Category: Crime and Punishment

Why do we release violent felons?

One aspect never brought up in the discussion over “gun violence” is how many times the bad guy has been released from prison despite a long violent record

When Daryl Williams stepped in front of Cook County Judge Stephanie Miller on Wednesday, it wasn’t the first time the two had seen each other. Back in November, Miller—a champion of the county’s “affordable bail” movement—let Williams go free on a recognizance bond after he was charged with possessing a stolen handgun on the South Side.

While free awaiting trial on the handgun charge, Williams obtained another gun and fatally shot a man in the back of the head, police say. Arrested this week, Williams just happened to find himself in front of Judge Miller again.

In short, a man died because of lax laws, and it happens a lot Here is more

The Left hates everything that came out of the late 1980’s Get Tough on Crime initiatives. But violent crime peaked in this country around 1991 or so, and even with the increase we’ve seen in the past 3 years or so it is still near historic lows, at least in most of the country. (Chicago, Baltimore and a few other places are notable exceptions to that statement.)

In an effort to turn back some of that tough on crime stuff, Cook County (home to Chicago) is trying to go easy on defendants who might have a hard time affording bail. In some case releasing criminals on their own recognizance. Which brings us to the case in point.

A guy bought an illegal gun, that was originally stolen from Spokane. He fired a couple of shots to “be sure it worked.” He got busted for illegal possession of a firearm. Released – no bond, no electronic monitoring. He was just left to walk out the door. He skipped his hearing. (Color me shocked!) While out awaiting that hearing, he bought another gun. He used that gun to shoot a man in the back of the head.

Williams was released, and he killed someone. And the left can only blame the NRA?

What you must know about the Parkland shooting

Mike McDaniel has a masterful piece that our media, yes, you too Fox, SHOULD be covering

as Fox News reports:

Some school counselors and officials were so concerned about the mental stability of Nikolas Cruz, accused in last month’s Florida school massacre that they decided to have him forcibly committed more than a year before the shooting.

However, the recommendation was never acted upon.

Documents in the criminal case against Cruz show that school officials at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and a sheriff’s deputy recommended in September 2016 that Cruz be involuntarily committed for mental evaluation under Florida’s Baker Act for at least three days, according to the Associated Press.

The documents, which are part of Cruz’s criminal case in the shooting, show that he had written the word ‘kill’ in a notebook, told a classmate that he wanted to buy a gun and use it, and had cut his arm supposedly in anger because he had broken up with a girlfriend. He also told another student he had drunk gasoline and was throwing up. Calls had even been made to the FBI about the possibility of Cruz using a gun at school.

So, why wasn’t he taken in?

Real Clear Investigations/com suggests the reason:

At the same time the Broward County school system was dismantling the ‘school-to-prison pipeline’ under policies that failed to stop accused shooter Nikolas Cruz, it was building another pipeline, funneling back into regular classrooms thousands of other potentially dangerous students released from local jails, county and school district records reveal.

Through a little-known “re-engagement” program for serious juvenile offenders, the Florida district has ‘transitioned’ back to school almost 2,000 incarcerated students, a number comparable to student bodies at many high schools, according to district data obtained by RealClearInvestigations. Local probation officers warn that these offenders have a high risk of reoffending.

Another initiative, the Behavior Intervention Program, attempts to mainstream a smaller number of ‘students who exhibit severe, unmanageable behavior,’ according to a 2017-2018 program handbook, including those who are ‘convicted of a serious crime such as rape, murder, attempted murder, sexual battery or firearm related [offense].’

The number of returning felons and other serious offenders has climbed each year since Broward Schools Supt. Robert Runcie, a close ally of President Obama, started the program in 2013 as part of his crusade to ‘end the school-to-prison pipeline,’ which he says has disproportionately harmed young African-American men.

The next year, district officials worked with county prosecutors, probation officers and judges to release and return 325 incarcerated students to area schools. The number grew to 570 in the 2015 school year, before rising to 967 in 2016, the latest available figure provided to RCI by the district.

Is it any wonder a known danger like Nikolas Cruz wasn’t handled properly?

Please go read it all folks, and spread this around

Marxifornia goes full, well, you know

Oh goody, here the left goes again. An “unarmed” black man is shot by Sacramento police. And the California, without waiting to see if the shooting was justified, the legislature tries to tell police across the state when they may, or may not use lethal force. Never let a good crisis go to waste right?

Following the shooting death of an unarmed black man in Sacramento last month by police, state lawmakers have proposed legislation that raises the threshold for when an officer may open fire, Huffington Post reported.

As far as I know the threshold is already pretty high, and the legislators pushing this likely have an agenda which is not, shall we say, friendly to cops or law abiding citizens… What could possibly go wrong?

Flanked by leaders from the NAACP and the anti-cop Black Lives Matter movement, Assemblyman Kevin McCarty, D-Sacramento, said at a news conference Tuesday the law would change the guidelines in California’s use of force laws so that cops may use their weapon ”‘only when necessary’ rather than ‘when reasonable.’”

Ah, seems like this would only put more gray areas into play, further complicating any legal proceedings after an officer uses their sidearm. And, naturally, it would put even more pressure on officers, which could easily lead to more officers being shot or stabbed.

But, rest asured these fine lawmakers hold no ill will or bias against police. Right?

Assemblyman Christopher Holden, an African-American, went so far as to claim officers use black men as “target practice” while naming unarmed black victims of police shootings.

“We should no longer be the target practice of a ‘shoot first, ask questions later’ police force,” Holden said, according to the online news source.

Naturally, the proposal is supported by the American Civil Liberties Union and the California Legislative Black Caucus.

“It’s clear that the current law protects the police, not the people,” ACLU legislative advocate Lizzie Buchen said, according to Huffington Post.

Oh Marxifornia, you went there didn’t you?

Why is no one talking about this after Parkland?

Daniel Horowitz writes about the folly of not arresting violent people

But there is a more systemic problem in local law enforcement and school districts across the country: Arresting wayward teenagers is considered taboo. If this agenda is left unchecked, we could witness many more potential attackers slipping through the criminal justice system, even in better-run departments.

Look around at every major public policy issue, and you will see that the very statist “firefighters” in each party are really the arsonists who spawned or at least fueled the problem to begin with. We are seeing this in those wanting to throw money at opioid programs while fueling the heroin and fentanyl crisis with their open-borders agenda. And we are also now seeing it with the same people who promote jailbreak and weak criminal justice laws now pinning the blame for public safety issues on the Second Amendment. The “let criminals out of jail and lock up guns” agenda has come full-circle with the politicization of the Parkland shooting.

In addition to promoting open borders and importing criminals from other countries, George Soros’ organizations have made it a priority to gut the entire tough-on-crime agenda that has worked so well in recent decades. They are pushing on all levels of federal, state, and local criminal justice systems to reduce sentencing and release prisoners, particularly younger criminals, in addition to restraining effective policing tactics. They give it the Orwellian name of “criminal justice reform.” Of course, their end game is more felons voting, which we have vividly witnessed in Virginia, Maryland, and now in Florida at the behest of the courts. It’s no different from the end goal of the amnesty agenda: a permanent Democrat majority.

In recent years, they have successfully hooked almost every “conservative” organization and a number of Republican elected officials on their pro-criminal agenda by couching it as a way of saving money. As I noted before, just the day after the Parkland shooting, a number of the most prominent Republicans and Democrats promoting gun control voted for a bill that would provide multiple avenues to retroactively release the worst gun felons and drug traffickers in the country.

Sheriff Scott Israel prided himself on limiting arrests, thanks to federal programs

The jailbreak agenda is definitely on display in the Broward County law enforcement agencies. It turns out that Broward County has been promoting a program, funded in part by the federal government, to incentivize local officials to do everything they can to keep juveniles out of jail. The central problem with all these programs, though, is that the way to keep people out of jail is to prevent crimes, not to prevent actual criminals from going to jail.

Yet the Broward County “PROMISE” program (Preventing Recidivism through Opportunities, Mentoring, Interventions, Supports & Education) did the exact opposite. As Catharine Evans writes at the American Thinker, Broward County “had the highest number of school-related arrests statewide at 1,062” before Obama began his Common Core-style grant programs for local jailbreak agendas. Once millions of dollars were doled out for juvenile feel-good programs to avoid arrest, such as the PROMISE program, the number of arrests plummeted by 63 percent from 2011-2012 to the 2015-2016 school year. As Broward County Sheriff Deputies Association President Jeff Bell told Laura Ingraham last week, PROMISE “took all discretion away from law enforcement to effect an arrest if we choose to.”

These new policies were adopted by the Broward County School Board on November 5, 2013, in a Collaborative Agreement on School Discipline, which was signed by Sherriff Scott Israel as well as all the other major local officials. While the agreement gives lip service to not infringing upon the “discretion” of law enforcement, it dictates that officers “shall” take numerous specific steps before making an arrest and generally encourages them to work outside the traditional criminal justice system, a catchphrase of the juvenile jailbreak movement.

Proponents of jailbreak on the Right will contend that these agreements are merely designed to weed out “nonviolent” offenders. But the problem is that because they are attached to state and federal grant programs, the political leadership of law enforcement departments have every incentive to pressure their officers against making arrests across the board. Every nook and cranny of the federal government’s law enforcement and education programs are filled with a culture of leniency on crime. Up until the very last month of the Obama administration, the Department of Education, along with senior Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett and former Domestic Policy Council Director Cecilia Muñoz, were promoting “the continuing need to rethink discipline.”

If there was ever an argument for abolishing the Department of Education, the growing concern over school violence and the role of the federal government in pressuring local communities to weaken their disciplinary standards should be the number one reason.

Go read the whole thing folks, it is very powerful.

How NOT to fight crime

One duty the government has is to protect citizens from violent felons. The best way to do that, of course is to issue tough sentences for those convicted of violent felonies right? Then there are cases like this

What in the holy fuck is this?

  • A Chicago woman who live-streamed video of the racially charged beating of a teen with mental disabilities pleaded guilty Friday to a hate crime and was sentenced to four years of probation.

    Brittany Covington, 19, has been in custody since her arrest in January.

    Calling the incident “horrific,” Cook County Circuit Judge William Hooks banned Covington from social media over the four years, prohibited her from contact with two of her co-defendants and ordered her to do 200 hours of community service.

    Hooks told Covington he could have imposed a prison sentence but added, “I’m not sure if I did that you’d be coming out any better.”

    Hooks said he hoped the strict terms of probation would put Covington on a more productive life path, but he warned she would face prison time if she violated any of the restrictions.

    “Do not mess this up,” Hooks told Covington, who stood quietly in a blue jail uniform with her hands clasped behind her back.

  • Wow, community service and a social media ban? For taking part in a brutal case of kidnapping, assault, battery, of a mentally challenged man? Oh sure she might get a harsh sentence the next time she helps brutally victimize someone. So what, we get tough after two people are harmed?