Three Strikes was a failed experiment, so why are we bringing it back?

We have to decide what we want, revenge or Justice! We can't have both...

Photo by Rajesh Rajput on Unsplash

Three strikes is a failed experiment. As a community we need to be honest about what we want. Do we want revenge? Or are we here for Justice?

Mandatory sentencing, such as Three Strikes, often results in very poor outcomes, it fails to deter harm in our communities, and can result in immoral and unjust sentences being passed on traumatized, mentally ill, and disabled people.

So, we come back to the question, what do we want? Revenge? Or Justice?

If we want revenge, then let’s be honest about that. Boot camps, Three Strikes, more and more mandatory and tougher sentences, let’s do it all. Revenge is about making those who have caused harm to suffer.

And if that is the decision we are making as a community than sure, let's keep going with what we're doing. However, let's be honest about that. And be honest about the cost.

When we build our justice system as a tool to enact state sanctioned revenge, then we are saying yes to pouring money into building more prisons, punishing more people, and - this is important - ensuring that the harm we want people to be punished for, continues.

It's hard to say it more clearly, but punishing people, while choosing to ignore the evidence that shows us why some people cause harm, and how to prevent that harm, does not prevent harm from occurring.

In fact, ignoring the evidence, and choosing to punish people who - the evidence shows us - are likely experiencing mental distress, have a disability, have gone through trauma, are impoverished, suffering from addiction, and dealing with a whole range of social challenges, only contributes to the problem, while ignoring the solutions, and makes it more likely that the individual in question will cause more harm in the future.

This is not justice. This is revenge.

If we want justice, then we will look to build a system that seeks to make the wrong right. We will look to build a system that responds to evidence, that acknowledges what is going on in our communities, that gives voice and support to those who have been harmed and creates the environment for people who have caused harm to be able to take responsibility for their actions, while receiving the support they need to deal with what’s going on in their lives.

None of this stuff is simple. And it is for that reason that Wellington should not be making these decisions for our communities.

The choice isn't one between tough vs soft on crime. It's one between doubling down on the status quo (which is this Government's current approach), or finally doing something different, listening to the evidence, and rebuilding a justice system that serves all our people.

We can do better. The Government would have us believe that we've tried listening to the evidence and it hasn't worked. This isn't true.

And if we are serious about wanting things to change, then we'll reject the false binary we've been provided.

We will choose to depoliticize this conversation, we will choose our communities, our people, we will choose evidence over emotion, love over fear, justice over revenge.

We can do better.

We must.

#LoveIsTheWay

A.J. Hendry is a Laidlaw College graduate, and a Youth Development Worker and rangatahi advocate, working in the Youth Housing and Homelessness space. He leads Kick Back, a service supporting rangatahi experiencing homelessness and is also an advocate working collectively to end youth homelessness in Aotearoa. He is also the curator and creator of When Lambs Are Silent.