The sense of security you speak of is an excellent point. I have to tell you that the current case goes somewhat beyond that. As this future law, which is currently a bill, comes into force, it will lead to more than a sense of security. You know, we hear about all kinds of pressure, intimidation and the like, exerted in some neighbourhoods. Citizens are asked to cooperate by denouncing the individuals that threaten and assault them. Unfortunately, it is difficult to convince them not to worry, because every day we see offenders who, a short while later, catch up with their victims on a street in the same neighbourhood and taunt and threaten them. People do feel quite intimidated.
When we talk about the burden of proof, the word "burden" is meaningful. Proving that you are not dangerous is not easy to do. Nor is it easy for the Crown to determine that an individual is dangerous. Therefore, if the burden of proof rests with the person who committed a heinous or violent crime, the chances are that person will be detained, which will increase people's sense of security, because they will think that if they denounce someone, that individual will not be released prior to his trial and will likely remain imprisoned for some time. People will think that they did their job and got rid of the offender.
That is what will happen when the bill is passed. I think it is the cornerstone that will ensure that violent individuals are treated very differently than people who shoplift in a store, for example, although I do not want to minimize shoplifting. But people who threaten citizens are not considered the same way as people who shoplift.