Death in Detention

Home Detention Death

P brings death. It brings death if it is used in prison and it brings death if it is used or manufactured at home while under detention.

MP Ron Mark attempts to blow whistles about anything "the NZ taxpayer" has a right to know, and with all the expertise of reactionary views formed by reading newspapers, to decide the best way to deal with delicate, difficult issues.

Meantime, Ron Mark's boss, Winston Peters, is pushing for referenda to give the NZ public a say in the decisions that matter. The trouble is, that popular opinion is not always correct, and reliance on it for issues that require a complex combination of medical expertise, criminal law, and social issues rather than a rash summarial response in the media, is rule by the lowest common denominator.

And locking up hopelessly addicted drug addicts seems attractive. Sentencing all drug addicts to prison has unfortunate effects. One of these is to hook them into sources of supply that tend, by the fact that they are in prison for it, to be criminal.

It would be more effective for treatment in the community and connecting the ex-addict to a life that fulfills them. Punishment for what is a medical condition may make matters worse.

When that ex-newsreader was given home detention the media went on and on about privilege for the clean cut boy. The man that died of an overdose was proof that diversion applies even with "gang members". Those connections were maintained and would have been in prison for him. The man lost his life. Society lost little. The system did not fail him, he failed himself.

Why change a system that works for those who want to reintegrate because of the failure of one person who could not control his addiction? Because of prejudice. And why pass laws because of the stink that a minor player in parliament can kick up in the media? If we had a referenda controlled system, it seems we would.

See also: stuff.co.nz