Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
Thomas Sowell :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Left and crime
by Thomas Sowell
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


The general mindset of the political left is similar from country to country and even from century to century.

The softness toward dangerous criminals found in such 18th century writers as William Godwin and Condorcet has its echo today among those who hold protest vigils at the executions of murderers and who complain that we are not being nice enough to the cutthroats imprisoned at Guantanamo.

The specific issues change from place to place and from time to time but the mindset remains remarkably similar. What is also different from country to country and from one era to another is the amount of resistance encountered by the left, which determines how far they can go in practice.

The United States has always been more resistant to the left than most European countries have been. Often we can see where the American left is headed by seeing where the European left has arrived.

A new book on crime in Britain shows what happens when the mindset of the left prevails throughout the criminal justice system. That book is titled "A Land Fit for Criminals" by David Fraser.

Within living memory, Britain was one of the most law-abiding nations on the face of the earth. When Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew visited London right after World War II, he was so impressed with the honesty of the British and their respect for law and order that he returned home determined to make Singapore the same way.

Today it is Singapore that is one of the most law-abiding nations in the world while Britain's crime rate has risen to the point where, for the first time, it now exceeds the crime rate in the United States.

What happened in the intervening years was the rise of the British left's dogmas about crime to complete domination of the country's legal system and its political and media elites.

Today, a burglar caught in the act by the police in Britain is almost certain to get a warning. If he has previous burglary convictions, he may get a sterner warning. But he is unlikely to face anything so draconian as being put behind bars.

Burglary has been described as a "minor" offense by leaders of both the Conservative and Labor parties in Britain. Rare cases where burglars are put in prison are criticized by the media.

The left's ideology on crime, including their disdain for property crimes, has spread across the political spectrum to all who wish to be considered up to date. That ideology is essentially the same on both sides of the Atlantic but in Britain it has achieved far greater unchallenged dominance.

Among the dogmas of the left is that putting people in prison fails to reduce crime and that the social "root causes" of crime must be dealt with to prevent it beforehand and that "rehabilitation" through various programs "in the community" are more effective than locking up criminals.

None of this is new and the rationales for it go back at least two centuries. What is remarkable is how mountains of hard evidence to the contrary have been ignored, evaded, or simply lied about, on both sides of the Atlantic.

David Fraser's book "A Land Fit for Criminals" examines that evidence at length and exposes the fraudulence of the claims used to try to justify continuing to be lenient to criminals as crime rates have soared in Britain.

There are similar mountains of evidence against the left's crime dogmas in the United States and this evidence is similarly ignored, evaded or lied about by those on the left. It is just that the left faces stronger opposition here so that it has not achieved the pervasive dominance that it has in Britain -- yet.

In both countries, ideologues have the support of "practical" politicians and bureaucrats who simply do not want to spend the money needed to build and maintain enough prisons to put career criminals away for many years.

Those weighing costs and benefits define "costs" as government expenditures. But the costs paid by the public, just in economic terms, vastly exceed the cost of more prisons. But that does not count for either the ideologues or the "practical" politicians and criminal justice bureaucrats.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Thomas Sowell and Townhall.com's daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Blame Welfare
Eliminate welfare and prison populations will shrink. Do the math. Welfare promotes family dissolution; family dissolution promotes poverty and incompetence; incompetence without personal responsibility engenders entitlement. Crime is entitlement by coercion.

Rogue Historian: more germane...
... blame gun control.

Brits won't put thieves in jail, but if you use a gun to protect yourself or your property you are H I S T O R Y.

Further, UK's violent crime rates skyrocketed after they instilled their draconian gun laws. Further, in response to the escalating crime rate after the gun ban, they then outlawed BB guns.

In response to the still-escalating crime rate, they are now in the process of banning carrying of knives of any kind, including your Boy Scout pocket knife. On top of that, they're debating making it illegal for kitchen utensils to have sharp points.

Yes, folks, I kid you not.

Of course, welfare, too, as well as all the rest of the socialist roadmap.


Like the anti-gun crowd
And the second amendment defenders here in the States. Although, I think we (2nd A) are winning right now.

One flawed British study brought seatbelts to America. Mandatory - now.

Every once in a while (like with tookie) there's some outcry on the left about the death penalty. And I still say the same thing: If we release him, he LIVES WITH YOU, Okay?

Interesting, Rogue, never thought of it quite like that... 'Crime is entitlement by coercion.'


Poverty causes crime.
A consistent refrain from the compassionate among us is "poverty causes crime"...horsefeathers!! Thhe reality is that crime causes poverty. The evidence is overwhelming and is supported by common sense. There is no wonder that the Left will not cosider it. Common sense and evidence mean nothing to these elite idiots. Evidence and commonsense: who will start an enterprise in a crime ridden neighborhood? Why start up a store and hire people and have to put up with burglary, robbery, grafitti, harassment or rape of employees? Result, no easy employment for the locals...poverty results.

Rudi Guiliani came down hard on "broken windows" and the quality of life in New York improved measurably. Everywhere the cops are allowed to do their job crime decreases.

Facts cannot overcome utopian vision, I guess.

No argument from me regarding welfare and gun control. (See above.)

Yep, FOWG, you're on...
... the money, too. Good analysis.

BrianR
I read the same info you did about the knives and kitchen utensils, but I hadn't heard about the BB-guns. The whole thing kind of reminds me of an asylum. You know, Keep Sharp things away from the inmates.

When Australia baned all firearms, the crime rate rose 500% in a short time. On a side note, some may not know this but the real Crocodile Dundee, the one the movie was based on, was shot dead by the police when he refused to give up his guns.

One thing that has always bothered me was the enormous time spent on death-row. Keeping a person 10-20 years at $40-$60,000 a year while they file appeal after appeal. I say use your 12 cent solution within a month after conviction. Liberals would not like that though. There might be one in 10,000 that is innocent. And of course, the lawyers would balk. It would cut into their money source.

FOWG: Right on!

Even Kids Know
If children know they will face certain punishment for the things they do that they know their parents think are wrong, they will generally not do as many wrong things. On the other hand, children who know few consequences for their bad behavior generally behave badly.

Why would anyone assume it's different with adults than with children?

This isn't rocket science.


From whence comes crime?
It is a core value of the left to cringe at the thought of punishment. Punishment is something that implies two things. First that something is wrong. Second that the people who want to do wrong cannot be reasoned with. These are both ideas that are anathema to the left.

The concept of sin is utterly opposed by the left. They think people are basically good. I knew a man who had to attend a class to secure his daughter’s college loan. In his class he was told that the loan had to be repaid. Someone in the government had decided that the reason college loans were not being repaid was that people did not know that loans had to be repaid. The only reason for loans not being repaid to the liberal mind is that the people had not received training.

Sin is a word that receives little press. The education industry makes a lot of money from convincing everyone that instruction and education are the answers to all of our problems. The reason the left tries so hard to deny the existence of sin is that if there is sin, there needs to be a savior.

People find it easy to deny the existence of sin. They look at themselves and say, “I’m not so bad, I have never killed anyone.” In a culture where everyone feels good about themselves, it is difficult to present a view that our best is not that good.

The problem with the world is sin. We get it from Adam, we are born in it, and we die in it. The answer to the problem of sin is Jesus. He paid the price for the sin of the whole world. In him we can be free from the power of sin. He offers forgiveness to the whole world, all we have to do is receive it.

THEIR ON A MISSION
The liberal views of the courts, the ACLU, Hollywood and everyone in Connecticut are on a mission to turn this country in to a free for all. The rest of us need to make sure that the politicians that we vote into office have an agenda that is strongly opposed to all of the above, and at all cost, they will make sure that our right to bear arms is never infringed upon. Visit http://www.headsneedtoroll.org and post your thoughts on the importance of maintaining the right to bear arms.
Heads Need To Roll

Allow me to recommend...
Theodore Dalrymple's "Our Culture, What's Left of It".

Dr. Dalrymple is a British doctor who has worked on four continents and has most recently practiced in an inner-city hospital and prison.

From the inner jacket:

"Informed by years of medical practice in a wide variety of settings, Dr. Dalrymple's acquaintance with the outer linits of human experience allows him to discover the universal in the local and the particular, and makes him impatient with the humbug and obscurantism that have long marred our social and political discourse."

Re They're on a mission
hntr admin states "the left wants to turn this country into a free for all". Once they succeed, citizens will give up, forfeiting their freedoms for some semblence of lawfulness. What they will get is socialist fascism (AKA communism/Nazism).

During the Clinton era, citizens complained to Big Bill about the increase of crime in their neighborhoods. Big Bills resopnse was "We can do something about it - it will cost you some of you freedoms but we can do something about it".

Government goes soft on crime, citizens give more control to government and loose freedom.

Those whacky Britons
What kind of country do they think they are having only 4% of the number of murders we have? The answer to our problem has been clearly stated by the think tank of commenters. First we cut off all food and shelter to the poor. Then we militarize by imprisoning as many people as possible. Then, let the executions begin! Blood and more blood… kill and sacrifice to our mother Kali! Sorry, ignore that last bit. I got a little excited. But serious folks, isn’t it great fun to execute people? Wouldn’t every true patriot watch and cheer? And don’t forget watching children starve. Heck, it’s their fault after all that they chose losers for parents. Remember, I’m trying to be a typical liberal, Marxist, democrat, commie, Clinton loving, socialist, bleeding heart abortionist who wants to cut and run after offering my daughter to the islamo-facists. Please let me know if I fell short.

Being poor doesn't have to be permanent
Wealth begins with a stable economic environment, allowing entreprenuers to get a return on their investment in a country without fear of confiscation by its government as well as well enforced laws protecting property. That is the main why Singapore is doing so well economically and African countries are not. Investors are not foolish enough to continue pouring money into areas where there is instability within the state.

Whether honesty and respect for the property of others based on proven Judeo-Christian principles is taught by the family (the preferred method) or enforced by a dicatator like figure (like Singapore's leader), it is crucial in order for economic development to occur. When the economic atmosphere is right, wealth will follow. Honesty is an essential part of the foundation for this. It always has been.

Reduce crime ... ?
ALL murderers should get the death penalty. Make executions public. An execution held in private has little use in deterring future murders by others. The execution should fit the means of the murder (drowning for drowning, stabbing for stabbing, etc.) To hell with "cruel and unusual punishment" protests. The murderer gave up his rights when he took the rights of the victim.
Eliminate the "not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity" plea. Everyone is responsible for their actions, especially when those actions cause harm to others. "Pyschologists" should not be allowed within 5 miles of a courthouse.
Everyone should carry a weapon of their own choosing and be trained in it's use, whether it be a blade, mace, a club, or a firearm. Those that choose not to do so are at the mercy of the streets, and responsible for their own funerals. Criminals are very wary of who they attack if there is a chance that they can be injured or killed in the attempt.
The police can only respond to crimes committed, not provide individual protection. The 911 system promotes dependence on the police for protection and it DOESN'T work! It's a scam on the American public! When someone is breaking down your front door, call 911 and Pizza Hut and see who gets there first. Be sure to have the correct change on hand ...
Restore discipline and some form of corporal punishment to the school system and make parents responsible for the behavior of their children.

true
true

Does poverty cause crime,
or does crime cause poverty?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that those who tend to commit lots of crimes have a hard time keeping a real job, and therefore tend to be among the economicly downtrodden.

I think it was Walter Williams who once said "Minimizing the consequences of folly maximizes the amount of folly."

Coddling criminals only produces more criminals because there is no real deterrent for committing crime. Why SHOULDN'T they steal cars? It's fun, and even if you get caught, the leftists will make sure the only thing that happens is you get a stern talking to. "Don't do that again, or else I'll have to tell you not to do it again next time too!"

Moonbat Morality Causes Crime
I blame it on the refusal of the left to make a clear distinction between good and evil. To a moonbat the the term 'good and evil' is a relative term, driven by modern social acceptance. When any society loses a grip on right and wrong (which was defined for us before the world was formed), they reduce themselves to anarchy.

Moral Relativism
The Left's conclusions re criminals are the logical outcome of moral relativism and the belief in rationality and the perfectability of man, beliefs that are not only responsible for just the minor annoyances of rising crime rates, but also the horrors of totalitarianism, the ultimate fruit of the tree of the French Revolution.

smokeykhan
Thanks, will check it out.

The Left and Crime
Crime is another one of the self-fulfilling prophecies for the left. They go soft on crime, and crime increases. Crime affects the individual. When it increases too much, such as a low income neighborhood, the victims cease to be individuals. They become a group. A Community. It then takes government to do what the private individual will not, and can not do for fear of being sued or fined or imprisoned for violated somebody elses "rights".

One crucial element not mentioned...
...is the infestation of of a worthless culture called muslems...

...just like we are being invaded by one from our south...

Mike R
Amusing how you create such a silly false dichotomy. Being opposed to welfare means "we cut off all food and shelter to the poor". So, those are the only two positions? How about we stop giving handouts to the poor and let them (and everyone else) keep what they earn? Or are you saying that without the handouts form enlightened, wonderful lefties like you the poor could never manage on their own? Pretty patronizing attitude isn't it? Those poor benighted lower class people could never survive without the largesse granted by the white knights of liberalism riding tot heir rescue.

Hits the nail on the head
This article's analysis of the way the left sees crime is quite accurate, and gave me some things to think about as it challenges a lot of the old assumptions about crime I used to have and am still in the process of deconstructing. I am generally in agreement about the need for tough sentencing and the failure of gun control in preventing crime, but I know of certain types of criminals who are so twisted that they'll keep on committing crimes in the face of the harshest possible penalties (serial killers, for example), and since catching them means that at least one person (and possibly many more) will have already been brutally killed or injured by that time, I think there must be some measures of prevention. And I have to admit that I was surprised when I realized that the left is ill-equipped to do this thing that they so passionately espouse because many of their policies, in my opinion, would create greater instability particularily where families and our sense of right and wrong are concerned. I think one of the best measures of prevention is promoting strong, healthy families and giving our children a strong moral compass to go by, as well as cracking down hard on the emotional, physical, and sexual abuse of children. Indeed, I think this would be good prevention for a lot of social ills.

The Tolerance Über Alles Principle
The following is an exchange between author Lawrence Auster ("LA") and poster "Mark D." regarding an article http://www.city-journal.org/html/16_2_oh_to_be.html by Theodore Dalrymple who observed that the most trivial violation of "political correctness" called down the greatest and most immediate response by British law enforcement, while the most egregious violent crimes went ignored:

Mark D. writes:

May I suggest that, grounded in liberal anthropology, ANARCHO-TYRANNY is perfectly consistent, and in fact required . . .

Liberal anthropology is derived from Nietzsche: it affirms the sovereignty of the individual will, that the INDIVIDUAL HUMAN WILL IS THE HIGHEST AND BEST VALUE, and asserts that the individual will is the arbiter of all value. Within society, all individual human wills are considered OF EQUAL VALUE, VALIDITY, AND WORTH, and there is NO PRINCIPLE (e.g., God) by which to discern among them. Society is then a contest of a will to power, of asserting one's preferences over those of others.

On the "ANARCHO" side this translates into AFFIRMATION OF THE INDIVIDUAL HUMAN WILL OVER SUCH TRADITIONAL VALUES AS PRIVATE PROPERTY, PUBLIC ORDER, AND EVEN HUMAN LIFE. If a crime of violence is committed, a conviction may be sustained, but a long incarceration is viewed with suspicion, as the imposition of a collective will over and above the highest good - the individual will that committed the crime. It is NOT LEGITIMATE within a liberal community to assert the communal will over (and) against an individual human will (unless, of course, that individual human will contests the über principle of liberalism itself).

On the "TYRANNY" side, it is obvious that the PREFERENCES OF INDIVIDUAL HUMAN WILLS ARE SACROSANCT, such as sexual orientation, lifestyle, dissent, and so forth. Any speech, thought, or action that threatens a protected preference is therefore punished with the utmost severity as a direct threat to the ultimate good - the individual human will (which is above critique). And because the individual human will is the source of all goodness, it cannot be relativized by any "status," particularly status within a religious or ethnic minority. Those WILLS IN THE MAJORITY THEREFORE MUST BE RESTRAINED, and those wills in the minority must be protected, SO THAT A PRINCIPLE OF ABSOLUTE EQUALITY IS MAINTAINED. In fact, WITHIN A LIBERAL SOCIETY, the fiction is maintained that THERE IS NO MAJORITY AT ALL; and if a majority is invoked, this claim is condemned, marginalized, or ignored. LIBERAL COMMUNITIES HAVE NO LEGITIMATE MAJORITIES. Liberal communities are merely a collection of individual human wills . . .
In liberal society, human life is NOT sacrosanct; the human will is sacrosanct. Abortion policy is the perfect expression of this principle.

LA reply:

Very interesting. Human life is something "outside" the self, a "transcendent," as it were. Since only the immanent self and its desires have value, without reference to anything outside the self, life does not have value.

Also, Mark D. points out to me in an e-mail that this means that "in liberal societies, two principles we take for granted NO LONGER apply: (1) consent of the governed, and (2) rule by majority."

This is profoundly troubling, and obviously true. It's just a further application of our understanding that since liberalism says that only the individual and his desires matter, LIBERALISM DENIES THE LEGITIMACY OF THE NATION AND ITS MAJORITY CULTURE. But now we see that LIBERALISM ALSO DENIES THE LEGITIMACY OF POLITICAL MAJORITIES as well as of cultural majorities. Or, as Mark continues: "A majority party can rule so long as it affirms there is no majority. This is Blair's England."

And thus we arrive at the modern bureaucratic state, the ideal of which is the EU, and the current leading examples of which are Britain and France. Since only the individual and his will matter, and all individual wills are of equal value, NO MAJORITY OF INDIVIDUAL WILLS CAN BE ALLOWED TO FORCE ITS WILL ON ANY MINORITY OF INDIVIDUAL WILLS. Therefore the society cannot be ruled on the basis of the consent of the majority, also known as the consent of the governed. THE SOCIETY MUST BE RUN BY A NON-ELECTED INSTRUMENTALITY (i.e., the “intelligent” people) THAT IS INDEPENDENT OF THE GOVERNED, IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE EQUALITY OF ALL INDIVIDUAL WILLS.

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/005489.html

(Emphasis added)


Government cannot mandate
a moral society...and I know that some of the folks in here disagree with me on what constitutes "moral". Still, we can probably agree that people who refuse to be governed by reasonable laws made to benefit all are not going dissauded by penalties and even more laws. We are responsible for the health of our Republic and its institutions.
That is why I applaud Bill Cosby for his reproof of African-American "victem" mentality. Moreover, taking responsibility for our community means not only doing your own share, but maybe a little more. Don't be afraid to point out the people who are goldbricking, or actully working against us. Take time to volunteer if you can. Help the police and stand against neighborhood crime. This seems so simple, yet it also seems forgotten...because when people leave responsibility to the government, it never seems to get done.
Dependance is a pernicious habit that is ill-becoming of Americans. After I was badly injured on the job (I was a commercial aircraft structural mechanic) a couple of years ago, my company disputed the workers-comp and I was literally told by managment to apply for welfare. It was the most humiliating thing I have ever done, and I despised myself for being unable to provide for my family as I once was able to. Maybe the Brits can put up with it, but I can't.

Look to the Greatest Generation
My father was born in 1913 and my mother was born in 1923. This means my father was a young man during the Depression and my mother was a child. Both were raised in what we would consider poverty today, although neither of them thought of it like that growing up.

My father's first job was driving a milk truck when he was 13. He would then drive the school bus (owned by the same man) and pick up his classmates to take to school and return them at night. He was paid $2 a week. He gave a $1.75 to his parents to feed him. He did that all through high school until he shipped out with the Merchant Marines when he was 18. He would work the ships as a cook until things got tight there, then he'd find another job, on a road construction crew or a farm or .... I asked him if there was ever a time when he didn't work during the Depression and he said "Only for as long as it took me to get to the next town or company and convince somebody I was the best cook in the world -- or that I could pick peaches faster than anyone else, or ..." You get the picture.

My mother grew up on a farm, where everybody worked hard to make sure they had food to eat in the winter. She took her first job in 1933 at the age of 9, riding cattle for an uncle with a ranch. He normally paid $12 for the summer. She asked for $9 and a $2 pair of shoes, to be paid up front (she'd outgrown hers and her parents couldn't afford to replace them until fall). She gave $8 to her mother to buy coal for the winter. She worked mustang round-up with my grandfather every summer until she was 15 and then she worked full-time as a dishwasher for $3 a week while she finished high school. Pearl Harbor was bombed in her senior year and the whole family relocated to Seattle to work in the defense plants the following spring.

Both my parents grew up poor, but they learned how to work hard. That didn't make them rich as the economy improved, but it did make them comfortable. I never heard either of them say "I'm too good to do that." Their attitude was always, "I can do that." You didn't see people of that generation expecting anything they hadn't earned. Even "the bums" who traveled around expected to be put to work doing something for a meal.

So, when people say "Children will starve if we don't give their parents welfare", I think, nobody gave my grandparents welfare and they managed to feed their families. If you have to, you will. If you don't have to, why should you? And when you've seen your parents sitting around a comfortable four walls and roof with a TV, microwave and running water without having to work for it, what's your motivation for getting a job that you have to be to every morning and actually do the work assigned? No, it's easier to steal from other people or sell drugs, so that's what you're going to do. Then you're going to blame your crime on being raised poor, but if that's a cause-and-effect relationship, why were the people of my parents' generation not all criminals. Maybe it was because they were too busy putting food on the table to go breaking the law.

How would you define "Dolt" ?
Here in Kalifornia, we have an Asshat Attorney
General named Bill Lockyer... Keep in mind that Mr. Lockyer is the #1 law enforcement Officer in the state... Mr. Lockyer, in all his infinate wisdom, claims that "laser Encripting" every bullet and every cartridge case on every round of ammunition sold in the state will deter criminals and will be a tremendous aid in solving gun related crime... Never mind the fact that such technology does not exist... Never mind the fact that even if such technology did exist, it would astoundingly cost-prohibitive... Never mind the fact that the California Peace Officers Association has nothing good to say about Mr. Lockyer's brilliant idea... Bill Lockyer terms out this November.. So, what are his future plans ? Why, to run for State Controller... What else !!

crime
I went into a small town as a rookie cop. I had just come off a farm and was a pretty good tracker and had been a "enlightened" youth and thus knew a lot about the "ciminal" mind. I had turned myself around with six years in the military and the Bible while in the service. No preacher, just the Bible and a lot of reading.

As a result, I arrested every violator I saw. I made so many felony arrests for burglary that in 6 months, even before I went to the police academny, I was promoted and put in charge of the detective bureau. In 3 and 1/2 years, our crime rate dropped 75% and yet, the respect for the police grew because the arrests were all done by the book and that meant a 99% conviction ratio because no rights were violated that could throw the case out.

The bulk of the arrests for burglary were juveniles because that is one of the first felony crimes young criminals choose. An empty home isn't as "scary" as confronting some one in a robbery. Anyway, most kids arrest resulted in a "one time" experience. When they knew they were going to be caught, at a young enough age, they were also smart enough to stop. However, the ones that had done if for a long time and not gotten caught before, we much harder to convince they couldn't "get away with it."

Most criminals start with very "misdomeanor" offenses. The sooner you stop that beginning behavior the more likely you will stop a life of crime.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/statab/sec05.pdf

This site has a chart of prison population. From 200 in 1970 to almost 1,200 per 100,000 the late 90's shows what our "permisive" society produced. Hmmmm? Wasn't that during the 40 years liberals were in control of Congress and spent 5 trillion on the "war on poverty?"

Wasn't that about the time the liberals demanded we stop praying and allowing the Bible in schools? Just curious.

A good reason to reject mass immigration
As "old man" notes, the left has badly messed up this country. While crime has soared, it is particularly bad for blacks.

Let's not import the huge new underclass Democrats are salivating for, so those hardworking people can become the fuel for the next crime wave in this country.

Liberal Problem Solving
Remember the Clintonian program called midnight basketball. That was a good idea right! Wrong. Children should be home sleeping at midnight and none of them should be in the street. The family unit in many sub cultures in our country are disfunctional and they are rasising dysfunctional children.

THEY'RE ALL VICTIMS
The Left's attitude towards crime can be summed up in two statements:

[1] There's no such thing as a criminal, only victims; and

[2]If we're nice to criminals, they'll be nice to us in return.

The root cause of the explosion in crime is indeed rising welfare rolls --most particularly the attitudes it breeds and the way it pays young women not in so as to get a check from Nanny State.

Welfare presupposes that one person has an unearned claim on the property and income of another, brokered by the state. Anyone committing a property crime is acting on the same premises, just cutting out the middle man.

There is a raft of research demonstrating conclusively that children growing up without a suitable father figure in the home feature disproportionately in measures of all negative social indicators. Boys are particularly vulnerable. In the absence of a father, they tend to be socialised by their peers and form distorted views of masculinity verging on the pathological.

Deliberately engineered and ever-widening family breakdown provides for an ever-expanded role for the state in picking up the pieces. And if you love "Big Gummint" aren't you just salivating at the prospect ...

Crime & Punishment
I read a paper in college in 1978 that stated the only effective deterent for crime was certainty of getting caught.

Criminal types do crime because they think they have a good chance of getting away with it. Liberal feel-good laws enhance that attitude.

Along with certainty of apprehension, there should be certainty of punishment. These two things go hand in hand. It does no good for criminals who know they'll be caught but also know they'll get a slap on the wrist.

Surety of apprehension and surety of severe punishment would deter most crime. That's why in states that pass concealed carry laws, the crime rate goes down. Criminals do not want the increased possibility of getting shot while robbing someone. Look at crime in Washington DC (with the most severe gun control laws in the country).

Salt of the earth.
aurorawatcher,

Applause, applause, applause.......................................................................................................................

Welfare is enslavement.

Charity is the work of compassion.

Taxes leave very little for charity.

Which allowes the government to enslave.


criminal thinking on punishment
The current mindset of the criminal is

I won't be caught
If caught I will be "warned" or charges dropped
If sent to court, my free defense attorney will get me off
If convicted I will win on appeal
If still convicted I will get probation
If sent to prison, it will be a short sentence.

At that point they seem to stop thinking because actually going to prison for a long time doesn't seem possible to them.

Cost
If they are that concerned about "financial" costs of punishing criminals, why aren't they concerned about Financial costs of every other failed policy of theirs. Why aren't my taxes LOWER?

cutthroats imprisoned at Guantanamo.
cutthroats imprisoned at Guantanamo.
Yeah, because every muslim is a cutthroats, nice article, but it´s with a lot of errors, you should study what you will write pal, not only take a chart and start dreaming about the things
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.