ACT’s ‘Three Strikes’ Telephone Poll is a nonsense - Rethinking Crime and Punishment

Claims by ACT MP David Garrett, that 75% of New Zealanders support ACT’s ‘three strikes’ policy, in preference to the government’s Bill is sheer nonsense, says Kim Workman, of Rethinking Crime and Punishment. “People taking part in the telephone poll, would have had no opportunity to properly compare the two pieces of legislation, let alone understand it.”

“The most telling result from the poll was that only 55% of the 500 people polled had heard of ACT’s ‘three strikes’ legislation, and yet 75% agreed with it. That means that 20% of those that agreed with it, had not previously heard of it. It is most unlikely that the legislation would have been fully explained by the pollsters, or fully understood by those taking part in the poll.”

“In a study conducted in Ohio on three strikes legislation, respondents were asked whether they supported the law without been given any context to the question. [1] Eighty-eight percent of respondents supported the proposal. When asked to impose sentences in a number of detailed case scenarios, the proportion of respondents supporting the proposal dropped to 17%. [2]” “A properly conducted poll in New Zealand would produce a similar result as that in Ohio. The ACT poll result needs to be regarded with a great deal of skepticism.”

“The current Bill and the ACT version are complex and difficult to understand. The publicity generated by proponents of three strikes legislation over the last two years, and following its introduction into Parliament, has contributed to an unprecedented level of confusion about its intent, impact and consequences. It has confused not only the public, but policy advisers, the media, proponents, opponents and parliamentarians. The public are more confused about this Bill than almost any legislative measure in recent memory. “

The real concern is about keeping dangerous and psychopathic offenders in prison, if they are considered to be a serious threat to public safety. This can be achieved through an amendment to the provisions around preventive detention. We don’t need a three strikes Bill of any kind in New Zealand.

[1] Applegate, B, Cullen, F, Turner, M and Sundt J (1996). ‘Assessing public support for three-strikes-and-you’re-out laws: global versus specific attitudes’, Crime and Delinquency, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 517–34.

[2] Roberts, J (2003). ‘Public opinion and mandatory sentencing: a review of international findings’, Criminal Justice and Behaviour, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 483–508.

ACT Three Strike Survey (pdf)

ENDS

© Scoop Media