Im­pose harsher sen­tences

The Star Early Edition - - LETTERS - Marzedt de Beer Dur­ban

I CON­CUR fully with Pro­fes­sor George Devenish’s let­ter “Why the death penalty isn’t the so­lu­tion in SA” (The Star, Novem­ber 13).

So what is the so­lu­tion to deal with the un­ac­cept­ably high in­ci­dence of vi­o­lence and other crime cost­ing this coun­try bil­lions?

It costs the tax­payer mil­lions to bring the crim­i­nals who per­pe­trate the crimes to jus­tice and to jail them.

Are we not over­look­ing the ob­vi­ous?

It is guns, am­mu­ni­tion and ex­plo­sives that are the cat­a­lysts to vi­o­lent crime. Crim­i­nals would be emas­cu­lated with­out them.

What about the re­ceivers of stolen prop­erty – have any of­fend­ers been pros­e­cuted? Common sense dic­tates that there should be harsh sen­tences for pos­sess­ing un­law­ful am­mu­ni­tion.

Firearms would be use­less with­out bul­lets. It is bul­lets that maim and kill, not guns.

If there were no re­ceivers, there would be very few thieves.

In­stead of mop­ping up the wa­ter of crimes com­mit­ted, it is time to close the tap.

Surely if you knew you would re­ceive a stiff prison sen­tence, you would think twice about be­ing in pos­ses­sion of un­law­ful am­mu­ni­tion or buy­ing stolen prop­erty.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa

© PressReader. All rights reserved.