On Sunday, Sydney had a wake-up call. Early spring weather delivered a bushfire that saw the F3 Expressway closed for over two hours. Traffic banked up for miles because of the smoke. and the flames licking along the side of the carriageways. Nobody was injured, but this incident certainly caused financial loss and a great deal of distress to many people.
The F3 is the main link between Sydney and the north of the state. No doubt there were people caught in that jam who depended on making it to departure times at Sydney airport. Missed connections would throw travel plans into disarray. Commercial drivers and self employed business people have suffered loss from sitting idle by the side of the road, and it would not be pleasant to be trapped in a car full of small kids without food or drink - or toilet facilities.
This fire was arson ! A twelve year old boy broke into a home and stole fire accellerant and used it to set the bush alight - for a sense of fun. He was caught by the police and in due course he will face a children's court. The question is - what penalty should that court impose ?
That is not an easy question to answer. Setting a bushfire is a potentially serious crime. Given the right conditions it can cause the loss of homes and cost victims their lives. In such circumstances, the act of arson could result in a murder charge. The magistrate will need to consider the options carefully.
The case could result in the offender serving time in a juvenile institution, but that would be the absolutely last resort. Only the worst of the worst serve time in these facilities, and they are described as " the university of crime ". On the other hand, a mere " slap on the wrist " penalty is no deterrent to others.
Perhaps the emphasis should be on the certainty of being detected and caught, rather than the penalty involved. Some people light fires to enhance their image - and having done so they engage in bragging about it. Being seen on the television news in custody and wearing handcuffs is certainly not the image they wish to portray - and it has about it a certain "loser " mind association.
We are about to enter the "drone " age and just as cctv cameras have proven amazingly effective in clearing up street crime, drones offer a way to make arson a risky proposition. An arsonist needs to make a quick escape before the resulting smoke draws attention to what has been done, and that is where a drone with it's high resolution pixel cameras can provide damning evidence - instantly.
Drones offer a low cost but highly effective surveillance weapon on high fire danger days. The biggest deterrent to arsonists is the risk of being caught by that " eye in the sky " . Being humiliated by getting caught is more to be feared than a draconian court penalty !
No comments:
Post a Comment