The death of teenager Stephen Dudley is a tragedy for absolutely everyone involved. However, pieces like this one by Kerre McIvor in the Herald on Sunday seem to be missing the point. Essentially, she seems to suggest the two young men who hit Dudley should have got a tougher sentence because it is a good idea to sheet home to teenagers that actions have consequences and resorting to violence in the first instance is wrong. In our recent report, Unlocking Prisons, we talked a lot about the myth of general deterrence: the idea that a tough sentence will deter others from acting in a similar way. This is a good example of how flawed the idea of general deterrence is: teens getting into a school yard fight are not thinking at all about the potential seriousness of their actions -- in reality, they are often not really thinking at all. In no way does this excuse the boys actions, or make it any easier for Stephens devastated family, but lets not call for a tougher sentence on these young boys for the sake of sending a message. There are far more effective ways to ensure a tragedy like this doesnt happen again: for example, educating young men about healthy ways of dealing with anger, and informing young people about how their actions can serious consequences in the sense of danger to themselves and danger to others. We need to look far deeper at the issues underpinning this kind of violence rather than assuming one tough sentence will prevent a tragedy like this happening again. nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11306595
Posted on: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 23:00:32 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015