一拳奪命引發的新猷

Barry O'Farrell announces 'tough' laws to combat alcohol-fuelled violence

Pubs and clubs in Sydney’s CBD will be forced to lock out new customers from 1.30am and cease alcohol trading by 3am under a state government crackdown on alcohol- and drug-related violence.

Premier Barry O’Farrell has also announced bottle shops will have to close their doors at 10pm.

Venues will be subject to a risk-based licensing scheme whereby higher fees will be imposed on venues that trade later, are larger or are in high risk areas, as part of a reform package announced on Tuesday.
Advertisement

As foreshadowed, mandatory minimum sentences of eight years in jail will apply to fatal one-punch attacks involving alcohol and drugs.

But Mr O’Farrell also announced mandatory minimum sentences would be introduced for other drug- or alcohol-fuelled offences, including reckless wounding (three years), assaulting a police officer in the execution of duty (two years), affray (four years) and sexual assault (five years).

Police will be able to test for drugs and alcohol if they suspect someone has committed an alcohol- or drug-fuelled assault.

Parliament will be brought back early next week, probably on Wednesday, to introduce the legislation required to implement the package.

Mr O’Farrell said with the support of the opposition the new mandatory sentencing laws could be in place by February 1, and the rest of the package, including the lockouts and reduced trading hours, by the end of April.

He said the lockouts and 3am licensing restrictions would apply to venues within a new CBD entertainment precinct stretching from Kings Cross to Cockle Bay, The Rocks to Haymarket and Darlinghurst.

‘‘This is about trying to send a very clear message to the industry that yes, you can continue to trade after 3 o’clock, but drinks will cease at 3 o’clock," the Premier said.

Restaurants and small bars and ‘‘tourism accommodation facilities’’ are exempt, as are venues at Barangaroo, including James Packer’s planned six-star hotel and casino.

"This is not about penalising responsible drinkers," he said. "It is about attacking the irresponsible acts of those who allow themselves to be intoxicated, whether by drugs or alcohol."

Mr O'Farrell said he had "heard the community's call, their demand for action. And I'm confident that the package that cabinet approved yesterday will make the difference and start the change that the community seeks to have implemented".

Other measures in the package include:

• Voluntary intoxication will be removed as a mitigating factor in sentencing;
• Free buses leaving every 10 minutes from Kings Cross to the CBD on Friday and Saturday nights;
• A freeze on liquor licences for new clubs and pubs (with small bars, restaurants and tourist accommodation exempted);
• Increased on the spot fines for anti-social behaviour (eg, from $150 to $500 for offensive language and from $200 to $500 for offensive behaviour);
• Increase from two years to 25 years' maximum sentence for the illegal supply and possession of steroids;
• A ‘‘road safety-style’’ social media and advertising campaign targeted at alcohol fuelled violence;

Justin Hemmes, CEO of Merivale, which owns ivy and multiple other bars in Sydney, said he welcomed the policy announcement.

"Without doubt, these measures will create a safer environment for all," Mr Hemmes said.

Reaction is being sought from the NSW branch of the Australian Hotels Association and the Last Drinks coalition of emergency services workers.
(Sydney Morning Herald 21/1/2014)

這則新聞簡單講就是由於近年醉酒之後打人事件太多，有幾宗還是一拳把人打死的，搞到天怒人怨，於是有人提倡要把一拳把人打死的行為立例，最高可判15年。我以前寫過3篇一拳奪命的文，反對這種另定法例的做法。看到報導講新省政府真的要立法，把在酒精或藥物影響下把人打死的判刑訂為強制性至少判監8年。我滴酒不沾，我同情受害者及其家人，但我反對這種立法理念。醉酒奪命處以8年刑期表面上看罪有應得，技術問題卻一籮筐，當然還未看到條文怎樣寫，如果不是一拳，而是一腳或一棍，又算不算呢？又或者是幾拳又如何？假如雙方都飲酒，死者挑釁在先導致毆鬥弄出人命，被告要坐監最少8年而不考慮一切求情因素？Alcohol fuelled其實不易介定，如果被告只飲了少量酒，犯案時其實並無受酒精影響，又怎樣衡量是alcohol fuelled?歸根究底我覺得應該找一兩單有代表性的案件來上訴，要求上訴庭訂立判刑指引方為上策。

另一個問題是voluntary intoxication will be removed as a mitigating factor in sentencing。醉酒作為求情因素是普遍的講法，屬於沒有預謀，情緒失控的行為，在打人案是常見及被接受的求情考慮。我不知怎様可以用立法來移除這種因素，真的這樣做，理應由上訴庭作出判刑指引時提出，而並非立法干擾，否則三權分立界綫模糊。

限制售酒時間及鼓勵減少飲酒，才是正確的針對措施。這裏的飲酒文化根深蒂固，就像大陸人抽煙，不改變這種風氣，再訂立嚴刑峻法也枉然。