Referendum Questions

[Oakleaf51]

Given the complexities of trusting the British people to make decisions in a referendum, (which I totally accept for some complex issues, such as financial services law, foreign policy, trading agreements etc), what simple issues could be put to the people in a referendum?
How would you phrase your question?
For example:-
Considering murder. Should life mean life?
Yes or No.
Should time be added on to sentences for bad behaviour, rather than taken off for good behaviour?
Yes or No?
Should carrying a knife carry a mandatory sentence of five years?
Yes or No?

[NJOK]

Ah, good old mob rule.

I find it funny that you regard any of the above as simple issues. Slag off politicians and the judicial system as much as you like (I know I do) but at least they base their decisions on highly detailed, evidence-based research.

What White Van Man doesn't get to see are - for example -the numerous studies that look at recidivism, which is the likelihood of repeat offending. These studies analyse the way that different punishments increase or decrease this lielihood by looking at thousand and thousands of cases. And it's far, far more complicated than you might think. So-called softer punishments (favoured by leftie liberals yadda yadda) often reduce recidivism more than harsher penalties. Did you know that? Does the average person on the street know that? Do I know much about that? Not really, which is why I'm not the one shaping policy on it

What does the average person know about the cost of imprisonment? Are they aware that even slightly harsher prison terms will lead to billions more expenditure which will have to be paid for through taxes? How do they balance that up against the hoped-for drop in policing costs? These are hideously complicated calculations which can't be conveyed in a simple one-word question.

I'm all for democracy but, as this site proves all too well, the general public is made up of an angry mob of knee-jerkers and I shudder to think what they'd do to the criminal justice system if they made the rules.

[IggyB]

your examples don't really work very well as each time these situations occur the surrounding facts can be very different e.g. is all murder as equally punishable? for example do you want to punish the woman who cared for and loved her terminally ill husband for many years but then gave him a massive dose of painkillers after he begged her to end his suffering to the same extent as the man that shot and killed a young woman in order to rob her? I think everyone would agree that the second situation is much worse and needs more punishment - so in this case the judge needs to be free to set the prison sentence most suitable, however if the question went to a referendum i doubt many would think of this problem and just leap for the "life means life" answer.

Additionally the question about carrying a knife - well surely you mean carrying a knife with intention to cause some form of harm otherwise all chefs would be sending a lot of time in prison etc. and the rest of us would have a hard time getting kitchen supplies home... if it the intention you mean then you need a judge and a jury to investigate the intention and then again some will appear to be more punishable than other in my opinion.

The type of referendum questions that would work would include things like the previously proposed EU constitution, the question being something along the lines of "having read the proposed EU constitution would you like the UK to adopt and implement it - yes or no?"

[Gromit]

It is always very difficult to phrase a question without adding a bias, one way or another to it. Your examples do convey your own bias. You have even introduced a factual error by implying bad behaviour is not punished with time added to the sentence, which of course it is. The same vote could be done with a different bias to get a different result.

Do you think it is a waste of money keeping elderly life prisoners in jail for many years, until they die?

If prison serves as a correctional and re-educational purpose, do you believe that if some prisoners reach a reformed state within their sentence, then it it a pointless expense keeping them incarcerated?

If you live in a violent neighbourhood, do you think you should be allowed to defend yourself?

These are not my views/bias, but as you can see, you would get very different and probably conflicting views to my questions as to yours, even though we are both trying to get the same information.

In short, I don't think you can make laws or influence policy on the basis of answers to one question.

[ruby27]

I can not add anything that has not already been comprehensively answered by NJOK, IggyB and Gromit. So the answer to your question is even apparently simple issues are far to complex to be anwered in a referendum. However I am looking forward to the reasoned and articulate responses that will claim that the questions you have posed are easily answered. Possibly death to all scum?

[Oakleaf51]

Thank you for your responses, and once again you have highlighted the complexities involved.
To simply put our trust in the present system is not an attractive option either is it? Crime soars and the streets at night in some areas are prohibited to law abiding citizens, and the police seem powerless to stop the crime.
Yes, I confess to being a knee jerk reactionist, a trait I probably share with many others who are just in despair. Judges don't help our safety, the police are powerless, the politicians are looking at cost, but I do believe that it would be worthwhile to let the people have a knee jerk now and again, to put some fear into criminals. Mob rule? Yes, if you like. Maybe the lesser of a lot of evils.
But again, thanks.