Do we need preventive detention for the worst burglars

Stuff reports:

One of New Zealand’s most prolific burglars has died in custody.

Prison, police and judges could not stop Stacey Spinks’ life of crime.

In the end it was a suspected heart attack that stopped the man whose brazen skills led to him racking up over 300 burglary convictions. …

His offending was continual.

He had over 300 convictions for burglary alone, with many others for breaching sentences, impersonating police officers, escaping, and shoplifting.

The man obviously could not be rehabilitated. Burglary is a lesser offence than violent offending. I don’t think you should have a three strikes and you’re locked up forever for burglary. But how about 100 strikes and you’re out? By out I mean an automatic 10 year (maximum sentence) prison sentence for every burglary conviction after you reach the threshold?

No sentence seemed to deter him.

Twelve times he was caught impersonating a police officer. He even handed over a police business card at commercial premises where he asked about security measures.

There comes a point where you accept someone can not be deterred. Then the focus is on community safety. If we know beyond a slither of a doubt that the moment he is out he will carry on, why let him out?