pay the money back for as long as it takes, Surely that is going to go further in redressing the crime than having them spend a short period in prison and then walking away fromn the carnage thay have left behind.

    We are poor at rehabilitation. There is no question that a good number criminals must be locked up and some for very long periods. There are some that rehabilitation will not work with but successive governments have shown little appetite dealing with both restoritive justice or rehabilitation. This government espacially is leading the way in decision making by private polling. The Blood Alcohol decision was a classic and if the runours are only half true Joyce was rolled by cabinet based on polling feedback.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. MikeMan (171 comments) says:

    Nice try Rex. Not even close though.

    I spent 20 of the first 30 years of my life working along with my parents at keeping youth out of prison and in a safe environment.

    In total nearly 2000 of them and I have seen what adults like Anderson do to the people around them, I am all for rehabilitation as young people in their first few offences and I have no doubt that for some it would work and work well. In fact I fully support rehabilitation for first and maybe second offences, depending on the situation.

    However along with the carrot there must be an effective stick and in my humble opinion 175 convictions means the current stick sucks. At what point do you say that rehabilitation is not effective and then if this scumbag was 10 years older he would probably have his 3rd strike and be in prison for the rest of his natural life, now is that a good use of resources or is it better spent on the rehabilitation programs and working to keep the youth of New Zealand safe and try to raise productive citizens?

    I am not saying rehab would not have worked 30 years ago for this guy, but at what point to you keep investing resources into what is clearly someone who does not want to change, there are plenty of people who have gone from prison to being productive members of society, I would argue that Anderson is not one of them, so is the $90K+ a year keeping him locked up a good use of resources or is a handful of 7.62mm bullets and maybe $2,000,000 spent on rehab programs over 20 years a better option?

    I am not a “Red Neck, Kill em all” type BUT for long term recidivist offenders I would not hesitate to have the ultimate solution, they have proven over a period of years that they will not change and why waste resources on trying to fix something that cannot be fixed!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Rex Widerstrom (5,327 comments) says:

    berend:

    I can’t speak for Graeme, other than to note that he’s said quite clearly that’s he not talking about rehabilitation being appropriate now, but rather 30 years ago when Anderson started out.

    The state may well have no other option but a longer sentence if people offend again but the two issues remain:

    - Why is vastly more not done in terms of rehabilitation early in a criminal’s career; and

    - Why, as backster note above, do we let the first 10, or 20, or some arbitrary number of offences slide, handing out wet bus ticket penalties and then, at some point, cry “You’ve had your last chance!” and jail someone for a significant period, thus virtually ensuring they’re stuck on track down which they’ve started?

    “Three Strikes” is a crock because it sets up a jail at the bottom of the cliff. That’s fine if it’s a deterrent of last resort for people on whom the carrot and a lot of smaller sticks haven’t worked. But isolated from a “broken windows” approach and vastly improved rehabilitation, it’s just a sop to the redneck vote.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Rex Widerstrom (5,327 comments) says:

    MikeMan:

    Congratulations on your work with youth. You’ve done more to prevent people becoming victims of crime than the entire SST has, or will ever, do.

    …now is that [imprisonment of a redivist] a good use of resources or is it better spent on the rehabilitation programs and working to keep the youth of New Zealand safe and try to raise productive citizens?

    First, we shouldn’t have to make an either / or choice, but successive governments aren’t interested in truly solving the problem, since “tough on law ‘n’ order” stances win votes from the ignorant.

    But given that we do face such a choice, I’d argue that funding the ambulance at the top (youth rehabilitation) rather than the jail at the bottom makes more sense.

    I am not saying rehab would not have worked 30 years ago for this guy, but at what point to you keep investing resources into what is clearly someone who does not want to change

    Don’t get me wrong, I agree with you entirely on this point. Anderson may in fact be a sociopath, in which case rehabilitation would never have worked. But it’s interesting to speculate what might have been different if it was tried 30 years ago. Now, it’s too late.

    is the $90K+ a year keeping him locked up a good use of resources or is a handful of 7.62mm bullets and maybe $2,000,000 spent on rehab programs over 20 years a better option?

    If we did start executing prisoners, don’t tell me the government would divert one cent of the savings to rehabilitation. That wouldn’t win any votes for John “The Ultimate Populist” Key or Phil “I’ll have whatever principles he’s having” Goff.

    I can’t condone the state hiring an assassin to commit murder on my dime and in my name, so all I can do is join with you in lamenting the waste of money in keeping him incacerated – money which, as you point out, could be better spent.

    Which brings us back to the original point: We need a government that gets off the redneck bandwagon and starts addressing youth crime with a mix of no-nonsense sentencing and properly funded rehabilitation now. Because if we don’t, our grandchildren are going to be cursing us when, in another 30 years, they’re the victims of a new generation of Andersons.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Fot (252 comments) says:

    “We need a government that gets off the redneck bandwagon and starts addressing youth crime with a mix of no-nonsense sentencing and properly funded rehabilitation now. ”

    And what do you suggest Rex?

    Group hugs, hand holding, circle discussions where the little shits are encouraged to “share” their feelings with the victims?

    At what stage do people like you admit that thirty years of soft sentencing and soft on crime policies has got us to the position we are in today?

    Oh…hang on, I forgot, it is not their fault is it, it is ALWAYS the fault of others.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. Rex Widerstrom (5,327 comments) says:

    Try scrolling back up and following the links I’ve already provided before asking superfluous questions, Fot. That covers the rehabilitation aspect. Then Google “broken windows” for the punishment aspect.

    If you can watch that video (it’s only 12 minutes of your time) and not feel empathy for the young people in it, then I have to wonder whether you are capable of empathy at all.

    It’s not always the fault of others. If Anderson is a sociopath, it’s his fault. If he’s not, then the system has failed – whether you believe the answer is that he should have been shot or that he should have been hugged – so by definition it’s someone else’s fault.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. sonnyboy (1 comment) says:

    I know son very well, he was not scum however the people he bought into his own back yard were. He was the type of person that was always happy go lucky, would help a complete stranger, make you laugh he was a true comedian, his laugh was infectious, he was a wonderful loving caring son, brother, uncle, nephew, cousin, grandson, loyal friend and he was a loving father, his boy was his world, his everything, he loved him so much, a picture of his boy was tattooed on his chest, close to his heart. I have had to witness his family struggle for the last past 2 years to pick up the pieces. Son comes from a loving, caring, wonderful hardworking family, these people are decent good people, they did not deserve this and neither did Son. Not only were they victims of crime but they were also re victimised by our so called justice system. Where does the blame lie? Having seen what the Piper Whanau have beeen through, I don’t believe there is one person or system solely responsible, it is a combination of the 2 however the case is a bit more complicated than that, Anderson was hired by the Mother in law from hell and her brother to hurt son. There are people willing to pay to end someones life and there are people like Anderson willing to do it. Anderson, is truly evil personified and what the media have printed about him is only half of what this evil scum is all about, what has been revealed about him is truly disturbing, he should never be allowed to walk free in our society, he truly is a bad man however our system let him get away with his crimes, time after time, 175 convictions says it all and some of his convictions are quite serious offences, a few years back, police were pushing for maximum sentence on one of his offences but to no avail. If only the judge had of listened, maybe Son would still be alive today. No amount of rehabilitation will help this man, when he was charged with sons murder in court, I was in the gallery, he turned to us and he made a gun signal, this monster was not sorry, in fact he looked pretty happy with himself, how can our system rehabilitate someone like this? He is a sociopath who needs to be kept locked up until he dies. I do believe our justice system has alot to answer for though, how could they not see that this man was hell bent on causing chaos and destruction? You would think that by the amount of convictions he racked up and these are serious ones too, that they would of done everything to keep us safe from him. Sadly not even Sons murder has opened there eyes, Anderson was given a discount on his sentence for the quick return of Sons body, I don’t consider 5 months to be ‘quick’ in the return of his body, not only that he made a deal in order to give up where Sons body was. Whats wrong with this picture? I am a bit confused as to who was in charge, Anderson or our System? And since when should you ever be given a discount on your sentence just because you revealed where abouts you buried someone after you violently murder them? You should never be rewarded for bad behaviour! What we need, is our Justice System, to be run by the Sensible Sentencing Trust, they are the voice for victims of crime because our Government is not listening. It seems that our Justice System is weighted in favour of offenders rather than victims of crimes. When will common sense overide a criminals so called ‘rights’? Emotional damage is not considered when sentencing is handed down, crims have rights according to our system, they have feelings too so we aren’t allowed to ‘hurt’ them yet they can hurt us for no reason. Somethng is very wrong with our system, so very wrong.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.