OVER recent years, your paper has drawn attention to many cases whereby there is an imbalance between the feelings of the public and the decisions made by the law makers, magistrates and judges when meting out punishment to convicted criminals.

However, I found it absolutely incredible to read in the BEN that the Judicial Studies Board suggests that vandalism, shop-lifting, air weapon offences and even careless driving are not considered to be serious crimes for "young offenders".

Without wishing to put too strong a slant on one of these, vandalism creates fear and tension amongst everyone in its vicinity. It creates no-go areas and, if allowed to continue unchecked in an area, will ultimately cause a decline in a neighbourhood.

We have to strike a balance whereby people who have blatant disregard for the consequences of their actions on other people are made to realise that their behaviour is not acceptable to the population as a whole. How can it be right to discharge anyone, be they young or old, who has been found guilty of any one of these acts. People have been blinded by the indiscriminate use of air rifles. What sort of message does this give to young people, who are at the most impressionable stage of their lives?They should learn that "everything is relative". That there is a difference between the effect of one Crime and another on the general population. And that certain criminal acts merit stronger punishment than others. They will read about "nonsensical" penalties applied to motorists whose tyres may have inadvertently encroached over a white line.

Consequently, our children, in trying to decide what constitutes a serious crime, will deduce that vandalism, shop lifting, etc., must be quite acceptable, when they get a "discharge".

Have our legal experts really thought this through? Have they considered where we are heading with the laisser-faire attitude which has prevailed over the past few decades? We should not be advocating draconian penalties. But we should all be thinking about the consequences of our actions, and, in the words of Gilbert and Sullivan, "Let the punishment fit the Crime!"

R Arthur

Bolton

(Address supllied)