these sites:
izzylives
And anything on:
Want the latest It's Baaack! It�s Tuesday. Did Gerry Get His Car? Some of the more solidly constructed entries: The Kevin Dowling Mystery Amnesia isn't as fun as advertised Rants: Insane Justice Who's Ruining the Planet for Whom? Shut up with your "free speech" already.
|
2003-12-17 - 9:42 p.m. Let�s talk about justice today. So let me get this straight� John Hinckley, the man who tried to assassinate Ronald Reagan, the President of the United States of America, is going to be out on unsupervised visits? The nut-job who almost killed Jim Brady in order to get Jodi Foster to notice him? Because his doctors have now stamped �not crazy� on his record? Well, let me tell you something, Sigmund, some shit is crazy forever. What next? Is Charles Manson feeling much better now? How can there be no mandatory minimum sentence for trying to kill the President of the United States? Under normal circumstances, I am very much against mandatory minimums. But if we�re going to have them for some crimes, shouldn�t attempted assassination be one of them? If I�m sitting in jail for twenty years for a baggie of dope and I see on the news that John-motherfucking-Hinckley is out walking around with his mama? Shiiit. How is that right? Should there ever be a time when we say, �Yeah, we know you almost killed the President, but, you know what, that�s in the past. You seem fiiine now. By-gones.� If I was Jodi Foster, I�d be very nervous right now. Time to learn a little something about your new bestest virtual buddy, Gerry. I don�t believe in mandatory minimum sentences. Nor do I support the death penalty. I used to, but I changed my mind. Mandatory minimums take judgment out of the hands of the people who were given the job in the first place: judges. Whether it was done because people didn�t trust judges to be tough enough or whether they wanted to make penalties known as a deterrent to criminals, I don�t think it�s right. There has to be some way for a human to give some leeway. Sometimes there are extenuating circumstances. Judges are more than a facilitator at a deposition. The ultimate decision of what is fair punishment should be up to them. If you don�t think they�re being tough enough, let's talk about how we choose judges. Or even possibly recalling judges. But don�t turn trials into computer programs: (Bwah-ha-ha-ha! I know, I�m a geek. But, if you know any Visual Basic, that�s really funny.) As for the death penalty, I just don�t like the company it puts us in. Look at all the countries that have the death penalty. Then look at the ones who don�t. Whose side would you have guessed we were on? We can do better, we can be better than that. Plus, I don�t believe it is a deterrent. I don�t think that most murderers are thinking about any kind of punishment when they commit the crime. They probably believe they won�t get caught at all. I don�t picture someone ever saying, �Eh, if it was only the rest of my life in an 8�x10� cinder-block room it might be worth it. But since they might give me a lethal injection, I won�t kill him. I�m not willing to take that chance.� Once you�ve decided that murder is a viable course of action, I don�t have that much faith in your reasoning skills. Which brings us back to our boy, Hinckley. Come on. I�d feel better if someone was watching him all the time. O.K., so he�s all better now, good for him. Kudos on your new sanity. But there are guys in prison for life for a lot less. Can�t we at least put him in a minimum security prison? One of those nice country club ones. I�ll even make him a life-sized cardboard stand-up of Jodi Foster. Listening to: Nothing at the moment.Watching: The Gauntlet Drinking: Pepsi |