Why not spend taxpayer money on things that actually reduce crime?
Globe and Mail, BC edition
Letter by Jim Hackler
Jan. 23, 2010

Experts in criminology have shown mandatory minimum sentences do not reduce crime (Crime And Punishment - Jan. 22). However, they do create injustice and undermine confidence in the courts. …Both California and Texas offer case studies of how politicians used "get tough" policies to deceive voters who respond to simple-minded slogans about crime.

For several decades, these states built prisons to accommodate an ever-increasing number of convictions. Funds for education and child care, which provide a positive return for society, were cut. Funds for prisons, which provide a negative return, were increased.

Why not spend taxpayer money on things that actually reduce crime?

Improving conditions for struggling pregnant mothers, quality day care and better early childhood education all produce tremendous dividends; 15 years later, such programs usually result in less delinquency, less drug use, less violence….

Why is the Harper government determined to spend money that will increase, not decrease, crime?