This post is long because there’s so much fun to be had! My previous post discovering Mirko led me to believe he was a typical bleeding-heart Liberal defense attorney masquerading as a law expert who thinks most crooks are kindhearted citizens who haven’t been educated enough to understand that huffing paint and robbing convenience stores are bad ideas. It was also a bit dated–January 2016–so I had a look at what Mirko has been doing more recently. Behold, I quickly found an article from him calling for TOUGHER sentencing guidelines! Interesting. Does he break the mold?
A quick note on physiognomy. If you look at most people, their right eye is slightly more recessed than the left. The right side of a person’s face tends to reflect their attitude towards the outside world while the left side reflects their inward attitude. People are typically more on guard against the outside world than their inner thought life because you’re honest with yourself. This is the second picture I’ve seen of Mirko in which his left eye is the more recessed/guarded. That suggests either cognitive dissonance with himself or left-handedness.
Let’s dig into the article:
Sentencing experts call for tough youth penalties
Yay! Tough on crime!
The number of youth offenders breaching the terms of their bail, community corrections orders and parole in Victoria has increased five-fold over five years, prompting sentencing experts to call for stronger penalties for young people as the state tackles an outbreak of gang crime. [GQ: community corrections orders here are punishments that don’t involve incarceration or corporal punishment: curfews, homework, travel restrictions etc.]
Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council data shows the number of secondary offences — or offences that relate to conditions imposed on an offender following a first offence — had greatly increased from 2011 to 2016.
In the Children’s Court, secondary offences grew from 2.83 per cent of all charges sentenced, or 590 charges in 2011, to 14.34 per cent, and almost 3000 charges in 2016. In all courts across Victoria, the number of secondary offences almost tripled, with 12,244 recorded in 2011-12 and 31,862 by 2016.
Yikes, that’s serious. A society doesn’t change that fast without external disruptions. Like, say… immigration?
The State of Victoria has been enriched by the presence of people from all over the world. At the 2016 Census 28.4% of Victoria’s population were born overseas and 49.1% of Victorians were either born overseas, or have a parent who was born overseas. Victorians come from more than 200 countries, speak 260 languages and dialects and follow 135 religious faiths. Most of the overseas-born Victorians came to Australia as migrants hoping to find a better life for themselves and their children. A significant number came to Australia as refugees – first Europeans displaced by the Second World War, then refugees from the war in Indo-China and more recently refugees from conflicts in the republics of the former Yugoslavia, the Horn of Africa, the Middle East and Afghanistan.
Boldface mine. Here’s your problem, Victoria, you’ve been importing Negroes and Muslims and discovering they don’t behave as well as Hans & Gretel searching for a home that hasn’t been Ground Zero for two World Wars. Shee-it, that’s an official government site talking? I thought California was bad.
Anyway, here’s the smoking gun showing what happened to Victoria between 2011 and 2016:
Here are the highlights:
Number of Australians in Victoria, up 5% from 3.7m people in 2011 to 3.8m in 2016
Overall foreign-born, up 20% from 1.4m to 1.7m. That’s 60,000 new foreigners per year to this one region.
Indians, up 52% from 111k to 169k
Chinese, up 71% from 94k to 161k
Italians, down 8% from 77k to 71k
Scottish, down 13% from 30k to 26k
Pakistanis, up 130% from from 9k to 22k
Iraqis, up 46% from 13k to 19k
Afghans, up 82% from 10k to 18k
Iranians, up 123% from 7k to 17k
All of Africa–the morons broke it down by country so I need to calculate–
Africans, up 30% from 23k to 30k
Special note: South Sudanese, distinct from Sudanese, up 146% from 1k to 3k. I’ve a hunch this is the problem just because the datum is unique, like somebody wants to speak truth without getting caught.
Hmm, not as devastatingly Afro as I’d expected but still great strides on the road to Demographic Hell. While I don’t advocate ethnic purity, this massive growth in diverse vibrancy can only result in social collapse. But that’s not my problem today. Mirko is. How does Mirko propose handling the massive increase in lawlessness that just happens to parallel the massive increase in diversity?
Back to the original linked article:
Sentencing expert Mirko Bagaric, who heads Swinburne University’s Centre for Evidence-Based Sentencing, said some non-custodial sentences were not tough enough to stop young offenders from reoffending.
“The reason why you’ve got a lot of youth reoffending is because there are utterly insufficient resources that are being put into the type of programs that better educate and rehabilitate young offenders,” Dr Bagaric said. “If they do something wrong, they need an adverse consequence with that. Good behaviour bonds sometimes don’t convey the message.”
The Labor government is battling to contain a wave of violence committed by street gangs comprised mainly of teenagers, which broke out over summer. The street thuggery came at the end of a year during which the state’s youth justice centres were rocked by violence and riots.
The Attorney-General, Martin Pakula, yesterday declined to comment on plans under consideration to tighten community corrections orders [GQ: non-incarceration punishments for criminal convictions], but said the government was working to bring sentencing standards in line with community expectations.
“We will continue to make the changes necessary to keep the community safe,” Mr Pakula said.
“We want to make sure serious offenders are punished for their crimes and receive consistent sentences which better meet community expectations.”
Mr Bagaric said penalties for young offenders should aim to be as least punitive as possible, but magistrates also needed to make sure that the offender felt some form of hardship to impress the lesson.
Translation, Mirko thinks non-incarceration punishments need to be increased. “You know what’ll stop this crime wave? Not allowing young thugs to wear gang clothes anymore! Forcing them to live without air conditioning! A third probation officer! That’ll teach ’em to behave! Rampant vandalism may be unhealthy but prison is barbaric!”
“The number one priority should be the protection of the community and if they’re behaving repeatedly in a way that’s causing sexual or physical harm to members of the public, then there is a need for them to be put into detention,” Mr Bagaric said. “What they do in Victoria is that they’re very bad at putting in place active interventions that salvage these young people quickly.”
Classic Leftoid Utopianism. Notice Mirko thinks the top priority should be “protecting the community”? That’s what atheists tell themselves after they dismiss the notion of Evil and discover that a large percentage of the population does not wish to live in peace and honest work. “This is evil… no, wait… there is no evil… um… this is disrupting the safety of the community! Stop, you under-educated-but-not-evil person, in the name of the Generally Accepted Community Guidelines, Revised!”
Notice that mass immigration with no effort at integration apparently doesn’t impact “protection of the community”.
Good and Evil are unchanging principles defined by God. Human Law in the Christian West is meant to be the uniform application of God’s general principles to specific societies and situations. Stealing is bad because God said so, not because the law said so. Stealing would remain bad if the law legalized it. This simple concept is how an educated, degreed, credentialed, published, peer-reviewed and award-winning professional with extensive experience wound up so fuck-witted stupid that an Internet nobody like me can and should lecture him on his own life’s work. It’s not because I’m smarter than him. It’s because I know WHY we have laws in the FIRST PLACE: to honor Almighty God. Not to keep communities organized or God help us, properly EDUCATED to State standards of BEHAVIOR.
Mister Bagaric, you don’t EDUCATE a criminal into behaving. You PUNISH him. Even if you somehow know for a fact that he’ll never commit a crime again, you punish him because evil will be punished either in this life or the next. If you love the criminal then you’ll punish him now, when the punishment is temporary.
And you call yourself a criminal sentencing expert!
The rising number of secondary offences is not resulting in increases to the prison population.
Wow, what a finish. That’s the entire article summed up with a pretty bow on top.
Here’s an article confirming South Sudanese are the problem as well as Mirko’s theory that criminals aren’t deterred by punishment, only being caught. It’s a bad sign when even network news blames the dark-skinned for a crime wave:
African gangs in Melbourne are a problem, police admit, as Victorian Government defends strategy
Victorian police have conceded Melbourne has a problem with African street gangs, after earlier insisting there were no gangs in the city, as the State Government rejects criticism it has dropped the ball on the problem.
Police Minister Lisa Neville on Tuesday defended the Government’s handling of youth crime after the Federal Government on Monday said “African gang crime” was out of control in Melbourne because of lenient state policies.
The issue has become a priority for both major parties after a series of recent headline-grabbing crimes blamed on groups of young African men, including the trashing of an Airbnb property in Werribee, vandalism in Tarneit and a night of violence at St Kilda Beach involving dozens of youths.
Just days after Victoria Police Deputy Commissioner Andrew Crisp said he did “not accept for a minute that we do have gangs”, Acting Chief Commissioner Shane Patton said there were African street gangs in Melbourne.
“We have for a significant period of time said that there is an issue with overrepresentation by African youth in serious and violent offending as well as public disorder issues,” Acting Commissioner Patton said.
“These young thugs, these young criminals, they’re not an organised crime group like a Middle Eastern organised crime group or an outlaw motorcycle gang. But they’re behaving like street gangs, so let’s call them that — that’s what they are.”
More frontline police
Ms Neville said most African migrants were law-abiding citizens, but “this core group of African youths are causing huge fear”.
She said Victoria Police noticed youth offending “go to a new level” in 2016, and the State Government responded by:
- adding resources to the gangs squad and special operations group
- recruiting 3,135 additional frontline police
- funding an intelligence system, bulletproof vehicles and other technology and resources.
…Ms Neville said upcoming changes to the Youth Parole Board meant police would be informed when young people were paroled, and conditions would be placed on parolees to prevent reoffending.
A program that started in November was also targeting repeat offenders with intensive, individual case management, she said.
My previous post quoted Mirko’s theory that criminals only fear getting caught; actually punishing them isn’t needed. Neville is implementing his theory and the results thus far say Mirko is so wrong that the government might destabilize because it did what he recommended.
On Monday, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said the Government was concerned about “growing gang violence and lawlessness” in Melbourne, and frontbencher Greg Hunt said “African gang crime in some areas in particular is clearly out of control”.
“We lost Melbourne” won’t look good on the resume, Mirko. Still believe there is no God, when devils are running free?
South Sudanese Australian Nelly Yoa, who said he mentored troubled young people in the community, is also critical of the State Government.
Ouch! The vibrants themselves are telling the government it’s being too lenient with them.
Police Minister Lisa Neville proves feminism is ugly. Did she ever work the streets before reaching top brass?
Open your eyes, Mirko. The proper sentencing guideline for criminals who are either foreign-born or their first-generation descendants is THEY HAVE TO GO BACK! Not returned to society with a frigging curfew. As for the native-born criminals, PUNISH THEM! Make then regret they ever chose to do evil. It’s not about preventing recidivism or maintaining good order in society. It’s about right against wrong and you, sir, are wrong. Repent and take the hit to your credibility–admit you are dangerously wrong about the most basic principles of criminal justice–or stand fat and proud before God in Judgment.
One final article, this on Mirko’s concept of “hardship” towards criminals. Here’s a published paper of his from the U of Akron, Ohio of all places.
The Hardship That is Internet Deprivation and What it Means for Sentencing: Development of the Internet Sanction and Connectivity for Prisoners(2017)
Twenty years ago, the internet was a novel tool. Now it is such an ingrained part of most people’s lives that they experience and exhibit signs of anxiety and stress if they cannot access it. Non-accessibility to the internet can also tangibly set back peoples’ social, educational, financial, and vocational pursuits and interests. In this Article, we argue that the sentencing law needs to be reformed to adapt to the fundamental changes in human behavior caused by the internet.
We present three novel and major implications for the sentencing law and practice in the era of the internet. First, we argue that denial of access to the internet should be developed as a discrete sentencing sanction, which can be invoked for relatively minor offenses in much the same way that deprivation of other entitlements or privileges, such as the right to drive a motor vehicle, are currently imposed for certain crimes.
We don’t have to incarcerate petty crooks? We only have to take away their Internet because that’ll be just as harmful to their lives as being locked in a concrete cell? Internet deprivation is what’s called a First World Problem. Not an “inmate civil rights” problem.
How the hell would anybody enforce this? There are smartphones smaller than wallets. I pay a premium to have a NOT-Internet-enabled phone.
Second, we argue that prisoners should have unfettered access to the internet. This would lessen the pain stemming from incarceration in a manner which does not undermine the principal objectives of imprisonment—community protection and infliction of a hardship—while at the same time providing prisoners with the opportunity to develop skills, knowledge, and relationships that will better equip them for a productive life once they are released. Previous arguments that have been made for denying internet access to prisoners are unsound. Technological advances can readily curb supposed risks associated with prisoners using the internet.
See again, Mirko thinks the purpose of criminal justice is community protection. Who cares if inmates get free 24-hour porn as a “punishment” for their crime? The important thing is the community is no longer being disrupted by the “uneducated”. And yes, in the report he argues that inmates using the Net for porn is okay. I actually agree there but not as an entitlement; as a cheap entertainment the warden can take away if he doesn’t behave.
But I disagree, in the strongest terms, about inmates having relationships over the Internet while incarcerated. Never mind Death Row Fan Club, there’d be an army of trolls debasing Internet forums who are ALREADY BEHIND BARS!
And those “technological advances”? Bleeding-heart liberals put a LOT of trust in technological advances, don’t they? And they have constant witch hunts and purges among the people they can’t replace with tech. That might say something about their internal belief systems.
Finally, if the second recommendation is not adopted, and prisoners continue to be denied access to the internet, there should be an acknowledgement that the burden of imprisonment is greater than is currently acknowledged. The internet is now such an ingrained and important aspect of people’s lives that prohibiting its use is a cause of considerable unpleasantness. This leads to our third proposal: continued denial of the internet to prisoners should result in a recalibration of the pain of imprisonment such that a sentencing reduction should be conferred to prisoners.
The linked paper is fun to read. Mirko is a blind legal expert leading the credulous.