The right to repent
From Daniel Veen
Sir: Bruce Anderson (Politics, 11 December) suggests that the quarter of a million males who are responsible for half of all crimes should have their details recorded on computer. But he fails to explain exactly how this would allow us to cope with the ‘criminal underclass’.
Records are already kept of the convicted and their offences, as well as of those suspected of offences but never convicted or brought to trial. This by itself does not prevent repeat offences. Furthermore, Mr Anderson sug gests that this ‘quarter of a million’ have ‘their activities monitored’, which means that they would be considered irredeemable.
The government’s new laws may very well not make us safer, but Mr Anderson should consider that we also need protection from the lawmakers and their officers. Surely the best strategy is not to remove from the convicted the right to repent and make a fresh start in life.
Daniel Veen London SW17
Previous page
