Experience suggests that the critical faculty of perspective can disappear very quickly when crime statistics are the subject of public and political debate. The latest crime figures published by the Department of Justice yesterday give cause for concern insofar as each statistic represents a victim who will have suffered to a greater or lesser extent depending on the nature of the offence committed against them. And there is the certainty too that such figures do not reflect the full extent of crime in that they exclude offences not reported to the Garda. However, it is crucially important that such statistics are examined in context.
And the context is this: irrespective of fluctuations - which can be dramatic (and of limited statistical value) when figures are published quarterly - the rate of indictable or serious crime in the Republic is significantly below comparable jurisdictions such as England and Wales. This does not minimise the impact of such crime. But it does help to shape a proportionate response. This is especially important given the emotive nature of what is involved.
The statistics for the first quarter show an 8 per cent rise in serious crime, accounted for in large part by a rising incidence of offences against property such as burglary. There were also 12 murders compared to seven during the same period in 2005. Behind the anonymity of these figures are shocking crimes including the murders of brothers Glen (9) and Andrew Keegan (5), who were stabbed to death by their mother, and the killing of Donna Cleary, shot dead in an indiscriminate attack while attending a house party.
No society can legislate for the former. But the latter - and the growing gun culture it represents - demands a vigorous response. In that regard, the Minister for Justice was implicitly critical of the judiciary yesterday, suggesting that when releasing suspects on bail, they were not having due regard for the restrictions approved by the public in a constitutional referendum in 1996.
The Minister and the Garda have expended a great deal of effort and money in the surveillance and prosecution of Dublin-based drug gangs in the last year. This is appropriate. But Mr McDowell's comments on the judiciary illustrate his tendency to deflect criticism by identifying the responsibility of others. If he has real concerns about the application of the bail laws or parallel issues such as the consistency of or leniency in sentencing, he should raise them with the judiciary. In the meantime, those contributing to the debate on crime - including Opposition politicians - would do well to maintain some perspective.