Thank you.
Ms. Schurman, you mentioned a word that struck me a bit, and that's “cost”, whether it's a cost to the prison system or whether, as Mr. Craig Jones has stated, it's the cost to deal with a serious criminal. I would really like to remind you, and everybody watching this hearing as well, of the enormous cost that seems to be ignored here, and that's the cost to victims. There isn't a person here who doesn't know at some point somebody in life who's been victimized. We could all imagine if it were our sister or our brother or a parent or a sibling or a friend or a neighbour, and we've seen that. We've seen the horrendous impact—lives ruined, families ruined, communities ruined. So we have to strike a balance here.
Over two-thirds of the public are demanding some sort of protection that does not exist at this particular point. They need the balance back in. This is what they're telling us. We're suggesting that we have to find a way. The amendments to the Criminal Code are not a panacea, granted, but they are a component that's been designated as being part of the problem. Sure, the social root causes, etc., are paramount. Rehabilitation is crucial.
When we get talking about the dangerous offender portion of this in particular, I'd like to ask a couple of questions to either Mr. Pecknold or Mr. Pichette.
Possibly, just from your life experiences in the judicial field, in the police, have you found that if you have a violent offender...? Do you think there's any chance of their ever reoffending again, or are they just a one-time Charlie? Have you ever found that they only offend once and that's it? Is that what you've found, or have you occasionally seen some who might reoffend again?