Increased sentences for violent crimes ? especially those committed at sports grounds and other public areas ? were passed by the House of Assembly last night.

The bill passed after Government accepted an Opposition amendment to heighten penalties for assaulting Police officers.

Kicking off the debate, Public Safety Minister said the Criminal Code Amendment Act showed Government was tough on crime.

But Shadow Minister said the amendments were two years too late, the sentences were too short and the fines were too low.

If Government was serious about crime, he said, the penalties would be far more severe than the amendments allow.

The amendments increase the sentencing powers of both the Magistrates? and Supreme Courts, and give Police greater powers of arrest regarding acts of violence.

They also designate areas such as schools or public sporting grounds as increased penalty zones for acts of violence. Such areas are already increased penalty zones for drug offences.

Speaking to the House of Assembly yesterday, Mr. Horton recounted the infamous acts of violence which took place over the last year ? particularly those at public gatherings like the Friendship Trophy 2004 at Wellington Oval.

?I was absolutely shocked to see the manner in which people in our country were behaving towards each other,? Mr. Horton ? who was in attendance at that event ? said.

?It is increasingly evident ... that certain anti-social and lawlessness elements in our society have targeted public events ... as preferred locations for their rivalries.

?Too often the violence is gang-related?, he said, despite the official Police stance that gangs do not exist on the Island. The amendments also address offenders who are not in gangs, he said.

Such contempt of the law, he said, demanded attention.

Police needed greater powers of arrest, he said. Officers often find that although it may be necessary to arrest someone promptly to defuse a violent situation, they themselves are handcuffed by the lack of an arrest warrant. Under these amendments, that will change. Police may now arrest offenders or suspects without a warrant if they believe on reasonable grounds that an offence was committed.

?This is tough legislation giving the Bermuda Police Service the power to do their job more effectively overall,? Mr. Horton said.

Mr. Burgess, however, was not satisfied.

Penalties were increased by two years across the board, he said. That meant that if an offence previously called for two years incarceration, that period would be increased to four years ? a 100 percent increase. If the penalty was originally five years, however, it was only increased to seven years ? roughly a forty percent increase.

?The more serious of a crime you commit, the less of a signal you are sent,? he said.

He called for far greater penalties to ensure offenders are fully rehabilitated before they leave. Patients at the hospital would not be allowed to leave until they are better, he said; the same goes for offenders.

?Why aren?t we taking a more clinical approach??

And, he added, some may claim that ?you can lead a horse to water, but you can?t make it drink.

?Well, I can tell you, ten years with his head in the water, he may take a sip.?

There were also no penalties targeting gang behaviour, he said. ?We need to send a clear signal that gang violence is unacceptable.?

The increase in fines barely matched inflation. ?The Government is using 20th Century tactics to solve a 21st Century problem.?

Fines should be high enough to, for example, pay for the counselling of a victim after an attack, he said.

?It?s called old-fashioned restorative justice ... Victims shouldn?t have to be going to the Criminal Compensation Board, we should be going to them.?

As for the protection the amendments afforded those on ?the front line? ? Police, customs officers and the like ? Mr. Burgess said that, also, was too little.

The legislation should be saying: ?If you dare to so much as touch anyone on my front line, I?ll break you over the head. There is not a crystal clear signal saying we won?t tolerate attacks on our front line.?

Government is ?merely arranging the chairs on the while its on its way down,? he said. ?Until criminals believe the political wheel exists to knock them out of business, they?ll thrive.?

There should be increased penalties for those involved in gang attacks after hitting out at the cowardly way hooligans had behaved in the Wellington Oval incident.

?One of the most cowardly acts has got to be the type in St. George?s where five cowards come along with machetes and go after one guy.?

Further time should be added for this type of attack.

?We could have three years for the crime and a further two years for engaging in gang violence which is unacceptable.

?It comes from the gang mentality, we are becoming more North American than North America itself. The ghetto mentality of North America is resting on our shoulders, we need to get it away from our shoulders, we have to declare war on gang violence.?

And if Government was setting up zero tolerance zones then seniors homes should be included in that category.

Such zones should also include Police stations, he said. Officers were fearful of dealing with criminals in case they were slapped with assault charges so they had to adopted a measured approach.

?If you try wrestling with kid gloves you get kids? results. The pendulum in the confines of the police station and prison may have swung too far the other way.?

He said the legislation as it stood did not send a strong enough signal to the men of violence.(PLP)said there were a lot of violent influences on the young including games, news and pop culture.

He chided the Opposition for the lack of constructive criticism on the bill.

But Opposition Whip said the Opposition would have welcomed the chance to work on the bill with Government.

He questioned why it was only just now emerging after being promised in the 2003 Throne Speech, particularly as much of it was simply increasing penalties on existing legislation.

?This community could have used it in the intervening time,? he said.

Nor was it a broad look at the Criminal Code, as the Minister had claimed. Instead it merely reworked one section which looked at endangering life and health.

However there was no increase for endangering the life of a child under two while the offence of intimidation did not get a higher sanction, despite Government saying it was a problem.

?You cannot say you were in a rush when it took over a year,? he said. ?I hope the witness protection programme doesn?t take as long as this to get here.?

Mr. Barritt quoted a radio story which said a Bermudian drug importer in Antigua faced five years hard labour if he didn?t pay a massive fine.

?Why doesn?t that happen here??

Government whip said the amendments would help reduce crime and said the punishment should fit the crime.

He cautioned the House against viewing criminals as coming from a different culture.

?Criminals are very much a minority group, we must not just say the only thing we want to give them is punishment for the wrongs they do.?

Referring to Mr. Burgess? comments, he said: ?He?s saying it?s OK for individuals but gangs must be punished. Any crime has got to be punished.?

Morality needed to be taught so the jails would be unnecessary, Mr. Simmons said.

Shadow Youth and Sport Minister said the Opposition supported the bill.

He said the Government benches were calling for alternatives for young people. Mr. Brunson said: ?They are the Government, they are in the position to do it. Tell me when??

Community service should be required of prisoners if they wanted parole.(PLP)also said prisoners should be put to work and he said the problems started at home.

?I am a proponent of licks,? said Mr. Burgess. ?I believe in licks, many leaders had licks.? (UBP) said increased penalty zones should include hotels, restaurants and other tourists spots and punishment should be higher for those who harmed tourists.

?The crime is against everybody, not just against the individual but against the economy.?(PLP), former top Policeman,said the increased penalty zones would be challenged by defence lawyers who would argue their client was slightly outside them as they plea bargained.

He said penalties should be increased across the board after saying crimes occurred at other places such as Ice Queen.(UBP)said a restorative justice system should be put in place in Bermuda to make criminals take responsibility for their crimes.

And(UBP)called the Criminal Code Amendment (No. 2) Act 2004 ?effectively a knee-jerk reaction to some of the topical threats, like Wellington Oval.?

She said ?it was no small wonder that some people thought they were living in the wild wild west and therefore think they can have a go?.

?Criminals are now saying, what can I get away with? When we create legislation it is important not just to react to yesterday?s crime. We must go further and make sure ... it is not just another insulated, isolated attitude to a few crimes over the summer to placate the public,? she said.

But replied that was crime was at an unacceptable level.

He said the legislation sent out a message that people would not be able to get away with crime and that increased sentencing powers for Magistrates would see people brought to justice more quickly.

?We all know the time it takes to get to Supreme Court,? he said.

On the Police?s new powers of arrest, Mr. Horton said: ?Police were not able to arrest without a warrant unless they saw the offence they committed. Their ability to arrest means that the level of violence can be controlled much quicker and those people who are in that area will be safer when those people are moved out of the scene?.

He also said the legislation would make it possible for more members of the public to go to sports grounds once they felt they were safe.

When the bill went into committee, moved an amendment to raise the penalty for assaulting a Police officer.

?We need to send a crystal clear signal,? he said. ?I would have thought we ought to have a fine from those who offend against the agents of the front line (Police, Customs and Prison Officers) of up to $5,000,? Mr. Burgess said.

Mr. Horton agreed to the proposed amendment and increased the penalty for those who assault ?frontline? officers to four years or a $5,000 fine for Magistrates? Court. This was the greatest sentencing power increase to Magistrates? from the Act.

The House then passed the bill.