Mandatory minimums the answer to drunken thuggery

JD says:

08:43am | 07/09/09

I’m sick of hearing about Rudi Gulliani and the effects of his ‘Zero Tolerance’ policing. If you dig a little deeper, Rudi didn’t achieve much, as unpopular as that may be. You see, crime was reduced by a similar amount across all of America, sometimes more so, in the same time frame that Rudi supposedly cleaned up the streets.

Are you telling me that zero tolerance policing was responsible for reductions in crime across the entire country? Traditionally, harsher sentencing does nothing to prevent crimes of “passion” either. Yet these crimes fell by the same massive amounts.

So if it wasn’t Rudi, what was it I hear you ask? Well, here’s the bit where I lose most people. They tend to block their ears and scream LA-LA-LA because they don’t want to hear it, and don’t wan’t to agree.

There was a very high profile case ~20 years before the crime rate began to fall across America. The case involved a young woman who wished to have an abortion, and a lawyer who went in to bat for her because of his belief in pro-choice.

Suddenly, abortion in America was legal. A little bit of analysis will show two things. The first is a startling similarity between the most common demographics to parent criminals, and their likelihood of having an abortion. The second being an inversely proportionate crime rate to abortion rate with a 20 year lag.

It turns out Rudi got lucky, but the pool of potential criminals was drying up fast.

In disbelief? So was I when I read the information, but it’s true I assure you. I don’t have sources on hand, but I will get them later once I return home for the day if you’re interested.

But we can’t just force abortions on potential criminals I hear you say. I agree. But what it does prove is that we have a culture issue, not a sentencing issue. By all means, make us feel warm fuzzy and safe by locking these bogans up, but beware that two will rise to take their place on the streets until we address the conditions that lead to innocent children growing into amoral thugs.

BennyJetts says:

08:48am | 07/09/09

How about developing proper communities in the outer suburbs instead of the ever growing spread of housing estates and roads? Whilst Doyles “keep the Bogans out of the city” is a misguided position, it sums up the problem of over saturation of venues in the cbd, whilst the ‘burbs have large pokies pubs that no young person would want to spend there Saturday in. Development of suburbs need to include less super-size-box retail parks with 2000 car parking lots, and more human sized commnunity activity centres.

Mr Pastry says:

09:19am | 07/09/09

@BennyJetts - Fully agree, bring together suburb based gangs behaving in a tribal way then what do you expect.  We haven’t grasped the idea of decentralisation which includes all services not just retailers.  Outer suburbs have no nightclubs, the fault in my opinion is the councils, in my own area the council refuses smaller bar licenses as it will take business away from the RSL pokies venues, and what lively places they are, I once found an unordered prawn in my chicken parmegiana, it was the topic of conversation all evening.

G says:

09:22am | 07/09/09

Michael…

I love it…  These statements are gold

“crime rages out of control”.
“The evidence is right there in front of us”
“TV screens and newspapers are filled with stories of the street violence “
“seemingly an everyday occurrence in Victoria”

You should receive public polariser of the year award. 

You should be more responsible, your just creating fear of crime and a genuine anxiety of crime by an individual with an increased perception of risk of victimisation. 

This fear can influence public sentiment and affect the thoughts and behavior of the public.  This can have damaging effects on a community’s well being, and can change people’s routine activities and cohesion which affects community stability. 

The statistical evidence regarding these issues does not support your statements in this column, in fact it is the opposite. 

Almost all types of crime are on the decrease.

iansand says:

09:57am | 07/09/09

Watching tabloid TV is not proper research.  Nor is fuelling their inaccuracies the role of a responsible politician.

Kristian says:

10:13am | 07/09/09

The jails are overcrowded as it is.  Where do you propose we put them?  I’ve a mate of mine who went to weekend jail for a car crash; the jails are disproportionately full of motorists.  My mate was speeding by 10-15kph over when he crashed into an elderly couple who didn’t see a red light and drove through it right in front of him.  He was trying to get to his job on time.  My mate doesn’t drink, smoke, take drugs; he’s a devoted sports nut and very into his fitness and health.

Anyway, 18 months periodic detention. 

Jail has completely changed him.  He’s witnessed horrors (rape, bashings, etc.) in there he can hardly speak of.  He’s been forced to make alliances with people he loathes, for self preservation.  And if he wants continuing protection, he HAS to do favors (criminally linked actions) or he’ll be raped/bashed. 

The warden of the jail offered the inmates all a free BBQ if they can go 2 weeks without someone being bashed and sent to hospital.

My mate got 18 months for aggravated dangerous driving causing grievous bodily harm; his cellmate got 3 months for beating 5 people (one into a coma) with a clawhammer.  My mates’ ‘protector’ got 5 months for aggravated assault & armed holdup (used machete), another guy for 6 months for multiple counts of vehicle rebirthing; others got less than 12 months for serious drug dealing/possession offenses + possession of illegal firearms.

The interesting thing is that almost ALL the motor vehicle related offences got higher terms than drug, violence, assault, theft crimes.  One guy was a tradesman who was on the brink of bankruptcy, wife with 2 young kids, one with a serious medical condition.  His license was suspended for a few ~10kph over speeding offences; without his license he would lose his business, wife, family - everything; so he chose to drive unlicensed for 3 months.  He ended up in jail because he couldn’t afford legal counsel and tried to argue his case himself.  He’s now using his trade skills for a bikie gang.  It’s either that, or get raped/beaten in jail.

So for all those who think the answer is to send everyone willy nilly to jail, think again.  The jails are already overcrowded; underfunded, and they’re simply a networking opportunity for criminals.  People who go in ordinary citizens come out recruited criminals more often than not; so do we really want to be recruiting and breeding badder, bigger, better networked new criminals?

Steve says:

10:49am | 07/09/09

The reason we cannot have mandatory minimums for assaulting police is because Judges need the discrepancy to decide if the ‘assault’ is actually a defense against this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWOLqZnDxbI

RF says:

10:58am | 07/09/09

Hi Michael - how come you don’t disclose your political party affiliation (past and present)?

Margaret Gray says:

11:07am | 07/09/09

“...The statistical evidence regarding these issues does not support your statements in this column, in fact it is the opposite.  Almost all types of crime are on the decrease…”

That’s not what the numbers say: http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?Document_ID=782

Many crimes go unreported.  These do wonders for ‘official’ crime stats.

Special tip-o-the-hat to Christine Nixon for changing the VicPol reporting protocols too.

iansand says:

11:17am | 07/09/09

Margaret Gray@11:07 You do realise that your link shows that crime rates are either stable or declining?  Of course you have invented a rise in “unreported crime” to compensate for this.  Where are your sources for all this “unreported crime”, or is it something that “everyone knows”?

Arthur George Manche' says:

11:59am | 07/09/09

Punch said it all !!  We have a WEAK GOVERNMENT, solely intended on being politically correct. Many of these gangs (thugs) are of foreign extraction who think they can carry on from where they left off, in their home country of origin. But NO WE CANNOT MENTION THAT !!  ( In fact I doubt that my comments will be published ).
Under the present Labor government we have seen our city become “a little Chicago”, back in the 1920s. There is NO LAW AND ORDER. and that is mainly due to the efforst of our illustrious Attorney General Mr. Hulls, whose only intent is to close the Melbourne Club, if it stays a “men only” Club, and to hell with the general public’s safety. He appoints judges and magistrates who look after the interests of the criminals, not the victims, hence the slaps on the wrists, or “house detention” or community based orders.
What is NEEDED is a judiaciary that reflects the community’s expectations in sentencing. If there is no room in our jails, build new ones !! THE SENTENCES GIVEN MUST FIT THE CRIME COMMITTED. Nothing else will suffice.

GP says:

12:06pm | 07/09/09

I think we should start a new system of sending offenders by boat to England, where they can break rocks for 7 years before becoming free settlers.

As for abortion being responsible for the New York decline in crime rate, well, I thought Friday was the traditional day for funnies…..

The crime rate in victoria is declining, claim others - no, it’s increasing alarmingly.  25 years ago when I moved to Victoria I had no fear of walking the City streets after some Friday night drinks.  Now I feel afraid during the day, and will not go anywhere near the City unless the reason is very compelling.

Melbourne - the world’s most liveable city - what a bloody joke that claim is

Toby Halligan says:

12:15pm | 07/09/09

@ JD
I’ve read similar theories in ‘Freakonomics’ by Stephen Dubner and Steven Levitt. They found that Rudy’s ‘Broken Windows’ policing, where people who committed minor offences were given harsh sentences based on the assumption that people who commit small crimes are more likely to also be involved in serious ones and that minor offences like graffiti or being drunk in public, encouraged other people to behave poorly, actually was no more effective then more conventional strategies employed throughout America.

What Dubner and Levitt found was that of the conventional explanations for reducations in crime (eg. getting guns off the streets, harsher sentences, the death penalty, more police) that three things consistently reduce crime rates: more police, longer jail terms and, yes, legalizing abortion.

Here’s their blog:
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/

Having said all that, Michael, you are wrong.

First up, why don’t you refer to figures? As Margaret Gray accidentally demonstrated, the Victorian Police report states that crime rates are going down:

“In 2008/2009, there was a decline in overall crime of 1.7%, as a rate per 100,000 population. The number of offences recorded in 2008/2009 increased by 0.2%. Since 2000/2001, overall crime has decreased by 25.5%, as a rate per 100,000 population. The number of recorded offences has decreased by 16.2% over the same period.”

Of course Michael you don’t appear interested in nuanced consideration of crime or it’s causes so I’m sure your response will be “The police are engineering the numbers so they look lower”.

What the real problem in recent months as been is the consistent over-reporting of crime. The Herald Sun, the Age, Today Tonight etc, have devoted an enormous amount of time to telling everyone about how much crime there is and that things have never been worse. I guess it’s easy to report on crime stories, it doesn’t take a lot of investigation and it’s compelling, even if it does exacerbate fear.

A perfect example of the overall trend is the way murders are usually covered. The shocking murder of four members of a family in Sydney earlier this year has received a huge amount of coverage. While it was a horrific crime and certainly deserving of some reporting, media coverage of horrible crimes creates an incorrect perception that crime rates are up. In reality, the Institute of Criminology’s latest report shows that in 1996 there were 354 murders, while in 2007 there were 282.

COF says:

12:14pm | 07/09/09

JD: the source is Stephen Levitt’s “Freakonomics”, to save you the time. He also mentioned a downturn in the crack market as a possible influencing factor on the reduction of crime in New York (it happened across the United States at the time, not just in New York). The main gist of the Levitt argument is that criminals are made well before they become criminals, and crime reduction essentially cannot be controlled effectively by aggressive policing. The root cause of the problem is deeper than policing. As a result, its fair to conclude that an increase in aggressive policing and hard line tactics will actually lead to an increase in reported crime.
And margaret, talking about unreported crime, how many is “many” and where can I find the figures? Oh thats right.

Will says:

12:36pm | 07/09/09

The problem is that our judicial officials, senior ones, get on their high horses and write editorials where they couple mandatory minimums with mandatory sentencing, for them, it is the same thing and it clearly is not, mandatory minimums simply take certain sentencing dispositions away and set the low limit for what a sentence should be, but lawyers, Judges and Magistrates lump it with mandatory sentencing, that is the problem…...and I thought it was the government on behalf of the people who set sentencing laws, not lawyers for their clients and Judges for themselves.

Mark says:

01:01pm | 07/09/09

The problem is, well its not the problem,
But Every Idiot and his dumb dog can blabber and whine and scream for longer Jail sentences, But the fact is they have their head just as far up their arses as judges whose opposite solution to the problem is to not send people to Jail. Jail does not work, Its like criminaly univeristy, training and indoctrination. It does a great job at roducing hardened criminals, You need to radically change the whole “correctional’ system, so it is about getting people back into society, and make it a lot cheaper, Then we could look at sending more people then.
Until then GP has the best suggestion, Lets ship convicts to England!

G says:

01:15pm | 07/09/09

Hi Margaret

I looked at the link you posted and crimes are going down in most of that report…?

Here’s the Australian Federal Governments Institute of Criminology’s report which also details a decline:  http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/E/4/0/{E4031E6F-031D-415C-B544-8CE865A3CA0C}facts_and_figures_2008.pdf

Also the Office of Crime Statistics and Research (Office of the Attorney General), NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, the Australian Centre of Policing Research, Australian Criminology Research Council also reflect these findings.

News coverage like this plays a major part in increasing the perception that crime is increasing and like this one has a tendency to exaggerate and focus on violent crimes over less ‘newsworthy’ minor crimes.

So umm yeah…  Michael, trying to incite moral panic just to get media exposure on a red button non issue is not good politiking.

Skogan, W. (1986) ‘Fear of crime and neighborhood change’. Crime and Justice and Jackson, J. (2006). Introducing Fear of Crime to Risk Research, Risk Analysis

Gandalf says:

01:30pm | 07/09/09

“Through no fault of their own, the police are no longer our protectors, but have become our fellow victims. ” This statement completely ignores the fact that our policemen have become tax collectors for Brumby and his minions. That could in part explain the public’s lacking respect for them.

Margaret Gray says:

01:37pm | 07/09/09

“...You do realise that your link shows that crime rates are either stable or declining?...”

Really?  Look again.

INCREASES in reported crime in Victoria in 2008/09 occured in the following areas:
Homicide +9.0
Robbery +0.2
Assault +7.4
Abduction / Kidnap +0.6
Arson +8.4
Property damage +2.2
Burglary (aggravated) +10.2
Handle stolen goods +5.5
Theft (shopsteal) +22.8
Theft (other) +4.4
Drug (cult., manuf., traff.) +3.2
Drug (possess, use) +4.3
Going equipped to steal +13.0
Weapons / Explosives +2.0
Behaviour in public +92.0

Doesn’t look too stable to me.

Michael says:

01:41pm | 07/09/09

Kristian knows what she is talking about, as for unreported crime I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss it, crimes go unreported everyday, from the shoplifter that’s too big a pain in the bum to bother holding for the police, to the husband who refuses to speak against a wife that has stabbed him in the arm (I still don’t understand why my uncle and aunt love hating each other so much).

Closing point, how many people document and report the graffiti that’s splashed across their buildings? lots of people just ignore it or clean it off, there’s just 3 examples of unreported crime.

Michael says:

01:51pm | 07/09/09

“Behaviour in public +92.0”

I wonder if that’s the same in sydney, with all the transit officers handing out fines for swearing and anything else they can get you on, thanks for the 800 bucks in fines cityrail, I’ll be voting for anyone that smashes your corrupt union ruined organisation now.

G says:

02:04pm | 07/09/09

Naughty Margaret, stop cherry picked stats out of that report…

You’ll note that it also states that in 2008/2009:

“there was a decline in overall crime of 1.7%, as a rate per 100,000 population. The number of offences recorded in 2008/2009 increased by 0.2%.

and

“Since 2000/2001, overall crime has decreased by 25.5%, as a rate per 100,000 population. The number of recorded offences has decreased by 16.2% over the same period.”

Michael Michael, I wondered why the evidence you referred to was from “TV screens and newspapers, filled with stories of the street violence that is seemingly an everyday occurrence in Victoria”.

The evidence doesn’t even remotely back up your assertions.  As a shadow minister you have an obligations to the Australian public, one of which is to be truthful to them.

Terry Wright says:

02:43pm | 07/09/09

Congratulations are in order for some of the best comments I have seen at The Punch!

Here is a politician for the conservative Liberal Party banging on about social issues - what do you all expect? (Thanks to RF (10:58am) for picking the author up on not disclosing his political party affiliation).

As JD (08:43am) rightly point out, New York’s Zero Tolerance policy based on the Open Windows theory didn’t achieve much that wasn’t already happening nation wide in the US. Look into it a bit more and you will see that Rudi’s policies caused absolute carnage especially to minorities and the poor.

The big slip-up is that crime is not out-of-control in Victoria. But alas, Margaret Gray (11:07am) tried her damnedest to support this claim by pointing us to a crime report. Unfortunately, it turned out to only contradict her claims and supply further proof that the article lacked credibility . Good pickup, iansand (11:17am).

The article was looking shaking by this point. Where was the author getting his information? Michael Ronaldson was guilty of crass fear mongering and political spin of the highest degree. His article is thick of nasty ideology; empirical and misguided, political and contrived. iansand (09:57am) and G (09:22am) sum it up perfectly.

Mandatory sentencing has never worked and Brumby should be congratulated for bravely voicing his opposition to it. Mandatory minimum sentencing contradicts the very principles of law. Thanks to Steve (10:49am) for his pithy explanation. But would you expect anything different from someone who uses the MSM as evidence for their argument? Would you expect anything different from someone who uses Rudi Gulliani as a role model of success? What about shouting praise for surely one of the loopiest ideas person ever to grace the Victorian parliament, Robert Doyle? BennyJetts (08:48am) fleshes out one of his classic “ideas” that would have police “encouraging” people from the outer suburbs not to venture into the city on weekends.

A modern government must have evidence based policies not antiquated “feel good” remedies.  Citing “some old-fashioned deterrence” over “post-modern fads from university criminology departments” is a dead give away to how these people think ... and act.

So why was this article so easy to discredit? Surely, Michael Ronaldson is intelligent enough to realise what most readers here concluded? The only points missing were the mandatory blame on the “drug scourge” and the mention of “family values”. I did note though that there was not one mention from the author of alcohol being a part cause of the problem. I know that if drugs had recently been in the MSM spotlight instead of alcohol, the article would have had been quite different.

Finally, the reality of what mandatory sentencing might achieve hit home with the brilliant comment from Kristian (10:13am). I get so sick of seeing reader’s comment from the Murdoch infotainment papers stating that jails are like holiday camps. Armchair critics and conservative politicians are so far removed from the real world and throw around prison time like a night of detention. Prison is harsh and the epitome of a cranky old judicial system run by those who least fear being a guest at one of these establishments. How anyone has to fear being raped or bashed in a government institution should be a priority to society. But why would it when removing judges from the sentencing process is being seriously considered.

COF says:

02:45pm | 07/09/09

Margaret, that is the most blatantly dishonest use of statistics I think I have ever seen. What amazes me is that every blogger can look at the table you got your figures from and see how blatantly dishonest you have been here. I would be pretty embarassed if I were you.

Michael, you are correct in saying that unreported crime is a significant portion of total crime, but the thing is that you and Margaret insist on using it as evidence that crime has increased in recent times. What I say to that is, how can you prove to us that unreported crime has increased in recent times? You can’t of course, because as many people here have said, there are no figures for unreported crime - by its nature, it remains UNREPORTED.

This is the initial problem with your argument - there is not enough evidence of a marked increase in crimehere to demand a fundamental change to the policing system. The second problem is, there is no evidence to suggest mandatory sentencing for drunken behaviour or petty crime will be the most effective solution - evidence has shown that a variety of social factors, including changing economic times, can have a much more enhanced effect on reducing or increasing crime than any foray into restricting civil rights like you propose here.

Margaret Gray says:

02:58pm | 07/09/09

“...Naughty Margaret, stop cherry picked stats out of that report…”

It’s hardly cherry picking to present the facts as published.

Do you deny those increases in those areas?

Grant says:

03:06pm | 07/09/09

Michael Ronaldson

The emotive writing in your piece, for example ‘active combat zone’, ‘epidemic of violence’, ‘marauding thugs rule our streets’, ‘crime rages out of control’ is clearly trying to generate an atmosphere of fear of crime.  When reading your piece it sounds like Iraq or Darfur.

If you are hopeful that the public will blindly accept your anecdotal information about how Victoria is in a crime wave so you can go down the populist route of advocating harsher punitive measures for political gain. 

When factual evidence refutes this, then I think you have sadly underestimated the intelligence of the general public.

Julia says:

03:08pm | 07/09/09

I was watching Amazing Grace the other week - the one about Wilburforce and the anti-slavery movement of the 18th Century. Drinking and associated problems - fighting, rape, vomiting and urinating in the streets (by the entire population not just footballers) - could be solved, according to him, by serving on beer in the cities and spirits in other places.

Closing the pubs early may not be the answer, nor would mandatory minimums, after all, when you’re drunk there’s little that you really care about except what’s happening in the moment. But maybe if light beer was served from 10pm onwards in pubs and clubs where there are known instances of trouble, it might help drunken violence.

Might not do anything for illegal drug taking, mind you, but that’s a different problem again.

Sloth says:

03:14pm | 07/09/09

The fascinating question, for me anyway, is how on earth do people like Sen. Ronaldson here think they are going to get away with spreading this sort of dreadful misinformation? Every politician in the country - bar none - bemoans the state of contemporary reporting and the Today Tonight effect of tabloid journalism. Yet, as Sen Ronaldson so clearly demonstrates they remain themselves willing to trot out dodgy ‘home-truths’ about the - non-existant - increase in crime to support bad arguements. In this case, we can’t even accuse the author of using bad statistics, since he’s not deigned to reference any objective facts whatever.

Why do we let politicians get away with this? As this comment thread so clearly demonstrates the truth is easily accesible. Yet time and time again we see terrible, unsustainable reasons used to justify bad conclusions. The public deserves better than this sort of blithe, arrogant nonsense from its elected representatives (yes, even those unrepresentative swill on the hill…)

Why does this happen? How does this happen? Sen. Ronaldson is doubtless a very intelligent man. Years of law school and practice as a solicitor ought to have given him an excellent grounding in how to write, structure and defend and arguement, how to justify a position by reason, not rhetoric. Add to this the vast public resources at the Senator’s disposal, and you can see why I think that publishing this sort of indefensible brain-fart is simply inexcusable. If you are reading this, Senator, we - your consitutents - demand better. You owe us better. Deliver it.

I don’t mean this as a partisan attack. Lord knows that the Labor party are just as bad; Sen. Conroy’s spirited defence of the ‘great firewall of Australia’, demonstrates that he is the clear favorite for the 2012 medal in statistical gymnsastics. And don’t even get me started on the Greens (one suspects that they outsource their fact checking to a firm who offers quantitative analysis of surveys taken exclusively from the trees which have been or currently are being hugged by dreadlocked stoners…)

When did we start letting such incompetent drivel dominate the political debate? Am I wrong to romanticise the yesteryear of politics as a time when our elected officials wouldn’t vent unsourced nonsense at any available opportunity, hoping to piggy-back public outrage and ride it all the way to the polls? Or are there Hansard extracts of Chifley and Menzies free-styling ill-advised and unconsidered policies in response to the day’s headlines that I’ve missed?

Where did it all go so very wrong?

Venise Alstergren says:

03:35pm | 07/09/09

Michael Ronaldson: Your concern for the people of Melbourne currently being held to ransom by the beer-sodden louts and hoons of the outer suburbs would be touching if you actually meant a word of it.

You purport to have deep concern by dredging up every bit of hyperbole in the book. Phrases like “But for all their noble intentions. Active combat zone. Far too much carrot, far too little stick.” Come tumbling out of your head. Unbelievably predictably you invoke the name of Rudi Giullani as being a saviour of a similar crime wave in New York, and you score cheap political points against the incumbent State Government.

Of course everything would be solved by Victoria having a Liberal National Party coalition. Oh yeah? Your thinking could have come from a minister in Bob Menzies Liberal Party in the 1950s. Demonize an already rotten situation, bang on about how you would solve the problem because, as we are always told-by the Liberal Party, the Liberals are the only ones who know how to rule the plebs, and look to the US as the font of all knowledge.

Who on earth do you think you are kidding Michael? Your lot can’t even field a cohesive party. You are all so fractured by internecine brawls. You have Jeff Kennett, Michael Krüger, Peter Costello all mixing it up and you have poor Ted Baillieu crucified against the nearest wall by the shafts of hatred you hurl around like confetti. Your lot couldn’t even hold an amicable cocktail party, let alone a decent political party.

You are intellectually dishonest, which is putting it very, very politely.

Suzanne says:

03:37pm | 07/09/09

Sloth;
You ask where it all went wrong?  Well as far as I can tell, it went wrong a couple of years after I left school (Im 30) or possibly a little before that.  Political correctness is a load of crock.

There are no manners anymore, not respect either.  How can you expect to be respected when alot of these “thugs” & gangs etc dont even respect themselves.  Sure this is not new, but I have proven time and time again, if I am in a crowded bar, that people will move for me or let me past if I say excuse me.  The opposite is the case if I just try and push past. I just get grunts or filthy looks.

The youth of today are an angry bunch, and I have no idea why.  They have it pretty good out there, but for some reason arent happy unless they are getting rip roaring drunk and hurting people.

I think the saying spare the rod spoil the child has never been so true as what it is now.

Dean says:

03:44pm | 07/09/09

Doubt my comment will be published . Putting it bluntly this country’s legal system is virtually the worst in the world, albeit second to that of England and is under english common law. Mandatory sentences for all people and dont generlise through race, religious or their social or economic status in the community. I dont care who commit these acts they all must pay the price for the cowardly actions in Melbourne CBD, other inner or outer suburbs and Australia as a whole.

I am sick of these lowlife gangs we never did this when we were growing up, my family immigrated in the 60’s from italy and were very hardworking, never getting into trouble and continued that here. All the ethnic and other violence is through children having no discipline at all, gang culture happens as a consequence as they are all pretty much no hoping people bludging on welfare with nothing else better to do. That dumby will never heed the call for mandatory sentencing which will teach these people the lessons they desperately need to stop this violence. The soft approch has never worked, the hardline approach needed now..

Deano from Morwell

Jeremy C Browne says:

03:50pm | 07/09/09

The Prime Minister’s enlistment of AFL Captains to back his campaign against ‘alcohol-fuelled’ violence should be seen for what it is, a cynical attempt to justify a hefty increase in tax for the law-abiding alcohol user and not a serious attempt to tackle violence on our streets.  Why hasn’t Kevin Rudd backed an equivalent campaign directed at cocaine, crack, speed, ice, etc? All of these illicit drugs are embarrassingly easy to procure and controlled by vicious organized crime syndicates.  Likewise, why is the Prime Minister uninterested in the proliferation of illegal guns on our streets or the gang violence which makes some of our streets too dangerous to visit at night?  Apparently, all the violence can be linked to legally available alcohol, even though it has no criminal element in its’ production, distribution and sale.  It is, of course, much easier to scapegoat legal industries rather than tackle organized crime which flourishes throughout Australia.  All of us, drunk or not, must be responsible for our actions.  However, for Kevin Rudd to pretend that his campaign against ‘alcohol-fuelled’ violence is anything but an attempt to minimize the public’s reaction to increased alcohol prices is disgraceful.  A ‘cynicism-fuelled’ electorate should not tolerate it. 

PS:  Is there really any sane person out there who believes any statistic provided by the Victoria Police?

Margaret Gray says:

04:13pm | 07/09/09

“...Your lot couldn’t even hold an amicable cocktail party, let alone a decent political party…”

Do you actually have any solutions ‘Venise’ or again just spouting the same old hate Righty and big bad Amerikkka vitriol?

J. Weston says:

05:22pm | 07/09/09

Why is alcohol necessary at AFL games where the venues are large public areas loaded with impressionable kids.  I can’t see why adults can’t spend one afternoon without swilling alcohol, and don’t think that kids aren’t taking notice, because this is where they are being schooled in public consumption of an addictive and mind-altering substance.  It should be banned from all sporting venues.  I don’t go to football any more because I couldn’t stand having alcohol slopped all over me and the stink of it.  If people are wondering why kids think it’s standard practice to drink themselves stupid, just take a look at its availability and how they are exposed to it at a very young age.  AFL administrators - SHAME, SHAME, SHAME.

stace says:

05:50pm | 07/09/09

This argument never goes anywhere.

The nub of the problem isn’t crime, punishment and deterrence. (But what a nice easy out.) The problem is a worldwide one that began with the liberalisation of liquor laws and the proliferation of drinking venues - their number, density, size and opening hours. Whether you support that or not is another issue, but we now treat alcohol like any other consumer goods. As availability goes up, so do the social harms.

Alcohol fueled assaults, (and particularly domestic violence which no one seems to discuss in relation to this anymore) are all up. It’s just so easy to label all these so called drunken yobs who’re beating each other up, glassing people and so on as ‘thugs’. Most of them are just regular people - except they’re drunk. And they’re now alot more drunk alot more of the time.

Politicians love the old law and order debate. It’s a nice little earner for them. Yet whether you believe the stats or not, if people’s perception of crime goes up, it is a problem.

It’s just so much easier to say the police should be fixing the problem, because no one wants to get between an Australian and his or her beer.

And all this talk about civilizing our drinking with small trendy bars is just another well-meaning crock. We’re not about to get civilized with our drinking any time soon.

Alex says:

06:10pm | 07/09/09

It’s hardly cherry-picking to point out that some crimes are increasing while others are decreasing.  Especially if it’s the violent crimes that are increasing.

On the other hand, it’s quite misleading to suggest that violence is decreasing based on the total number of offences, since the overall number includes non-violent crimes such as bicycle theft, drug possession and handling stolen goods.

Jkelly says:

06:46pm | 07/09/09

There one thing that stands out to me in this whole issue, people have become invisible, unless you are outed by the herald sun or another large proponent of the media, most people can go around un noticed as the criminal that they are, 30 years ago if you bashed someone everyone would know about it in town, if you used a weapon you were known as a dog that everyone would avoid. Why don’t peoples family, work place associates, find out whats going on. If we can put death notices in the paper, why can’t we put crimes of violence notices in the paper and drunk driver notices, I bet no one would want their name to appear on page one of the violent crime notices section or have their boss read that they were disqualified from driving for blowing .2 on the breath tester. The best detterent is advertizing, lets not protect anyone that resorts to violence, a mandatory 5 days jail for all drink driving charges, 10 days for violent crime. Explaining to your family, friends or boss why you acted like such an asshole that you ended up in jail would surely be a good detterent, and lets not lock them in a normal jail where they can learn more crime, lets transport them to a tent jail in the desert and feed them food that is cheaper than what a dogs diet is so that they remember what it means to act like an idiot.

Peter says:

08:12pm | 07/09/09

Dunno about Melbourne, but the casual violence and anti-social behaviour is gradually making Sydney unliveable.

I’m not afriad of getting murdered, its the mindless bashing and occasional robbery that worries me.  It’s the gangs of drunken young men on the trains, abusive and domineering, picking on the lone female in the carraige.  Its the punks who roll a taxi driver for fun. 

The simple fact is that there is a cohort of young men out there who don’t care about the law - in fact are arrogantly dismissive of it.  Go to a tavern in the Western Suburbs one night and see it in action.

Those who do get busted get let off time and time again.  Maybe mandatory sentences won’t work, but at least those losers will be off the street for some period of time.

SC says:

01:38pm | 08/09/09

The authority should close those troublesome entertainment venues as suggested by the mayor and bring to an end those booze-fueled street violence. Heavier judicial penalties should be meted out to those violent thugs instead of slap-on-the-wrist type of punishment.

Venise Alstergren says:

02:09pm | 08/09/09

Margaret Grey: Where did I say I was anti-america? i said the Liberal Party always look to the US for guidance. Quite a different matter.
Yes, I do have an answer-I do not think it is anywhere close to being the whole answer. Let me call it a suggestion.
For ten years I lived very close to Chapel Street, Prahran. I and my friends were always furious to see parents giving their fourteen-approximately year old sons fifty dollars saying, “When you’ve spent it you can come home.” Where, Margaret, would you suppose kids of this age end up? Precisely, they ended up being in groups of drunken hoons.
I would like to see people in uniform patrolling cinemas on Fridays, and Saturdays, and public holidays. Just to make sure to catch these so-called parents.
You were saying Margaret?

Vaughan says:

07:02pm | 08/09/09

Mandatory sentencing does NOT work, If you really care about facts do some research (I won’t bung on about all the studies).  Being a lazy and reactionary society does not give us the permission to act like morons.  Maybe we should twitter these young men messages like “Hey don’t drink too much and hurt someone, man - love Ashton” or “Taylor Swift says - if you want to be my BF don’t take drugs that you have no idea about and glass some poor bastard XX”

Mario says:

10:34am | 10/09/09

I too have read Freakonomics. I don’t believe that their concepts are directly related to our situation here although I do think that people need to start thinking along their line of thought.

You can sit on your leather chairs arguing this stupid point all day long, Mandatory Sentencing - such a pathetic typical bigoted response without even looking at the cause. Can you seriously sit there and think that this will solve the problem? Uggghh the thought is sickening - this is pretty much harvesting more and more criminals…

Violence will happen on the streets whether you like it or not. This is the cause of the seeds that have long been planted. Like Dubner and Levitt, I too believe you have to go back and look at the possibilities at what it could have been. In my opinion it’s the beloved education system… It would be nice have the statistics from kids coming out of public vs private’s crime rates. There is the obvious socio-economic divide in the public education system and will never be addressed, although it must be considered as a cause. All the money can be spent on the education system but if it isn’t properly developed / implemented it won’t do a thing.

What can we do? Re-evaluate our education system - teaching kid’s real life long lessons, give them true life experiences at that young age where there is not yet a seed to plant, show them what life can be, somehow show them true human morals and ethics, instead of hours and hours of mindless idleness in school. I know so many who’ve come out of school with direction and without. It’s funny to know exactly how differently they see life.

Spending the time to find them and truly bringing out the better of every single one. If you spend the time helping a lost person find themselves and really give them the time they will become someone with direction in life.

By the way, apparently,, I am one of those young thugs (a 24yo male - when I go out with 2+ mates at night), or at least that’s how I’m labelled and looked at by most..

Adelaide Female says:

05:28am | 07/10/09

Im a hard working 23yr old female, under 60kg, no previous criminal record and actually until recently was seriously looking into becoming a police officer. I very rarely go out into town but went out for a girlfriends birthday on the weekend…and never again will I enter town again..

On the weekend I was seriously assaulted by a male police officer after being falsely arrested (long story,  basically I was told to move on from a club by bouncers and I refused to as i was waiting for my girl friend alone in their club so we could go home together..i was actually the one who asked for police to be called!!..they arrived and much to my surprise I ended up being arrested for arguing with them about needing to wait for my friend!!! Furthermore, due to the fact I was genuinely concerned about leaving my friend alone in town (because they had then arrested me, obviously making it certinly difficult to be able to contact her!) I kept arguing how wrong the whole matter was and that surely there were more pressing matters at hand for them to deal with than a girl waiting for her friend to go home…I was then met with a hard punch just below my eye (while i was wearing handcuffs) and had my hair ripped out of my head (I never touched the officer, never spat on him or called him derogatory names, possibly I let out a couple of curses in my annoyance at the whole thing, but certainly no personal cursing towards the officers, after the whole assault against me and while he had me pinned down by my hair in the back of the police car while calling me an ‘ugly slut’ - i asked him if he ‘felt powerful’ to which he replied ‘he loved it’ and ‘did I like being dominated..?’...I have now been put up for assaulting him..in front of me he said to 2 other officers in the car that this would be ‘the story’...what do I do? do i deserve a jail sentence then for wanting to wait outside a club for my friend? Were they really doing their job we pay them for that night? Does he deserve respect for treating any person like that neverlone an innocent female? ....I definitely think there should be special circumstances depending on each case and that ALL police officers should certainly not be given this power because at the end of the day a lot of the time its just their word against the publics…This wont fix anything, just give them more power, which they are obviously already abusing..