Last week much was made of a study that found the defund police movements in 2020 led to an increase in crime, said crime rate falling when the push to hamstring police failed in the face of public backlash.
Surprise, people of all races, creeds and colors don’t want to deal with more crime in their neighborhoods. Imagine that.
But that’s only half the story. Punishment for convicted criminals matters greatly, too. And on that front there is a clear movement towards coddling criminals.
From the Tesla terrorist being set free due to a lack of gender-bender care in prison, to various protesters getting away with carnage all in the name of free speech, to many jurisdictions putting revolving doors on jails, to the much-cited Maryland man, we have a wave of people commiting misdeeds and expecting to pay no price – often being proved correct in that ridiculous belief.
This helps explain rogue judges believing they, too, are above the law and not bound by the very dictates they might chose to use to punish you.
It helps explain waves of shoplifting, which now has escalated to stealing trucks and train cars of goods to be resold.
Whatever is up in price is fair game. Witness thefts of huge shipments of eggs when those prices spiked briefly as we got rid of Clueless Joe and put in Donald Trump.
A lot of academics will argue that punishment is not a deterrent to crime. It is an absurd assertion from the same people who routinely insist criminals have been rehabilitated by the system, only to have those same criminals revert to their bad behavior upon release back into the general population.
I’ve long thought a simple test of the faith of these leftist apologists would be a basic rule: You certify a prisoner is safe to be placed back in society at large, and if said criminal runs afoul of the law again, you get to share the cell with him/her/it for as long as the sentence runs.
I’m pretty sure that would result in a severe drop in experts telling us the convict is safe to mix again with the rest of us.
Along that line, it is obvious that if we had capital punishment readily dispensed for the worst offenders, they at least would not be around to relapse.
And I think if the criminal public was aware such punishment was a very real possiblity, the crime rate would reflect a certain reticence to be fried, shot, or given a lethal injection.
Consider the case of the protesters who last week took over the library at Columbia, then were horrified when the doors were secured and their only option for being allowed to leave was to show identification.
These cowards, and others like them, rely on anonymity, hence the masks and other efforts at disguising themselves.
If they truly were warriors, they would not worry about being identified. Recall John Hancock’s intentionally oversized signature on the Declaration of Independence.
That the chickenheart protesters do worry about their identify being known indicates a certain level of fear. This tells us that if we want to limit such acts going forward, the solution is greater enforcement and stricter penalties, not less of either.
A main problem is these scofflaws tend to operate in the leftist sanctuary dens, secure in the knowledge that even if the police arrests them, some socialist prosecutor, judge or politician will move heaven and earth to have them released to commit more affronts.
Until citizens of such leftist strongholds change things through the ballot box and throw out the socialists, they are doomed to suffering from ever increasing disregard for the law by a growing number of their fellow residents.
Sam Ross Jr's site 