June 23
I stand corrected!
After a bit of research who knew that the man who is our Justice Minister was a lawyer.....how his thought process has led to his distain for youth is beyond me? I guess he just doesn't get kids...or youth for that matter...and the hard nose approach just doesn't work all the time!

Well I've found my new target
Mr. Harper you make it so easy for a person of my intelligence to write about your government. I think my new found interest is not in you Mr. Harper--not that you will ever be too far from my thoughts--but in your very own Justice Minister Vic Toews.

Mr. Toews said he is concerned that the Supreme Court appears to have stated that deterrence is no longer a principle of sentencing.

This was his thoughts after the Supreme Court of Canada made up of judges who have practiced law for many years including overseeing courtrooms on various levels made the decision that youth crime in it's very nature does not need the custody based approach to deterring youth from engaging in criminal activity.

I wonder if this man was ever a teenager? First he wants to raise the age of sexual consent to 16 and now he wants to put kids in jail for crimes that generally are kids just getting caught doing stupid stuff. I'm not saying that kids who commit violent acts should not be held accountable for their actions but the vast majority of crimes before the youth courts are for minor things. It's only the media's high coverage of the violent crimes that make it appear to be more than average.

"Accountability and responsibility for serious crimes needs to be enforced in our youth justice system."

And Mr. Toews this is addressed in the YCJA. Youth who do commit serious crimes can be charged as adults. However using the adult sentance approach is not enforced often and nor should it be. Using an adult sentance should only occur in very serious criminal activities like the two young ladies who killed their mother in Mississauga. Those two ladies will be getting an adult sentance as they should for their crimes as they show no remorse for their actions and the planning that took place in order to carry out their activity is enough to warrant the adult sentance.

The Supreme Court ruling is not questioning the sentances that are enforced but if holding kids in jails is a viable means of detering further criminal activity. What the Supreme court ruling recognizes is that young offenders should be treated differently than adult offenders. They recognize that the YCJA is moving towards a more restorative justice approach instead of an incarceration. As such it is asking the courts not to place kids in custody as a deterrent to further criminal activity.

The restorative approach also holds kids accountable for their actions. Justice circles are a key component to the approach. By having kids face their victims they are held accountable to those people and they must take responsibility for their actions. It also makes kids accountable to their community. Restorative justice is all about community and the connections one has with their community. So how is this ruling a bad ruling I ask Mr. Toews?

Mr. Toews noted that the Conservative government has promised to review the youth justice legislation.

There is no need to review the youth justice act. The act is still young. It's only been enacted since April 1st, 2003. Give it time to get the glitches out. It's a more progressive approach to dealing with youth criminal activity and reviewing it would be a throw back to a time when young offenders were treated as adults.

After reading the book I did on boot camps--especially those in the US--I am only encouraged to fight harder for youth and Mr. Toews you are my spark underneath this fire.