Solution Required, Suggestions, Anyone?

Canadians are concerned with the level of crime within the country. Violent crime in particular.

And the problem of youth crime of a horrendously violent nature committed by young people whose youth protects them against a system of justice geared to protect society from crimes committed by older malefactors. Where the public sees justice not quite served, as they would have it. And where criminals serve out their time in conditions that take great pains to ensure their human rights, inclusive of conjugal visits and Internet use.

The current Conservative government has pledged to Canadians that it will see a tougher view of justice meted out to criminals and psychopaths who bedevil society. A get-tough movement is stalking the country. A new federal Tackling Violent Crime Act is seen by some as reflecting too punitive an approach to solving society's crime statistics. But then, what is a society to do to protect itself?

Perhaps the question should be asked where all these criminals and budding criminals come from. A dysfunctional society creates socially distanced individuals who cannot seem to find a place for themselves. And resort to crime, perhaps. Poverty is the guiding hand of criminality. Lack of sufficient social support for the poor, the homeless; youth left adrift, hopeless addictions.

The new legislation dealing with crime will increase mandatory minimum sentences for crimes committed with firearms. For dealing with incidents of impaired driving. It will insist that those who commit serious sexual or violent offences, with three strikes against them, have the onus placed upon them to give proof why they should not be indefinitely incarcerated. Who could possibly object to all of this?

Everyone has ghosts in their past. Many people have been raised in less than ideal circumstances. Neglect, disinterest, lack of support when it's most needed. People can fall into a cesspool of personal pain and despair. A lack of education, of opportunities, of support and hope, can cause people to turn to drugs, to prostitution, to crime, to support themselves. Living in the shadows of society.

Everyone is imbued with free will. People make choices, often unfortunate choices. People can find it in themselves to transcend their difficulties. People who have suffered dreadful abuse as children at the hands of their parents don't necessarily succumb to complete social alienation, but they're more likely to. It's dreadfully costly to pay police salaries, launch a court action, incarcerate offenders.

It's costly to create the right mix of social support agencies within communities to deal with the needs of the disaffected, the homeless, the addicted. When people serve out their prison sentences for crimes they've committed, recidivism becomes a huge problem. After all, any proclivities toward crime simply become enhanced through bitterness, lack of opportunity, mingling with hardened criminals.

Prison populations breed future criminals, in an unending cycle of crime and violence. A cycle costly to society in terms of failed lives, and the impact upon victims of crime. Social activists and social agencies teamed up for the purpose of giving hope and opportunity, support and knowledge to the vulnerable, teetering on the edge of sociopathy, can serve to create a more favourable outcome.

It's a matter of anticipating needs and fulfilling them, as opposed to cleaning up the mess left as a result of needs unfulfilled. It's proaction, as opposed to reactive. But will it work? Reason claims it should and would. Worth a chance, certainly. If only, if only parents of children took their jobs as guidance counsellors seriously. If only parents could understand how vital good parenting is to the outcomes of children's future choices.

But then that presupposes familial values and priorities are universally worth handing on. That's not always the case. Societal failures in raising the new generation starts at home. But then, what happens when the parents are themselves incapable of drawing reasonable conclusions with respect to lifestyle choices, making good value judgements, encouraging their young to succeed at life? Starting with a good education they may themselves have lacked.

It's telling that in the United States there are 751 people incarcerated for every 100,000 in population. That with less than 5% of the world's population, the U.S. has almost one-quarter of the world's prisoners. Nothing less than amazing. Through a combination of the three-strikes laws and mandatory minimum sentences, there is a record 2.3 million people behind bars in the United States. That represents 700,000 more than in China, with four times the population.

The argument could be made that China makes greater use of the death penalty, but that's surely not the whole story. Half a million people in the U.S. are imprisoned for drug offences. Representing not only dealers but low-level offenders, there for drug possession. The more public funds spend on incarcerating offenders - $100,00 to $200,000 for each mandatory term for low-level offenders - the less is available for other vital public services, like education funding.

That's some trade-off. Less education available; more proclivities and opportunities toward law-breaking. More prisons built and filled, less funds available for education. Two-thirds of prisoners released from jail tend to re-offend. Yet, oddly enough, since 1990, there's been a noted fall-off in criminal offences in both Canada and the United States.

Lower unemployment rates, a decline in the youth demographic, enhanced community policing programs and a reduction in crack cocaine use has been credited with much of the falling crime rates. Along with higher rates of incarceration.