Sir, - The lack of foresight shown by Mabien Roberts (May 1st) is amazing. Does Ms. Roberts seriously think that the prospect of a few light strokes with a cane is going to deter a heroin addict who has a £150 a day habit? Such a punishment would be utterly inconsequential.
Why would the type of cane need to be standardised? If you are going to boat another human being with a piece of wood, it hardly matters what type of wood it is. What ago limit would she favour? Above 16 but under 60? A person's age would not have a bearing on whether a boating would discourage them from doing the same thing again. Why males only? Does Ms. Roberts think that men are more able to "take a beating"? Women also commit crime, and if this suggestion was to be implemented then women would have to be beaten for their crimes also.
"Medical certification of fitness would be necessary . . ." Is this fitness to be caned or to cane? A person is never fit to be beaten, that is a ludicrous statement. I can just imagine the report of an "independent witness": Well, I thought that last stroke where the blood started pouring was a bit harsh, but apart from that it was a most satisfactory thrashing!
"Ideas" such as Ms Roberts are indicative of the fact that people do not want to accept that the true causes of crime are deprivation, poverty, and lack of education. Caning people for their crimes would enforce hatred and distrust of authority and help lock the offender in a cycle of crime and violence. We need proper ideas and plans to tackle the roots of crime instead of considering reactionary ideas that would simply mean the crime levels would carry on rising. - Yours, etc.
Northbrook Avenue,
Dublin 6.