John MacDonald: I'm not going to bag ACT's thinking on teen crims

Here’s one thing I can pretty much guarantee: the ACT Party’s idea of dealing with 17-year-old criminal offenders in the adult courts, instead of the Youth Court, won’t reduce crime.

It just won’t. Because I actually don’t believe that tougher penalties or harsher approaches make any difference as to whether someone commits a crime or not.

Because if penalties were enough to keep people on the right side of the law, then we’d have no crime.

Now before you jump to the conclusion that I’m about to bag ACT for this policy it announced yesterday - calm the farm for a minute. I’ll get to that.

But, at the risk of being a bit simplistic on it, I reckon there are two things that determine whether someone commits a crime or breaks the law, or not. Some people just lose it in a moment of madness or jealousy or self-interest, whatever; and some people just have no respect for other people or their property, they’re angry and they’re out to get whatever they can. Some are just evil.

And that can be the result of a crappy upbringing, drug addiction - you name it. Life works against some people and that is why some people end up criminals.

But never do these people think about the consequences enough to stop them doing what they do. To stop them breaking the law.

Just like people who lose it in a moment of madness, jealousy or self-interest.

I’ll give you an example that you might relate to. You imagine you’re dropping someone off at the airport and you’ve left things a bit late and the way things are going they’ll miss their flight.

So, where you can, you break the speed limit a bit. You go through that orange light when you might normally stop - you might even sneak in a left turn on a red light. Because the only thing you’re focused on in that moment is making sure the person you’re driving to the airport doesn’t miss their flight.

The only time you think about any consequences for your actions, is when you see the red and blue lights flashing in the rear-view mirror.

Or you might be like I was once and so hellbent on getting to the top carpark at the skifield that I was quite happy to go over a hundred kilometres per hour.

And the only time I really thought about the consequences was when I saw the cop car up ahead and, sure enough, on went the flashing lights.

So the ACT Party’s idea of dealing with 17-year-old offenders in the adult courts isn’t going to stop crime happening.

But, from what I’ve seen and heard, David Seymour isn’t claiming that. But what he is saying, is that it shifts the focus of crime committed by 17-year-olds from the offenders to the victims.

Because, back in 2016, ACT supported the then-National-led government in changing the age people became subject to the adult courts from 17 to 18. The thinking then was that dealing with these kids in the Youth Court would give them a better chance of changing their ways and so we would see less youth crime.

Because the Youth Court would be a better place to put things in place to break any cycle of offending.

But David Seymour says that hasn’t happened.

The People Against Prisons organisation is anti ACT's idea, of course. This is the outfit that wants “care not cages” for criminal offenders. Which I reckon sounds all fine and dandy until you personally are affected by crime.

Sure, there are some amazing people who show amazing compassion when they are affected by serious crime, but they are in the minority.

Most of us find compassion towards criminals very hard. And, for me, that isn’t limited to age. Which is why I’m not going to sit here this morning and criticise or bag the ACT Party for what it’s proposing.

Because, whether we like to admit it or not, we have 17-year-olds in our society who are just bad. Some of them even evil. And I’m in no doubt that these kids need to be treated in a way that matches or reflects the g