The Changing Definition of “Law and Order”
Share this article
ADVERTISEMENT
(comments below)
Comments
Comments
5 responses to “The Changing Definition of “Law and Order””
-
Please check out this week’s edition ‘The Economist”magazine. You know that radical lefty rag from London.They have two good articles on this issue of punishment in the US. They are critical of AG Holder for not going far enough to reform the system.
-
I am not amazed that Cuccinelli supported Haynesworth. I am amazed that 4 of the 10 judges on Virginia’s Court of Appeals ruled against issuing a writ of actual innocence.
But, as Mary Sue Terry once publicly remarked while Virginia’s Attorney General, “Evidence of innocence is irrelevant.”
-
re: ” a larger, national conservative movement to re-evaluate ways to reduce jail and prison populations. ”
umm… I’m not aware of long-standing “liberal” … “lock em up and throw away the key ” ideas… lemme see.. George Allen comes to mind.
there NEVER WAS bi-partisan rancor – it was always the guys on the right who had the “lock em up” fire in their bulbous bellies….
in fact – to this day – if you wanna talk about who actually gets sent to prison for what offenses in terms of race – the “conservatives” still have great angst in looking at the problem in those terms.
and who is it in Va that still opposes restoring voting and other rights to those released – even those whose crimes were non-violent drug-related?
it seems to me that the Conservatives these days cannot move an inch unless they “tidy up” (revise) the history so they fit into “better”. just saying…
-
lemme see.. the Conservatives have finally decided that it’s okay to be “soft on crime” gee willikers… who’d a thunk it!
-
What I think might work for youthful/first-time offenders is a couple days in jail, coupled with non-custodial punishments. And by a couple, I mean about two. That just might create some deterrence.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.