The Jack’s Law expansion is a symbolic step – it’s not a solution to knife crime
- Written by: Janet Ransley, Professor, Griffith Criminology Institute, Griffith University
Laws just passed in Queensland[1] give police unprecedented powers to scan people with a handheld wand and potentially search them in all public places, without needing a warrant or reasonable suspicion.
Earlier versions of “Jack’s Law” were copied in other jurisdictions[2], such as New South Wales, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and Western Australia. Queensland’s expanded laws may flow on to them now, too.
However, while the newly expanded Jack’s Law[3] may detect more weapons, there’s no evidence it reduces violent crime. It may, in fact, do more harm than good, while putting human rights at risk.
What is Jack’s Law?
Jack’s Law is named after 17-year-old Jack Beasley who was stabbed to death[4] outside a convenience store in Surfers Paradise in 2019.
Passed in 2021, the law resulted in a time-limited trial allowing officers to “wand” people with metal detectors[5] in some entertainment precincts.
Since then, the trial was expanded twice to include public transport, stations, shopping centres and licensed entertainment venues.
In a little more than two years, Queensland police conducted[6] 116,287 scans and removed 1,126 weapons – a detection rate of about 0.9%.
The majority of charges that followed were for minor drug offences, or breaches of knife-carrying bans.
The trial was set to expire on October 30, 2026 after another mandatory review.
Instead, the law has now been made permanent with the scope extended again to allow wanding in all public places.
The changes also remove safeguards, such as the need for senior officer oversight, reporting requirements and a further review of the impact of wands on crime and on civil liberties.
Our research into Jack’s Law
Our review[7] of the 12-month trial of Jack’s Law on the Gold Coast in 2021–22 is the only publicly available evidence about the impact of metal detector wanding on knife violence in Queensland.
We found there was no reduction in violence as a result of the use of the hand-held scanners.
There’s also potential for bias when officers using the wands are influenced by factors that aren’t related to evidence. This includes the unfair targeting of minorities. More people could also be caught up in the justice system for minor, non-violent breaches.
What’s needed to reduce knife violence are evidence-based programs addressing underlying causes such as mental health, poverty, child maltreatment and domestic and family violence.
Wanding has no impact on these underlying causes and diverts resources and police attention from where they’re really needed.
Does the law reduce knife crime?
While the intention behind Jack’s Law is to enhance public safety by deterring knife-related crimes, the evidence suggests this is unlikely to happen.
Our study found that although the use of metal-detecting wands can lead to increased detection of weapons, there is no evidence this in turn reduces violent crimes involving knives.
Confiscated knives are easily replaced and we found no evidence that scanning deterred people from carrying weapons.
This is consistent with research from the UK[8] showing “stop and search” laws had no effect on violent crime, and Victorian research[9] showing no effect of similar stop and search laws on violent crimes.
Concern over human rights
The expansion of police powers under Jack’s Law raises human rights concerns.
The ability to stop and search people without reasonable suspicion may lead to racial profiling and erode public trust in law enforcement.
A 2022 independent inquiry[10] into the Queensland Police Service highlighted issues of systemic racism and sexism within the force, underscoring the potential risks of granting broader discretionary powers without adequate oversight.
Our review also found evidence of police wanding decisions being based on discriminatory stereotypes. This makes the removal of oversight and review mechanisms of particular concern.
Additionally, searches for knives following wanding have led to a rise in minor drug charges. This funnels more young people into the criminal justice system, which increases their risk of re-offending[11] and also places more pressure on an already overburdened criminal justice system.
While the expansion of Jack’s Law is a visible response to public concerns about knife crime, it is essential to recognise such measures are not a silver bullet.
Further erosion of the already tenuous trust in the police service among minority communities in Queensland, particularly Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, could lead to reduced public trust and have long-term negative impacts on public safety.
Why a holistic approach is needed
Addressing the root causes of knife violence requires a comprehensive approach that includes investment in support services and community programs.
We also need to recognise around 50% of serious violent crime[12] occurs in the context of domestic and family violence, in private settings. Wanding does nothing to help those victims.
Understanding why people carry knives and implementing targeted prevention strategies are crucial steps toward creating a safer society.
While Jack’s Law serves as a symbolic gesture honouring the memory of Jack Beasley, its efficacy in reducing knife crime remains unlikely and will now not be reviewed.
Policymakers must balance the desire for immediate action with evidence-based strategies that address underlying factors contributing to violence.
Only through a holistic approach can we hope to achieve lasting change and truly honour the lives lost to such senseless acts.
References
- ^ just passed in Queensland (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ copied in other jurisdictions (www.sbs.com.au)
- ^ newly expanded Jack’s Law (documents.parliament.qld.gov.au)
- ^ who was stabbed to death (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ “wand” people with metal detectors (www.brisbanetimes.com.au)
- ^ police conducted (statements.qld.gov.au)
- ^ Our review (research-repository.griffith.edu.au)
- ^ research from the UK (publications.parliament.uk)
- ^ Victorian research (www8.austlii.edu.au)
- ^ independent inquiry (www.qpsdfvinquiry.qld.gov.au)
- ^ increases their risk of re-offending (www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au)
- ^ around 50% of serious violent crime (www.choreport.health.qld.gov.au)
Authors: Janet Ransley, Professor, Griffith Criminology Institute, Griffith University
