We all know that the Tories have a penchant for untruths, but their latest claim is so wildly inaccurate it makes you wonder if an intern has got a bit carried away...
Continuing with their campiagn for tough justice that is repeatedly shown to be ineffective at tackling crime, the Scottish Conservatives criticised SNP plans to put 10,000 "serious criminals" back on the street.
The SNP is about to ban prison sentences of less than a year, which would let almost 10,000 serious criminals back out onto the streets, potentially endangering the public.
— ScotConservatives (@ScotTories) May 15, 2019
It's time we stood up against their soft touch approach to justice:https://t.co/K7UiO68lKI pic.twitter.com/ULn87sw65i
They tweeted: "The SNP is about to ban prison sentences of less than a year, which would let almost 10,000 serious criminals back out onto the streets, potentially endangering the public."
There's just a few problems with that statement.
First of all, there aren't 10,000 criminals serving prison sentences of less than a year in Scotland.
In fact, there aren't even 10,000 people in prison in Scotland, full stop.
According to latest figures from the Scottish Prison Service, there are around 8000 in total, which includes those serving sentences longer than a year.
So even if every current prisoner in Scotland was let back onto the street right this second, the Tories would still be wrong.
Ok, we hear you say, BUT when you look at how many people in total move through the prison system over the course of a year, instead of just the current number, the figure is much higher. Could it be the case that the Tories meant that "serious criminals" would avoid prison, rather than being let "back out onto the streets"?
It's not what they said, but let's be generous and assume that's what they meant.
Even then, the claim that 10,000 "serious criminals" would be spared a prison sentence doesn't quite stack up.
Looking at the data, when it comes to offences that resulted in shorter stays in prison, it's more likely to be for shoplifting or a breach of the peace than a serious crime like attempted murder.
Heck, more people spent a short stint in prison for public urination, and miscellanious crimes, than they did for serious assault.
Don't get us wrong, here. We'd rather not catch sight of an unsteady figure having a wee next to the Garage nightclub on a Friday, but we wouldn't call them a "serious criminal" if we did...
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel