Seems to me there are three ways you fight crime:
1. Law as a deterrent
2. Police as a physical deterrent
3. Armed citizens as a physical deterrent
Sadly, our legislatures seem focused only on #1 above, and each time one of them comes into office, it's with the promises of "getting tough on crime" by jacking up the laws and penalties.
Don't believe me? Just ask the guy in California who is serving a life sentence for stealing a slice of pizza (thanks to the draconian "Three Strikes Laws").
Bottom line, is we're not just getting tough on criminals, we're getting tough on ourselves, because it's only a matter of time before you, I, or a friend or loved one crosses the line and gets hammered with some ridiculous sentence.
Want to really get tough on crime? Then fund more police and get your CHL (Concealed Handgun License). But please stop piling on the laws.
Thoughts?
2007-08-31
05:21:30
·
5 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Law & Ethics
For the person questioning the veracity of the guy getting life for stealing a slice of pizza, here is one link (it's way down in the text):
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0126-01.htm
Now, as far as my views, I'm not saying we need to slap criminals on the wrist. As with any crime, the sentence is generally variable. For repeat offenders, judges could simply hand down the maximum sentence for the crime in question. So maybe that slice of pizza was worth a year in jail, not 25 years-to-life.
But if we keep stacking on these harsh penalites, we'll end up like Singapore where tossing a cigarette but onto the ground gets you 3 lashes with a Rattan cane wielded by a martial artist. A bit much.
2007-08-31
05:39:19 ·
update #1