Medicine has, for at least decades, generally moved forward on the basis of the best available evidence. What outcomes have we observed from a given surgical procedure, a particular prescription drug, or from  combinations of various lifestyle choices and genetic predispositions? We consider the best evidence and we either modify our approach or stay the course.

But with crime and criminal justice we tend to throw the best available evidence out the window, preferring instead to indulge our emotions in our policy-making. Consider the recent spate of initiatives from the federal government: elimination of the already “faint hope” clause for first degree murder, expansion of the national sex registry, elimination of conditional sentences and the creation of mandatory minimum sentences for all those who distribute illegal drugs. There isn’t any reliable or credible evidence to support these initiatives. They won’t make our streets safer, they won’t deter others from involvement in crime, and they are all extremely costly, requiring the building of additional jail cells. Study after study has indicated that the overwhelming majority of sex offenders have low rates of recidivism, mandatory minimums trap addict-dealers, not drug kingpins — and the faint hope clause is currently working well; there is no suggestion of failure after release in these circumstances.

(more…)

Let me begin by saying that gangs and organized crime have been with us for at least 150 years: alienated and disenfranchised young men finding a common bond in lawlessness, using crime as a lever for the creation of material wealth. Recall Daniel Day Lewis in Gangs of New York, a fictional depiction of gang violence in New York City in the 1860s – and then fast forward to the streets of Vancouver, where some 140 years later, there was almost a shooting a day, until about three weeks ago.

The late 1960s and early 1970s provided new opportunities for those involved in gangs and organized crime. The drugs of the third world arrived on the doorstep of the first world; the new availability of global travel had brought North Americans into contact with cannabis and hashish in such places as India, Lebanon and Thailand, cocaine in Colombia and Bolivia, and opium and heroin in Southeast Asia. And some intrepid travelers and entrepreneurs brought these third world drugs into North America and Western Europe. Although marijuana, cocaine and heroin have been illegal since the early 20th century, there was little traffic in Canada or the United States until the late 60s and early 70s – in fact about 1,000 convictions per year annually from the 1920s until 1967 for all illegal drugs combined. By 1976 we had 40,000 criminal convictions annually – and these were just for simple possession of cannabis.

(more…)

I’m not gay and I don’t play soccer, but I have been pleased by the blossoming of gay marriage initiatives and by the fact that increasing numbers of young and old have been drawn to soccer as a recreational activity – to the point that our local community has, with some curmudgeonly exceptions, embraced the reality of synthetic turf, to permit year round participation in a wonderfully healthy activity.

It seems that opposition to the synthetic turf field is very much like opposition to gay rights and gay marriage. In both instances there are claims that the behaviour in question simply isn’t “natural”, and as such, ought to be resisted. Sex between two men or two women is, statistically speaking, outside of pre-existing norms. And a synthetic playing surface is similarly, statistically speaking, outside of pre-existing norms (never mind that plastic has been an integral part of our lives, in other contexts, for decades).

(more…)