0

Repeat offenders danger to American society

In order for law abiding citizens to live in a society, criminal elements must be removed from that society for it to function.

This is a lesson that somehow has not gotten across to those who decide what happens to the criminal elements. Recent headlines in The Albany Herald stated that a gang member picked up on murder charges was released from prison in September 2011 after serving six years of a 20-year sentence. Anyone with a little common sense knows that most criminals with serious repeated convictions cannot be rehabilitated, yet they are routinely released, not because they have suddenly reformed, but because the prisons are overcrowded and costs are too high. So back they go into society, where there is a high probability that they will commit more crimes.

As members of our society, we should be outraged that this is being done. It is now so commonplace that we have become accustomed to the new norm and accept that there is not much we can do but adjust to the fact that those in charge are not doing their job to protect law abiding citizens.

At some point, serious changes must be made in the criminal injustice system or we will have to retreat to our homes and hope another home invasion does not occur. It seems that the notion of a fair trial is only for the criminal, not the victims.

There is a way to greatly reduce crime without capital punishment but, unfortunately, society is not yet ready for a radical approach and may wait until it is too late to try something different.

BILL BATES

Albany

Comments

waltspecht 2 years, 1 month ago

I sort of favor three strikes and your executed. Other than that, I know of no cost effective means to control these individuals. We turn these individuals loose because it costs too much to keep them incaraerated. Then there aren't any jobs for them to help themselves survive, so they revert to crime to survive. The population of Criminals is just too large for our Society to absorb. So we either accept their behavior, or we take the most drastic option and remove them from Society. Now before you jump down my throat, what do you propose we do with them?

0

agirl_25 2 years, 1 month ago

I kinda agree with you there walt.....but let the crime fit the punishment. The thing that amazes me is how using drugs to end someone's life is "cruel and unusual punishment" when someone is given the death penalty. As someone who has undergone major surgery you don't feel a thing when you are off in la-la land. As a matter of fact you barely get to count down from 5 to 4 before you are out of it and the next thing you know you are in recovery with those fantastic warm blankets wrapped around you. So how does anyone know it is cruel and unusual punishment to push just a bit more of the drug and let the convict go off to la-la land (or wherever)? I even think the citizens would contribute to a fund to pay for the injections if the state said the costs were too high. Morbid? Maybe but we are sick of the rampant crime. The Alday murders were a fine example of not zapping 3 worthless humans soon enough, in my opinion. I don't care if the doctors said one of them was mentally incapable of knowing right from wrong. Any man who rapes a woman knows how to die. The End.

0

QUIK 2 years, 1 month ago

The law abiding citizens are not willing to pay the high cost for 20 year sentence and especially for life sentences. As more criminals are convicted the cost keeps going up and the more law abiding citizens are taxed so it's one way or the other. Changing the laws is very hard to not give criminals chances to correct themselves since we profess higher morals than other countries. We are not like those countries that have swift justice. We can't have it both ways.

0

Sign in to comment