MOTOR-CAR THEFTS CONTINUE

Dominion, Volume 32, Issue 104, 26 January 1939, Page 10

MOTOR-CAR THEFTS CONTINUE

Motor-car thieves seem to be ignoring the advice tendered them by the Minister of Justice. Early in December Mr. Mason issued a statement which reproved critics for suggesting that the penalties tor the “conversion” of motor-vehicles were not sufficiently severe. “Offenders,” he said, “should understand that at law there is adequate punishment available.” Apparently they do not understand this; either that, or they choose to regard the temporary possession ol othei people’s motor-cars as being worth the risk of whatever punishment the Courts are likely to inflict, for thefts of this nature are continuing unabated. Yesterday we printed four reports of Court cases involving in all the “conversion” of seven motor-cars. Several of the offenders in these cases were described as having bad records, and they were dealt with severely; but what of the .younger, irresponsible type o thief whose activities cause the bulk of the loss, inconvenience and damage suffered annually by New Zealand owners? As the Minister admits in a further statement, also published yesterday, a difficulty lies in the fact that about half the offenders are under 17-years of age, and 80 or 90 per cent, of them are under the. age of 23. It had been suggested, he said, that the only, form ot punishment calculated to diminish the offences is that of imprisonment, “but it had been said, and he thought rightly, that a grave responsibility rested on the judicial officer who sent a young, offender to prison for a first offence.” An equally grave responsibility, however, rests on those who devise our laws. A more effective deterrent than those commonly employed in cases involving youths or first offenders should be found, not only to protect property, but m the interests' of public safety and for the sake of the young offenders themselves. , The problem cannot be solved by reviving discussion of the legal distinctions between “conversion” and “theft.” Whatever their offence be termed, those who appropriate motor-cars must be taught plainly and speedily that the game is not worth the cancjle. Possibly the adoption of weekend detentions, in lieu of terms of imprisonment for young offenders, would meet the case. Such a penalty would deprive them of the leisure they have abused, without interfering with earning capacity. And the detentions could be so contrived as to avoid, where desirable, the stigma of the jail.