TOUGHER SENTENCES FOR GUN CRIMES WON'T SOLVE PROBLEM, CRITICS SAY

TORONTO - A crime crackdown that includes raising mandatory minimum
sentences for gun crimes and ending house arrest for some other
felonies is a political sham that will do nothing to make Canada's
streets safer, top defence lawyers and other critics say.

Criminologists and advocates for prisoners' rights fear the approach
will merely criminalize more minority youths, fill crowded jails with
people who should not be behind bars and gum up an already strained
court system.

"There's this real concern out there that we're moving towards this
'pander to law-and-order types' (trend)," said Bill Trudell, chairman
of the Canadian Council of Criminal Defence Lawyers. "We know it's
not going to work."

This week, in a charge led by Ontario Attorney General Michael
Bryant, provincial justice ministers who were meeting in Whitehorse
managed to persuade federal Justice Minister Irwin Cotler to impose
mandatory minimum sentences for more firearms offences.

Critics, however, fear the move is a sign that electioneering and
exploiting public fears are taking precedence over common sense and
the integrity of the judicial system.

In a letter to Mr. Cotler this month, the Canadian Association of
Elizabeth Fry Societies said mandatory minimums have no "discernible
deterrent benefit" and result in "skyrocketing incarceration rates"
for minorities.

"Rather than reduce crime, these approaches have in fact exacerbated
the problem," said Colleen Minnabarriet, vice-president of the
advocacy group for women in conflict with the law. "This approach has
failed and, paradoxically, has resulted in unsafe communities and
increased violence."

Dismal results have prompted even conservative jurisdictions such as
Michigan and Australia's Northern Territories to back away, Ms.
Minnabarriet said.