Using tragedy to promote an agenda, Lesson 2
In his most recent column, Dave defends the decade-long power grab by prosecutors under Measure 11, Oregon's 'one-strike, mandatory minimum' law.
But of course he does, right? I mean, liberals are soft on crime & punishment. We'll contact the ACLU any chance we get to make sure that murderers and sex offenders can move in next door to us, right?
We especially decry Measure 11 if it entails 'a minor beef' like stabbing kids to death under Portland bridges, right?
This is the leap Dave uses to admonish Measure 11 critics that offer a 'succession of poster children' that refute and point out the inanity of Oregon's law. Never mind that 'minor beefs' would actually entail the sad case of Aaron Weight from Hillsboro, who received a seven-and-a-half year sentence for letting a friend borrow his car, that was then used in a robbery. Due to Measure 11, Aaron's judge's hands were tied and was forced to commit Aaron to a sentence that didn't fit the crime.
But never mind that. Dave would have you believe that Measure 11 critics would rally in defense of James Nelson, who as a 16-year old stabbed to death another kid under a Portland bridge. As these were the days prior to Measure 11, Nelson served ten years of an eleven year sentence before being released on parole. Which raises the question: an eleven year sentence?!?!?! For stabbing a kid to death!?!?!?!
I'm not familiar with the intricacies of James Nelson's stabbing case, but if his sentence was handed out by a judge or a jury, it illustrates the fact that if common-sense sentences had been passed out by Oregon's legal system, then the voting populace wouldn't have passed Measure 11 in disgust in the first place.
As an alternative, Measure 11 doesn't offer common-sense sentences or solutions. Judges shouldn't be passing lenient sentences on violent criminals- and didn't, for the most part, prior to Measure 11's passing. According to the FBI, there was no increase in violent crime in Oregon during1980-1995, but in fact there was a decrease. Regardless, perennial gubernatorial candidate Kevin Mannix joined forces with special interests (prosecutors and the prison industry) to give him an opportunity for a 'strong on crime' approach to a problem that never even existed.
I support strong sentences for violent criminals. Murderers should be locked up, and denied access to the public for a very, very long time- if ever. What I don't support is preventing judges from making the best decisions in regards to a defendant's sentence. A number of mitigating factors weigh in on every criminal case- the most obvious being a first-time offender. Why should a first-timer be treated the same as a repeat offender? That simply lacks common sense.
And let's revisit Aaron Weight. A friend abuses his trust and uses his car to commit a robbery. Aaron should serve hard time next to seasoned criminals? That simply lacks common sense.
James Nelson was a monster. Anyone who's remotely followed the Jessica Kate Williams saga has to be aghast at the callousness that Nelson and his street 'family' savagely took the life of this mentally disabled woman. While there can be no apologies necessary for the actions of the sociopathic Nelson and his 'family', neither should this family tragedy be used to promote a crime-fighting agenda that lacks in common sense.
Using personal tragedy to advance an agenda? What else could we expect from Dave? That's his modus operandi.
But of course he does, right? I mean, liberals are soft on crime & punishment. We'll contact the ACLU any chance we get to make sure that murderers and sex offenders can move in next door to us, right?
We especially decry Measure 11 if it entails 'a minor beef' like stabbing kids to death under Portland bridges, right?
This is the leap Dave uses to admonish Measure 11 critics that offer a 'succession of poster children' that refute and point out the inanity of Oregon's law. Never mind that 'minor beefs' would actually entail the sad case of Aaron Weight from Hillsboro, who received a seven-and-a-half year sentence for letting a friend borrow his car, that was then used in a robbery. Due to Measure 11, Aaron's judge's hands were tied and was forced to commit Aaron to a sentence that didn't fit the crime.
But never mind that. Dave would have you believe that Measure 11 critics would rally in defense of James Nelson, who as a 16-year old stabbed to death another kid under a Portland bridge. As these were the days prior to Measure 11, Nelson served ten years of an eleven year sentence before being released on parole. Which raises the question: an eleven year sentence?!?!?! For stabbing a kid to death!?!?!?!
I'm not familiar with the intricacies of James Nelson's stabbing case, but if his sentence was handed out by a judge or a jury, it illustrates the fact that if common-sense sentences had been passed out by Oregon's legal system, then the voting populace wouldn't have passed Measure 11 in disgust in the first place.
As an alternative, Measure 11 doesn't offer common-sense sentences or solutions. Judges shouldn't be passing lenient sentences on violent criminals- and didn't, for the most part, prior to Measure 11's passing. According to the FBI, there was no increase in violent crime in Oregon during1980-1995, but in fact there was a decrease. Regardless, perennial gubernatorial candidate Kevin Mannix joined forces with special interests (prosecutors and the prison industry) to give him an opportunity for a 'strong on crime' approach to a problem that never even existed.
I support strong sentences for violent criminals. Murderers should be locked up, and denied access to the public for a very, very long time- if ever. What I don't support is preventing judges from making the best decisions in regards to a defendant's sentence. A number of mitigating factors weigh in on every criminal case- the most obvious being a first-time offender. Why should a first-timer be treated the same as a repeat offender? That simply lacks common sense.
And let's revisit Aaron Weight. A friend abuses his trust and uses his car to commit a robbery. Aaron should serve hard time next to seasoned criminals? That simply lacks common sense.
James Nelson was a monster. Anyone who's remotely followed the Jessica Kate Williams saga has to be aghast at the callousness that Nelson and his street 'family' savagely took the life of this mentally disabled woman. While there can be no apologies necessary for the actions of the sociopathic Nelson and his 'family', neither should this family tragedy be used to promote a crime-fighting agenda that lacks in common sense.
Using personal tragedy to advance an agenda? What else could we expect from Dave? That's his modus operandi.
posted by true_slicky at 10:44 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home