the politics of crime

THE POLITICS OF CRIME

THE NEW ‘MORAL PANICS’

Demonizing Youth, Marketing Fear: The New Politics of Crime

Crime rates are dropping, the economy is booming Canada is once again, according to

the United Nations, one of the ‘best countries’ in the world.

IS THERE A RELATIONSHIP?

Yet fear of crime is a crippling concern

the new millennium is witnessing the sharpest distinction between the living conditions of the rich and poor since the Great Depression

Sharp Paradox: In a Time of Plenty

thousand's of adults, children and youth live on the streets,

reduced to begging, marginal efforts at work petty crime Hundreds of thousands more live in

shelters or a step away from shelters.

The Politics Of Crime

Why has a harsh approach to crime and disorder become a central feature of our culture?

Purpose of the Criminal Law

to ‘protect society’ guarantee security and safety for

individuals provide prompt retribution for victims

of crime Under the rule of law

But:

It is relatively easy to politicize crime: crime, and fear of crime is part of the culture

HOW?

Crime is fascinating A commodity for writers, artists, the

media Political interests of all stripes are

carefully attentive to issues of criminal justice

The ways that crime is:

defined prosecuted punished Are being influenced by ever more

overtly political ends

The ‘new’ welfare state

Both neo-conservative and neo-liberal

Neo-conservative Positions family and church (not the state) give

charity support for the unfortunate state entitlements such as welfare

weaken family and church social assistance is not a right Should rarely go to children, youth

and single mothers a ‘law and order’ retributive approach

to social disorder and dysfunction

Neo-liberal Positions ‘survival of the fittest’ rely on market forces. The state should ‘get out of the way’ Market will decide which regions, which

people, prosper and which don’t. The only assistance the State should be

providing are ‘incentives’ to work. private security, policing and correctional

services expand treatment and social services are

privatized,

Results

Major cuts to social assistance strict new rules limiting entitlement

introduced suddenly Rents deregulated social housing programmes cancelled

and cut back

Results? an increase in homelessness in general new presence of homeless and

disenfranchised young adults on the street ‘student welfare’ cancelled most of the youth who leave home today

have few options available for the basics of survival: food, clothing and shelter

More results?

a significant number turn to or are captured by street prostitution

juggle part time minimum wage jobs panhandle squeegee windshields engage in crime or starve


Cuts to Children’s Aid Society budgets have removed another strand in the safety net

The education system is also being reformed Fewer teachers for students with special

needs Reduced resources for support programs Alternative schools and alternative

programs are being cut Adult education courses closed School funding formulas are changing School boards funded based on the

students who remain enrolled for a full year.

Zero tolerance to school violence policies which ensure that students

engaged in almost any sort of violence may be expelled

some young people have nowhere to go but the street

demonized and marginalized young people expelled from school under

zero tolerance very rapidly run out of options

except for property crime, prostitution, drugs or all three

The Commodification of Crime

Crime has become a valuable political commodity

concern about crime has become a feature in literally all political campaigns today, even in the face of significant declines in the rate of crime


Crime sells newspapers.


Crime is no longer simply something with marketing power.

Crime itself, or more accurately, the fear of crime, is being marketed for political purposes.


Demand is fostered for: more safety more control more order more punishment.


Middle class markets are targeted new laws are developed new fears are identified. And each time, a political benefit is

extracted.

Common perceptions about what ‘crime’ is are shaped:

‘crime’ is limited to street crime and

disorder, and to random acts of extreme

violence. But: corporate or so called ‘white collar’

deviance causes as much or more social harm than street crime

The criminal justice system is broken

Crime is ‘out of control’ Criminals are ‘getting away’ with

murder Courts are too ‘soft’ on crime Criminals have more rights than

victims

The Politics Of Crime Law’s reach against corporate

deviance (from environmental crimes to economic misconduct) is diminished:

investigative and prosecutorial infrastructures are dismantled

‘cutting red tape’ ‘getting government out of the

boardrooms of the nation


On the other hand: Street youth Beggars Squeegee kids Prostitutes increasingly demonized and

criminalized.

Political Crimes and Misdemeanors

redundant exercises of quasi-criminal legislation enacted with overtly political goals in mind

clearly marketed to serve political, not legislative, interests.

not needed (if existing legislation were actually used)

A similar strategy names a piece of legislation with its message

. The ‘Safe Streets Act’ An Act to promote safety in Ontario

by prohibiting aggressive solicitation, solicitation of persons in certain places and disposal of dangerous things in certain places and to amend the Highway Traffic Act to regulate certain activities on roadways

The new ‘moral panics’

. Debate or critique is almost impossible with this technique.

Who wishes to re-victimize Brian and family or Christopher and his?

Who wants unsafe streets? Who would refuse to protect children?

The Politics Of Crime homelessness and poverty is articulated as a decline in

moral values and an increase in sexual and other disorder. nothing of substance is done to make streets safer the sight of poverty is criminalized. ‘ Aggressive’ begging is outlawed invisible, begging is not. Begging in any location where the solicitation is hard to

ignore, near automated bank machines for example, is criminalized

begging where the beggar can be ignored is not. None of these provisions were needed in any real sense.

The police have ample powers and plenty of crimes to choose from in the Criminal Code to curtail harassment, loitering and nuisance.

R. v. Parker

(2002) 146 C.C.C. (3d) 193 (OCA)

Facts The accused was charged with cultivating marijuana

and with possession of marijuana. The accused suffered from a very severe form of

epilepsy. Surgery had failed to control his frequent serious and

potentially life‑threatening seizures, and conventional medication was only moderately successful in doing so.

The accused found that by smoking marijuana, he could substantially reduce the incidence of seizures.

As he had no legal source of marijuana, he grew it himself.

The charges resulted when on two occasions the police searched the accused's home and seized marijuana

Procedural History The accused challenged the constitutionality of the

marijuana prohibition claimed that it infringed his rights under s. 7 of the

Canadian Charter of Rights of Freedoms the trial judge agreed and stayed the cultivation and

possession charges The trial judge read into the legislation an exemption

for persons possessing or cultivating marijuana for their personal medically approved use.

The trial judge also ordered that the marijuana plants seized from the accused should be returned to him.

The Crown appealed

Issues

1. Is the prohibition on the cultivation and use of marihuana for medically necessary reasons unconstitutional?

2. If so, is the remedy to “read in” am exemption or to leave the matter to parliament?

Rules

S. 7 of the Charter Cases interpreting s. 7 Medical authorities

Analysis: First Steps The evidence led at trial demonstrated the therapeutic

value of marijuana for treating a number of very serious conditions including epilepsy, glaucoma, the side effects of cancer treatments and the symptoms of AIDS.

The threat of criminal prosecution and possible imprisonment amounted to a risk of deprivation of liberty.

Liberty includes the right to make decisions of fundamental personal importance. This includes the choice of medication to alleviate the life‑threatening effects of an illness.

Deprivation by means of a criminal sanction of access to medication reasonably required for the treatment of a medical condition that threatens life or health also constitutes a deprivation of security of the person.

Next Steps: The state has an interest in protecting

against the harmful effects of marijuana The blanket prohibition on possession and

cultivation, without an exception for medical use, did little or nothing to enhance the state interest.

The practical unavailability of a defence under the legislation also infringed the principles of fundamental justice


The Crown did not attempt to establish that the violations of the accused's rights could be saved under s. 1 of the Charter


THE NEW ‘MORAL PANICS’

[email protected]

the politics of crime

News & Politics