Are democrats Soft on crime?

14 posts / 0 new
Last post
G Ross
G Ross's picture

Obama backing off strict crime policy

Quote:
But the Obama White House has taken the first steps in decades to move away from a strict lock-‘em-up mentality on crime — easing sentences for crack cocaine possession, launching a top-to-bottom review of sentencing policies and even sounding open to reviewing guidelines that call for lengthy prison terms for people convicted of child pornography offenses.

The moves — still tentative, to be sure — suggest that President Barack Obama’s aides are betting that the issue has lost some of its punch with voters more worried about terrorism and recession. In one measure of the new political climate surrounding the issue, the Obama administration actually felt free to boast that the new crack-sentencing bill would go easier on some drug criminals.

“The Fair Sentencing Act marks the first time in 40 years that Congress has reduced a mandatory minimum sentence,” said White House drug czar Gil Kerlikowske, who billed the new legislation as “monumental.”

Obama’s signing of long-debated legislation last month to reduce the disparity between prison sentences for crack and powdered cocaine is being hailed by some advocates as a watershed moment in the nation’s approach to criminal justice.

Comments

polycarp2
Sure Dems are soft on crime.

Sure Dems are soft on crime. They don't address its causes any more than Repugnants do.

Lowering sentences doesn't address the addicts need to bop someone over the head to get his next  "fix".

Probably selling drugs legally and cheaply through government pharmacies would stop drug lords from distributing free samples to get new clients.  Free rehab should be an adjunct to that. Cheaper than prisons and courtrooms..Cheaper than hospitalizations for robberies gone bad.

Dems are just as soft on the causes of crime as Repugnants are.  In the meantime, "drug war" costs go up and our neighbor to the south is becoming a failed state...to feed our addictions.

After nearly 40 years, I'd think that someone would finally get that our drug/prison policy doesn't work.

Both parties are soft on causes of crime...and in doing so...promote it!

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

 

Barliman
Barliman's picture
I am amazed that nobody seems

I am amazed that nobody seems to have noticed that despite draconian law and order policies and astronomical rates of imprisnment- the crime problem is not going away.

Why do the same mistakes keep on being made?

Is there a  sort of national, institutionalised Attention Deficit?

Martin Seligman has the right idea ( Positive Psychology).Look at countires like Scandinavia. Thse countries would be roundly denounced as Socialist in any analysis from any of the mainstream American political commentators, but their societies are provably, measurably happier, and their citizens actively resist any attempts to get them to structure their economies along the lines that the Banksters would wish for.

Wake up guys- your political institutions and media outlets have all been bought and paid for and your futures are being sold down the river.

Ulysses
Ulysses's picture
Overall, Democrats are no

Overall, Democrats are no softer on crime than Republicans are on white-collar crime, seeing as how the majority of white-collar criminals emerges from GOP constituent institutions.  Anybody remember the name Scooter Libbey?  How about Dick Cheney?  Where's the prosecution of  the Bush administration for destroying a half-million e-mails which recorded lots of its doings and comings and goings, thus violating National Archives laws which maintain any given administration's records for historical posterity?  Those records belonged to the citizens of the U.S.; they weren't Bush's to destroy.  If anybody else were to willfully destroy Federal public records, they'd be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.  

Nobody can reasonably bring up whether or not Democrats are soft on crime unless they want to examine Republicans at the same time. 

DRC
DRC's picture
A bipartisan discussion of

A bipartisan discussion of public policy on crime and punishment would reveal that the hard ass policies are pure GOP, but as with economics, once the political culture has been polluted, Democrats become echoes of the pathology all too often.

Being compromised on an issue is not the same as being its author or prime beneficiary.  Democrats have a hard time being against the war budget or standing up to the War on Drugs.  Willie Horton worked.  It is hard to make a political talking point out of compassion for inmates.  Hell, we even had one goofy spot complaining that prisoners were given free soda pop on the taxpayers' bill.  What they think prison is supposed to create in inmates when they are released back into our communities does not enter their minds.  They really are not coming back in the minds of the hard on crime addicts.

Prisons are very expensive and lethal.  The number of convicts who can be reformed by the experience is small, and to make remorse work, the process needs to work at the point of confession and remorse rather than continue the punishment much longer.  That just convinces the guilty that the system is not interested in reform and is just as evil as they are.  Then it becomes a nasty game to beat the bad system.

When the system really is brutal and unjust, the chances for redemption go way down.  It is a warehouse and recycling program of catch and release.  It is sociologically structured and psychologically abusive, and what causes it is more about privilege and power than about "crime" or "poverty" by themselves.

This is the kind of issue that needs to be raised by alternative parties and connected to an agenda "too radical" for the Democratic Party at this point.  Democrats ought to raise questions about the dumbest of the "zero intelligence" polices like "3 strikes."  It is time to question the value of the War on Drugs and the imprisonment costs it brings for non-violent and even non-existent crime.  Being "soft" on costly prison/industrial policies does not have to be focussed on abusers and victims.  Compassion is for another discussion.

I think there is also a hunger for community based responses to problems the police run in several areas.  "Crime" is a symptom, and the problems are not the people who live in the ghetto or who deal with the structural injustices of the cities of 'benign neglect.'  There is nothing in their character that is flawed or deformed.  Compared to the banksters, they are saints.  The only accurate charge of "soft" on crime is about Wall St., the White House, Congress, the Pentagon and its contractors.  But at least the Democrats are only the softies instead of the criminals.

MA'AT
MA'AT's picture
crime rates are

crime rates are down.

snip....

According to the figures released today by the FBI, the estimated number of violent crimes in the nation declined in 2009 for the third consecutive year. Property crimes also declined in 2009, marking the seventh straight year that the collective estimates for these offenses dropped below the previous year’s total.

http://bluewavenews.com/blog/2010/09/13/u-s-crime-rate-down-for-third-year-straight/

Just the facts maam.

Illegal imigration is also down and deportations are up.

 

 

polycarp2
From the link: "In 2009,

From the link: "In 2009, there were 14,614 law enforcement agencies that reported their staffing levels to the FBI. These agencies reported that, as of October 31, 2009, they collectively employed 706,886 sworn officers and 314,570 civilians, a rate of 3.5 employees for each 1,000 inhabitants."

I suppose some sort of resuts ought to be expected.

 Eliminating arrests for crime in some areas helps reduce "crime".....like minor pot offenses that used to bring 20 years.

My grand nephew didn't report the theft of the bike he rides to work. What's the point?

In my neighborhood, people tend to dish out their own justice...and woe be to he who reports the "punishment" to the police.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

DRC
DRC's picture
Out here, the prison builders

Out here, the prison builders are claiming that getting tough and throwing away the key is the answer, just look at the stats!  But all the scholarship on the prison/industrial system does not confirm this approach as anything other than very expensive and brutalizing.

There are many other factors, such as reporting stats v. real crime as Poly suggests.  Demographic shifts have more to do with the ups and downs than economic conditions.  

High mobility raises crime rates because neighborhoods are less stable and people don't know their neighbors.  But crime is a highly inflated issue due to its bleed and lead quality.  Great TV visuals compared to a discussion of Wall St. financial practices, but penny ante when it comes to what harms me or my community.  My grandmother was concerned about the crime stories she saw on her TV in the 80's and feared for her safety in her rural community.  The only thing that had changed was being able to get the news from the city.  

FoxMulder
FoxMulder's picture
i think dems are too soft on

i think dems are too soft on crime and furthermore they will make up stuff on innocent people and lock them up and fry whites more so in the chair or execute them

lawyer Allen dershiwitz says they do this ;execute whites at a greater rate even though blacks get to prison more

the more cases they get for cps made up offenses the more dollars cps gets -dems love this crap and dont see through it

they take white kids away at a greater rate

dems dont care

the laughter continues you will hear it every day

but maybe in nov people will wake up and vote these jerks out

republicans bug me too maybe not as much -i hope

FoxMulder
FoxMulder's picture
pat robertson of the 700 club

pat robertson of the 700 club is now against the death penalty

Ulysses
Ulysses's picture
FoxMulder wrote:i think dems

FoxMulder wrote:
i think dems are too soft on crime and furthermore they will make up stuff on innocent people and lock them up and fry whites more so in the chair or execute them lawyer Allen dershiwitz says they do this ;execute whites at a greater rate even though blacks get to prison more the more cases they get for cps made up offenses the more dollars cps gets -dems love this crap and dont see through it they take white kids away at a greater rate dems dont care the laughter continues you will hear it every day but maybe in nov people will wake up and vote these jerks out republicans bug me too maybe not as much -i hope

Nationwide crime statistics have long shown and proven that the majority of serial killers are white males. Nobody made that up.  Criminal justice authorities at all levels simply keep track of all data on serial killers and that's what it reveals.  It stands to reason, then, that the group who commits the most of a certain type of crime will suffer the penalty for that crime more than any other group.  So, since there are more white male serial killers than there are male serial killers of any other ethnicity, it naturally and logically follows that more white males will be executed for murder than will male killers of any other ethnicity.  

polycarp2
You should probably check

You should probably check your facts, Mulder. The percentage of blacks incarcerated is way higher than whites...along with their execution rate.

Perhaps if lynching was still the preferred course for an "afront",  perceived or real, that wouldn't be so..

I expect the "crime rate" among our  rather peaceful Muslim population to be skyrocketing. in the near future..No change in behavior...just an increase in the crime rate.

As things go from bad to worse, the Corporate State will need more scapegoats as a diversion.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

 

FoxMulder
FoxMulder's picture
Muslims are peaceful?-not in

Muslims are peaceful?-not in Sweden is what i heard

you dems like all this global crap so take in the whole picture -dont be hypocritical

Ulysses
Ulysses's picture
FoxMulder wrote: pat

FoxMulder wrote:

pat robertson of the 700 club is now against the death penalty

Why didn't he tell Pilate this beforehand?