Posted on 01/24/2006 11:41:49 AM PST by presidio9
It seems some people go into politics just before they go totally brain dead. This is the only explanation for the announced effort in New York State to increase the penalty for killers of children to life without parole from the current 25 years to life. "I hope that will play a deterrent," said a Brooklyn assistant district attorney, urging on the politicians. Where do we get these people? Let us see: Envision an enraged parent or some other custodian of a child (the sort of person the law has in mind) who is abusing his or her ward and, while in the throes of a homicidal rage, pauses before delivering the fatal blow to consider the penalty. Life without parole is too high a price to pay, he somehow reasons. But 25 years to life, that's a different story. With that, the blow is administered.
The proposed legislation is already being called "Nixzmary's Law" after Nixzmary Brown, the 7-year-old Brooklyn girl who was allegedly tortured and then murdered by her stepfather.
Little Nixzmary was starved. She weighed only 36 pounds at death. She was tied to a chair. She was repeatedly beaten. She was made to eat cat food. She was deprived of toilet privileges and had to use kitty litter. She was repeatedly kept out of school and when, finally, she supposedly helped herself to some yogurt, the authorities say, her stepfather killed her.
Over and over again officialdom reached out to her - often feebly, in the end futilely. Her school noticed her condition and made a report. A doctor examined her. Social workers went to the house, could not get in and went away. Neighbors must have suspected something was wrong. Her relatives must have known enough to worry or maybe just to wonder. Letters were
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
And, didn't SAY A FRIG'N THING!Not ONE WORD!
oops shot = shoot
Cohen is simply wrong. A pervert or child abuser in prison for life will never again abuse a kid. That's enough deterrent right there to ensure passage of the increase in sentencing.
Cohen should test his "not a deterrent" theory by proposing a compromise: Let the current law remain in effect for killings occurring on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. A less-harsh penalty will apply for killings on Tuesdays, Thursdays and weekends. If there's really NO deterrence, none at all, we won't see any difference after the amendment, will we?
There is also the point of PUNISHMENT that this idiot( and many many others ) fails to acknowledge .
Released to a hungry wolf pack within an hour of conviction. Way too quick a death, but environmentally friendly.
The author is correct that this change won't deter many killers.
But that doesn't necessarily make it a bad idea.
Bears repeating.
Hmmm, sounds almost like the Dims' and MSM's take on how we ought to not fight the WOT.
No it doesn't. It's stating the obvious. Fixing the o-rings won't bring the crew of the Challenger back either. It's still worth doing.
To hell with whether or not its a deterent, will it get dangerous criminals off the street for good so that the rest of the population can sleep a little better at night? If so then, I say... lock 'em up and/or shoot 'em.
Actually this is the central premise behind the "legalize drugs" campaign.
well, his point about "tightening up the system administratively" translates into - child protection services is going to take kids away on a hair trigger. of course in the case of this poor girl, it would have been the right thing to do. But several years ago in NYC, the unthinkable happened in reverse - a child taken away from a mother, was killed by her foster mother and grandmother. imagine that horror, your parental right is taken away, and your child is removed and placed into the hands of foster parents who kill her.
my point is simply, there is a dangerous line here, its easy to say "take the kids away faster" - but we all know government is messed up, and will make many mistakes implementing such a policy, and some of those will also have deadly results.
if NY had a death penalty, this would be the time to use it.
I once heard the attorney general of MO say this in regards to the death penalty: "You don't kill a mad dog as a warning to other mad dogs. You do it so they can't hurt anyone else."
You're exactly right. Banishment, forcing a criminal to leave a society, is the second oldest form of punishment known to civilization.
Isn't justice for the victim important also?
DING DING DING DING!
I remember a Wizard of Id cartoon from years ago. The king had just senteneced a man to death. The man's last words to the king were, "Capital punishment doesn't deter crime." The king responded, "I'll believe that when I see you again."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.