Gun control activists built their anti-liberty agenda around a simple theme: Guns kill. Never mind that firearms -- like any weapon or tool -- can accomplish neither good nor evil without an operator. Firearms are so evil that children shouldn't even play with toy replicas. But banning toy guns is ridiculous, isn't it? Not so fast.
In Michigan, toy guns have apparently replaced the so-called assault rifle as the criminal's weapon of choice. Republican Senator Rick Jones explained, "People are taking imitation guns that look real, cutting off the orange end and then threatening people." But do criminal acts with toy mock-ups warrant a ban? Quite the contrary, it would seem a reason to further liberalize right-to-carry laws. Toy gun toting gangbangers will think twice before pointing airsoft pistols at people who might be sporting the genuine article.
Gun control advocates will argue that armed citizens prompt criminals to use real guns, escalating the danger. Yet criminals already have that option. So why do they choose toy guns? Modifying toy guns is cheaper than obtaining real ones, and using them carries a lesser sentence upon conviction.
If S.B. 779 becomes law, brandishing a modified toy gun would be punishable by up to 18 months in prison. Why only 18 months, and why aren't such offenders treated as armed criminals now? The perpetrator who misrepresents a toy gun as the real McCoy is selling the threat, not the gun. Since the intimidating affect is real to the victim, the threat is the same as if a real gun were used. And should the victim unlimber their own firearm and kill the perpetrator their act would be just as much self-defense as if the perpetrator's gun were genuine. What's more, the aggressor would be just as dead.
Such a law is ambiguous, too. Jacksonville, FL police killed a robber who confronted them with a modified toy gun. But San Jose, CA officers appear to have overreacted when faced with a toy gun. Regardless the situation, no one finds joy in wounding or killing another person. But does either shooting validate criminalizing the possession of a modified toy? In the first example the robber received exactly what he requested. Thinning the herd, it's called. Why shed tears on his behalf? In the second incident, officers perceived a danger. But the gun wasn't presented in a threatening manner. Why should the wounded man face charges?
Rather than criminalizing toy guns for lacking orange muzzles we should recognize violent behavior for what it is and treat it accordingly. The last thing we need is another impotent gun law.
When one person threatens another the real crime isn't the presence of a gun, whether genuine or imitation. The crime is the aggressor's attempt to gain advantage through the threat of bodily harm, or even death. The criminal is telling the victim that their right to life and property exists only at the criminal's discretion. Isn't that crime's true nature?
Showing posts with label crime. Show all posts
Showing posts with label crime. Show all posts
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Friday, March 2, 2012
So now we're banning toy guns
Gun control activists built their anti-liberty agenda around a simple theme: Guns kill. Never mind that firearms -- like any weapon or tool -- can accomplish neither good nor evil without an operator. Firearms are so evil that children shouldn't even play with toy replicas. But banning toy guns is ridiculous, isn't it? Not so fast.
In Michigan, toy guns have apparently replaced the so-called assault rifle as the criminal's weapon of choice. Republican Senator Rick Jones explained, "People are taking imitation guns that look real, cutting off the orange end and then threatening people." But do criminal acts with toy mock-ups warrant a ban? Quite the contrary, it would seem a reason to further liberalize right-to-carry laws. Toy gun toting gangbangers will think twice before pointing airsoft pistols at people who might be sporting the genuine article.
Gun control advocates will argue that armed citizens prompt criminals to use real guns, escalating the danger. Yet criminals already have that option. So why do they choose toy guns? Modifying toy guns is cheaper than obtaining real ones, and using them carries a lesser sentence upon conviction.
If S.B. 779 becomes law, brandishing a modified toy gun would be punishable by up to 18 months in prison. Why only 18 months, and why aren't such offenders treated as armed criminals now? The perpetrator who misrepresents a toy gun as the real McCoy is selling the threat, not the gun. Since the intimidating affect is real to the victim, the threat is the same as if a real gun were used. And should the victim unlimber their own firearm and kill the perpetrator their act would be just as much self-defense as if the perpetrator's gun were genuine. What's more, the aggressor would be just as dead.
Such a law is ambiguous, too. Jacksonville, FL police killed a robber who confronted them with a modified toy gun. But San Jose, CA officers appear to have overreacted when faced with a toy gun. Regardless the situation, no one finds joy in wounding or killing another person. But does either shooting validate criminalizing the possession of a modified toy? In the first example the robber received exactly what he requested. Thinning the herd, it's called. Why shed tears on his behalf? In the second incident, officers perceived a danger. But the gun wasn't presented in a threatening manner. Why should the wounded man face charges?
Rather than criminalizing toy guns for lacking orange muzzles we should recognize violent behavior for what it is and treat it accordingly. The last thing we need is another impotent gun law.
When one person threatens another the real crime isn't the presence of a gun, whether genuine or imitation. The crime is the aggressor's attempt to gain advantage through the threat of bodily harm, or even death. The criminal is telling the victim that their right to life and property exists only at the criminal's discretion. Isn't that crime's true nature?
In Michigan, toy guns have apparently replaced the so-called assault rifle as the criminal's weapon of choice. Republican Senator Rick Jones explained, "People are taking imitation guns that look real, cutting off the orange end and then threatening people." But do criminal acts with toy mock-ups warrant a ban? Quite the contrary, it would seem a reason to further liberalize right-to-carry laws. Toy gun toting gangbangers will think twice before pointing airsoft pistols at people who might be sporting the genuine article.
Gun control advocates will argue that armed citizens prompt criminals to use real guns, escalating the danger. Yet criminals already have that option. So why do they choose toy guns? Modifying toy guns is cheaper than obtaining real ones, and using them carries a lesser sentence upon conviction.
If S.B. 779 becomes law, brandishing a modified toy gun would be punishable by up to 18 months in prison. Why only 18 months, and why aren't such offenders treated as armed criminals now? The perpetrator who misrepresents a toy gun as the real McCoy is selling the threat, not the gun. Since the intimidating affect is real to the victim, the threat is the same as if a real gun were used. And should the victim unlimber their own firearm and kill the perpetrator their act would be just as much self-defense as if the perpetrator's gun were genuine. What's more, the aggressor would be just as dead.
Such a law is ambiguous, too. Jacksonville, FL police killed a robber who confronted them with a modified toy gun. But San Jose, CA officers appear to have overreacted when faced with a toy gun. Regardless the situation, no one finds joy in wounding or killing another person. But does either shooting validate criminalizing the possession of a modified toy? In the first example the robber received exactly what he requested. Thinning the herd, it's called. Why shed tears on his behalf? In the second incident, officers perceived a danger. But the gun wasn't presented in a threatening manner. Why should the wounded man face charges?
Rather than criminalizing toy guns for lacking orange muzzles we should recognize violent behavior for what it is and treat it accordingly. The last thing we need is another impotent gun law.
When one person threatens another the real crime isn't the presence of a gun, whether genuine or imitation. The crime is the aggressor's attempt to gain advantage through the threat of bodily harm, or even death. The criminal is telling the victim that their right to life and property exists only at the criminal's discretion. Isn't that crime's true nature?
Sunday, July 10, 2011
Outraged or shocked at Casey Anthony verdict? Think again!
Social media is abuzz with condemnations for Casey Anthony. Celebrities are tweeting their outrage while media pundits from Joy Behar to Bill O’Reilly air their displeasure with the Anthony verdict. The court of public opinion had Anthony convicted and all but executed. Anger toward Casey Anthony united this country like nothing since Pearl Harbor. How could the jury disagree with the majority? But disagree they did.
The prosecution couldn’t produce sufficient evidence to erase the jury’s reasonable doubt about how Caylee Anthony died, or at whose hand. So Casey will go free, in complete agreement with America’s judicial system.
We the people empower the State to execute offending citizens, or imprison them for life. To balance that power, the State must bear the burden of establishing guilt. Were accusation, or public opinion, the primary evidence for determining a person's guilt the right to life, our most basic liberty, wouldn't exist. A State-induced, mob mentality would serve America no better than it did Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, or Islamic caliphates.
Yet the calls for Casey Anthony’s head are myriad. From Twitter to Facebook the protests rage, virtual vigils are held, and Casey Anthony is strapped into an imaginary electric chair. She knows whether or not she killed her daughter. But the State didn’t prove her guilt to the jury’s satisfaction. So Casey will be freed. There is no appeal, no re-trail. She cannot be “subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.”
I didn’t follow the Casey Anthony trial. I think publicly airing criminal proceedings cheapens our courts and transforms them into quasi-reality dog and pony shows. Courts are serious, not a judicial version of American Idol. Their purpose is to try the charged and determine guilt or innocence to the greatest degree possible within an imperfect, human system. Most of the time they work. Sometimes they fail. That’s life; get over it. When courts become public entertainment they’re no longer tools of justice and tranquility, but of tyranny.
Nothing in Casey Anthony’s acquittal indicates she is guiltless. Casey prefers partying to parenting. She’s a maternal nightmare, similar to Susan Smith and Andrea Yates, and exceeds the Octomom for irresponsibility. She’s no matron of motherhood. But for many of Anthony’s detractors, condemning her for considering Caylee an inconvenience is somewhat hypocritical. Why is a child’s death, for the sake of convenience, considered evil only when it offends the public?
More than a million babies die for the sake of their mother’s convenience every year. Had Casey Anthony aborted Caylee she would’ve been a heroine to the pro-abortion activist. The only difference between Casey Anthony’s alleged crime and an aborted pregnancy is the timing. The underlying attitude is the same. At least Caylee’s accused killer stood trial. Where’s the media, celebrity, and public outrage for the unknown babies sacrificed to convenience in abortion clinics every day?
Another interesting twist on the Anthony verdict is the eagerness with which her detractors want her punished. The nation is angry at Casey Anthony. Therefore, she should fry like scrambled eggs. But the condemnations contradict the normal attitudes our social superiors have towards accused, and even convicted, murderers.
Many of Casey’s harshest critics are altogether opposed to capital punishment. When an accused murderer is convicted, activists demand tolerance regardless of either the perpetrator’s brutality or prior record. Social activists excuse duly convicted murderers as products of an unjust society. They piously remind those of us in the great unwashed about the danger of executing an innocent person, even when the condemned has been tried and found as guilty as John Dillinger.
Those voices are quiet in the Casey Anthony aftermath. Or, they have joined the self-righteous calls for Casey’s guilt and execution. And they hold this opinion about someone who was tried and exonerated in criminal court? It's a double standard that defies all reason.
Blatant inconsistencies are evident in the public's reaction to Casey Anthony acquittal. The State didn’t convince a jury of Casey’s guilt, meaning she's innocent. Calling for her head is an affront to our fundamental liberty. Abortion activists believe pregnancies represent an inconvenience to women. Yet they're angry toward Casey Anthony for, allegedly, considering Caylee a drain on her lifestyle. And “open-minded” opponents of executing duly convicted murderers are convinced that an exonerated defendant should bite the dust.
The nation's reaction to Casey Anthony's exoneration confirms that a lack of consistency is the only constant in contemporary public discourse.
The prosecution couldn’t produce sufficient evidence to erase the jury’s reasonable doubt about how Caylee Anthony died, or at whose hand. So Casey will go free, in complete agreement with America’s judicial system.
We the people empower the State to execute offending citizens, or imprison them for life. To balance that power, the State must bear the burden of establishing guilt. Were accusation, or public opinion, the primary evidence for determining a person's guilt the right to life, our most basic liberty, wouldn't exist. A State-induced, mob mentality would serve America no better than it did Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, or Islamic caliphates.
Yet the calls for Casey Anthony’s head are myriad. From Twitter to Facebook the protests rage, virtual vigils are held, and Casey Anthony is strapped into an imaginary electric chair. She knows whether or not she killed her daughter. But the State didn’t prove her guilt to the jury’s satisfaction. So Casey will be freed. There is no appeal, no re-trail. She cannot be “subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.”
I didn’t follow the Casey Anthony trial. I think publicly airing criminal proceedings cheapens our courts and transforms them into quasi-reality dog and pony shows. Courts are serious, not a judicial version of American Idol. Their purpose is to try the charged and determine guilt or innocence to the greatest degree possible within an imperfect, human system. Most of the time they work. Sometimes they fail. That’s life; get over it. When courts become public entertainment they’re no longer tools of justice and tranquility, but of tyranny.
Nothing in Casey Anthony’s acquittal indicates she is guiltless. Casey prefers partying to parenting. She’s a maternal nightmare, similar to Susan Smith and Andrea Yates, and exceeds the Octomom for irresponsibility. She’s no matron of motherhood. But for many of Anthony’s detractors, condemning her for considering Caylee an inconvenience is somewhat hypocritical. Why is a child’s death, for the sake of convenience, considered evil only when it offends the public?
More than a million babies die for the sake of their mother’s convenience every year. Had Casey Anthony aborted Caylee she would’ve been a heroine to the pro-abortion activist. The only difference between Casey Anthony’s alleged crime and an aborted pregnancy is the timing. The underlying attitude is the same. At least Caylee’s accused killer stood trial. Where’s the media, celebrity, and public outrage for the unknown babies sacrificed to convenience in abortion clinics every day?
Another interesting twist on the Anthony verdict is the eagerness with which her detractors want her punished. The nation is angry at Casey Anthony. Therefore, she should fry like scrambled eggs. But the condemnations contradict the normal attitudes our social superiors have towards accused, and even convicted, murderers.
Many of Casey’s harshest critics are altogether opposed to capital punishment. When an accused murderer is convicted, activists demand tolerance regardless of either the perpetrator’s brutality or prior record. Social activists excuse duly convicted murderers as products of an unjust society. They piously remind those of us in the great unwashed about the danger of executing an innocent person, even when the condemned has been tried and found as guilty as John Dillinger.
Those voices are quiet in the Casey Anthony aftermath. Or, they have joined the self-righteous calls for Casey’s guilt and execution. And they hold this opinion about someone who was tried and exonerated in criminal court? It's a double standard that defies all reason.
Blatant inconsistencies are evident in the public's reaction to Casey Anthony acquittal. The State didn’t convince a jury of Casey’s guilt, meaning she's innocent. Calling for her head is an affront to our fundamental liberty. Abortion activists believe pregnancies represent an inconvenience to women. Yet they're angry toward Casey Anthony for, allegedly, considering Caylee a drain on her lifestyle. And “open-minded” opponents of executing duly convicted murderers are convinced that an exonerated defendant should bite the dust.
The nation's reaction to Casey Anthony's exoneration confirms that a lack of consistency is the only constant in contemporary public discourse.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Elena Kagan’s first vote was both baffling and predictable
Once Elena Kagan was confirmed to the Supreme Court it was certain that she would, at some point, cast a vote or render an opinion. It sort of goes with the territory. Of near equal certainty was that her initial ruling would embody everything objectionable and inexplicable about the Supreme Court, judges, lawyers and the legal system in general. Well, Justice Kagan has cast that first vote, to little fanfare I might add. In so doing she proved that my confidence in her ability to baffle was justified.
Granted, Kagan’s first decision wasn’t a thorough legal dissertation. It was simply a recorded vote in support of a losing opinion. However, she did confirm what conservatives expected from Elena Kagan. She voted to stay the execution of a convicted murderer, uphold a Ninth Circuit Court decision and support a lower judge’s ruling that questioned the safety of a lethal injection drug.
For a known Regressive jurist to coddle convicted murderers and side with the Ninth “Circus” is completely predictable. Understandable no, but completely predictable. But to question the safety of a lethal drug? Maybe I’m unclear on the concept. It just seems logical that a drug administered to fulfill a condemned prisoner’s death sentence would be, by necessity, unsafe. If the drug were safe, it would have difficulty achieving its stated purpose, now wouldn’t it? God help us, what has happened to our brains! Educated jurists speculating on whether or not lethal drugs are safe for their intended use is a sure sign our system has abandoned all sanity and common sense.
What’s next? Warning labels on sodium thiopental? We have labels on other drugs, most of which cause remedies to sound worse that the diseases they treat. I can almost hear the disclaimer now.
Are you suffering from violent anti-social outbursts that culminate in shooting, stabbing, strangling, or dismembering? One drug, Executus, has been proven to alleviate recurrences of these behavioral abnormalities. Executus is suitable only for patients professionally diagnosed with Chronic Criminalitis, especially Premeditated Murderosis. Diminished breathing and pulse rate accompanied by low or non-existent blood pressure are common among users of Executus. Some users may experience undesirable side affects, including partial paralysis, anxiety, depression and signs of panic. These symptoms are always temporary. If signs of life persist, stop taking Executus at once and contact your nearest ACLU chapter.
Give me a break! How many times must capital punishment be dissected before people like Elena Kagan are no longer trusted with judicial authority?
The Eighth Amendment prohibits government from dispensing “cruel and unusual punishments.” Not only is that proper, it’s wholly compatible with our cultural values. No one wants to brutally torture convicted murderers to achieve vengeance, satisfy bloodlust, or simply for hoots, regardless of how heinous the condemned treated their victims. There’s no burgeoning movement--not even among the most ardent death penalty supporters--to reintroduce crucifixion, iron maidens, burning at the stake, or drawing and quartering as practicable forms of capital punishment. But death sentences aren’t the antithesis of our Eighth Amendment protections, as evidenced by the fact that capital punishment was routinely used when the Constitution was debated and ratified.
Speculating on the safety of sodium thiopental may sound nuanced, reasoned and deeply thoughtful in circles where common sense is considered an archaic relic of our ignorant heritage. Such reasoning may gain its advocate a favored seat among the intelligentsia, for whom dismissing traditionally proven solutions is a sign of superior knowledge. But it smacks of short-sighted foolishness to me, a thorough waste of time, effort and discourse.
Elena Kagan carried a warning label that foretold her voting tendency. However, like the warning labels on prescription drugs, we tend to ignore a prospective jurist’s precedents, positions and opinions. Thus we make perplexing and painful mistakes like Kagan, mistakes that last a lifetime.
This column first appeared on the American Thinker.
Granted, Kagan’s first decision wasn’t a thorough legal dissertation. It was simply a recorded vote in support of a losing opinion. However, she did confirm what conservatives expected from Elena Kagan. She voted to stay the execution of a convicted murderer, uphold a Ninth Circuit Court decision and support a lower judge’s ruling that questioned the safety of a lethal injection drug.
For a known Regressive jurist to coddle convicted murderers and side with the Ninth “Circus” is completely predictable. Understandable no, but completely predictable. But to question the safety of a lethal drug? Maybe I’m unclear on the concept. It just seems logical that a drug administered to fulfill a condemned prisoner’s death sentence would be, by necessity, unsafe. If the drug were safe, it would have difficulty achieving its stated purpose, now wouldn’t it? God help us, what has happened to our brains! Educated jurists speculating on whether or not lethal drugs are safe for their intended use is a sure sign our system has abandoned all sanity and common sense.
What’s next? Warning labels on sodium thiopental? We have labels on other drugs, most of which cause remedies to sound worse that the diseases they treat. I can almost hear the disclaimer now.
Are you suffering from violent anti-social outbursts that culminate in shooting, stabbing, strangling, or dismembering? One drug, Executus, has been proven to alleviate recurrences of these behavioral abnormalities. Executus is suitable only for patients professionally diagnosed with Chronic Criminalitis, especially Premeditated Murderosis. Diminished breathing and pulse rate accompanied by low or non-existent blood pressure are common among users of Executus. Some users may experience undesirable side affects, including partial paralysis, anxiety, depression and signs of panic. These symptoms are always temporary. If signs of life persist, stop taking Executus at once and contact your nearest ACLU chapter.
Give me a break! How many times must capital punishment be dissected before people like Elena Kagan are no longer trusted with judicial authority?
The Eighth Amendment prohibits government from dispensing “cruel and unusual punishments.” Not only is that proper, it’s wholly compatible with our cultural values. No one wants to brutally torture convicted murderers to achieve vengeance, satisfy bloodlust, or simply for hoots, regardless of how heinous the condemned treated their victims. There’s no burgeoning movement--not even among the most ardent death penalty supporters--to reintroduce crucifixion, iron maidens, burning at the stake, or drawing and quartering as practicable forms of capital punishment. But death sentences aren’t the antithesis of our Eighth Amendment protections, as evidenced by the fact that capital punishment was routinely used when the Constitution was debated and ratified.
Speculating on the safety of sodium thiopental may sound nuanced, reasoned and deeply thoughtful in circles where common sense is considered an archaic relic of our ignorant heritage. Such reasoning may gain its advocate a favored seat among the intelligentsia, for whom dismissing traditionally proven solutions is a sign of superior knowledge. But it smacks of short-sighted foolishness to me, a thorough waste of time, effort and discourse.
Elena Kagan carried a warning label that foretold her voting tendency. However, like the warning labels on prescription drugs, we tend to ignore a prospective jurist’s precedents, positions and opinions. Thus we make perplexing and painful mistakes like Kagan, mistakes that last a lifetime.
This column first appeared on the American Thinker.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Illegal aliens naturally fear police
One of the prime arguments employed to promote amnesty for illegal aliens is the alien’s own fear of police. Amnesty supporters, such as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), claim that illegal aliens fail to report crimes for fear they will be deported. A case in Charlotte, NC seemingly bolsters that argument.
A Charlotte-Mecklenburg police officer stopped a young woman for an alleged traffic violation. Her boyfriend, Abel Moreno, was a passenger and an illegal alien. During the stop the officer groped the young lady. Moreno intervened, exactly as he or anyone else should’ve done. Now he’s in jail awaiting possible deportation.
Does this prove the pro-amnesty argument, that illegal aliens are expelled for reporting crimes committed against them? Not at all. In fact, that premise is based on a faulty assumption. If Moreno is deported it won’t be for blowing the whistle on the bad cop, who’s in jail with his own legal troubles. Moreno will be deported because he violated US immigration laws. The fact that he reported the officer’s misconduct does not make his own actions legal.
No doubt the SPLC is correct in one aspect, illegal aliens aren’t likely to report all of the crimes committed against them. That is the nature of lawbreakers; they tend to avoid contact with law enforcement with the same urgency that Christians once avoided Nero’s garden parties. And this quality isn’t confined only to people who violate immigration laws; it’s common to perpetrators of all unlawful behavior.
Suppose a drug dealer returned home to find the house burglarized. It might be better to deal with the situation alone than to have investigators nosing around in the closets. The victimized dealer’s stash could be uncovered. If the dealer chooses to call the police and the cache is discovered the ensuing arrest won’t result from having reported the crime; it will arise from the dealer’s own violation of the law.
Prostitutes, likewise, endure crimes rather than invite inquiry. “Working girls” conceal robberies, assaults and even rapes. Suppose a client paid his escort with a punch in the nose rather than cash. If the prostitute reports the crime she knows her own illegal activities will be exposed, if you’ll pardon the pun. Her prostitution, not having reported the assault, has put her at odds with law enforcement.
The same principle applies to immigrants. Illegal aliens aren’t prosecuted or deported for filing crime reports. But the justifiable decision to report crimes committed against them doesn’t validate the alien’s earlier decision to ignore immigration laws. The knowledge of their own illegality motivates aliens to avoid contact that could expose their status. The fault doesn’t lie in an unjust society, cultural or racial bias, nativism, or any other sensationalistic charge routinely trotted out by pro-amnesty advocates. It is simply a characteristic of the outlaw.
Must illegal aliens then suffer silently so to avoid deportation? Not necessarily. Prosecutors routinely cut deals with suspects to provide state’s evidence in more serious cases. Plea bargains are a viable option for aliens like Abel Moreno, if their only crime is illegal immigration and their foremost desire is to become American citizens. For aliens who would game the system and bolster their legal status with false crime reports and perjury, immediate deportation is the perfect remedy.
More than sufficient reason exists to hold illegal aliens accountable for violating our borders. No reason exists to allow organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center to substitute mindless, racial dogma for border enforcement policies.
Aliens aren’t deported because they report crimes committed against them. Aliens are deported because their own immigration choice placed them at odds with the law. Let the responsibility rest where it belongs.
A Charlotte-Mecklenburg police officer stopped a young woman for an alleged traffic violation. Her boyfriend, Abel Moreno, was a passenger and an illegal alien. During the stop the officer groped the young lady. Moreno intervened, exactly as he or anyone else should’ve done. Now he’s in jail awaiting possible deportation.
Does this prove the pro-amnesty argument, that illegal aliens are expelled for reporting crimes committed against them? Not at all. In fact, that premise is based on a faulty assumption. If Moreno is deported it won’t be for blowing the whistle on the bad cop, who’s in jail with his own legal troubles. Moreno will be deported because he violated US immigration laws. The fact that he reported the officer’s misconduct does not make his own actions legal.
No doubt the SPLC is correct in one aspect, illegal aliens aren’t likely to report all of the crimes committed against them. That is the nature of lawbreakers; they tend to avoid contact with law enforcement with the same urgency that Christians once avoided Nero’s garden parties. And this quality isn’t confined only to people who violate immigration laws; it’s common to perpetrators of all unlawful behavior.
Suppose a drug dealer returned home to find the house burglarized. It might be better to deal with the situation alone than to have investigators nosing around in the closets. The victimized dealer’s stash could be uncovered. If the dealer chooses to call the police and the cache is discovered the ensuing arrest won’t result from having reported the crime; it will arise from the dealer’s own violation of the law.
Prostitutes, likewise, endure crimes rather than invite inquiry. “Working girls” conceal robberies, assaults and even rapes. Suppose a client paid his escort with a punch in the nose rather than cash. If the prostitute reports the crime she knows her own illegal activities will be exposed, if you’ll pardon the pun. Her prostitution, not having reported the assault, has put her at odds with law enforcement.
The same principle applies to immigrants. Illegal aliens aren’t prosecuted or deported for filing crime reports. But the justifiable decision to report crimes committed against them doesn’t validate the alien’s earlier decision to ignore immigration laws. The knowledge of their own illegality motivates aliens to avoid contact that could expose their status. The fault doesn’t lie in an unjust society, cultural or racial bias, nativism, or any other sensationalistic charge routinely trotted out by pro-amnesty advocates. It is simply a characteristic of the outlaw.
Must illegal aliens then suffer silently so to avoid deportation? Not necessarily. Prosecutors routinely cut deals with suspects to provide state’s evidence in more serious cases. Plea bargains are a viable option for aliens like Abel Moreno, if their only crime is illegal immigration and their foremost desire is to become American citizens. For aliens who would game the system and bolster their legal status with false crime reports and perjury, immediate deportation is the perfect remedy.
More than sufficient reason exists to hold illegal aliens accountable for violating our borders. No reason exists to allow organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center to substitute mindless, racial dogma for border enforcement policies.
Aliens aren’t deported because they report crimes committed against them. Aliens are deported because their own immigration choice placed them at odds with the law. Let the responsibility rest where it belongs.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Welcome your new neighbors
Roll out the welcome wagon; some new faces might soon move into your neighborhood. If you’re going to help these folks settle in--you know, show them some real down home hospitality--you should know something about them. Fortunately, I’m here to handle the introductions.
Meet John Montgomery. He is a convicted first-degree rapist sentenced to life in prison for having his way with a 15-year old girl. The rape occurred while he was on the lam, having escaped from a Guilford County (NC) prison where he was serving two years for breaking and entering and larceny. Let’s just say that John is no stranger to the slammer.
Be fair; don’t judge John in haste. Montgomery hasn’t been the worst of the worst behind bars. His only infractions, aside from the aforementioned escape, are quitting a community based program, weapon possession and creating an offensive condition. That last one is a bit unnerving. How bad does a person have to be to create an offensive condition inside a prison?
Let’s face it; John Montgomery is a sweetheart. You’re going to love him. I’ll bet you can hardly wait to see his moving van in the driveway next door?
Perhaps you would prefer Alford Jones? You might not have to worry about him raping your daughter. But you will have to worry about him killing her. Alford is a first-degree murderer. He killed William Turner with a shotgun blast to the chest on January 6, 1975 and has been a guest of the state ever since.
Jones is industrious; he’s been a busy man while in stir. Four times he has been cited for substance possession. And that’s the good news. He’s also committed an undefined violation of North Carolina law, been charged for fighting and has assaulted a fellow inmate with sexual intent. It’s doubtful that Alford is housed in the female correctional facility. So, like I said, the wife or daughter can sunbathe in the backyard with a care. You men might want to take notice, however. And he might just kill the whole lot of you.
Andrew Carter is a first-degree murderer who strangled his victim. But that’s not all; he can give you the best of both worlds. He’s two for the price of one, as it were. Andrew sexually molested his victim, too. Whether it was before or after the strangulation isn’t specified. Does it really matter? Maybe. But only in whether his scorecard reads simply homicidal maniac or includes necrophiliac, too.
Carter has also been busy behind bars. He has stolen from other inmates and been caught fighting twice. Also credited to Andrew is one count of provoking an assault and one count of making a verbal threat. Your new neighbor could be a big-mouthed, murdering pervert with an axe to grind who gets his jollies at the morgue. I’ll send him over for a get-to-know-you dinner.
The mild-mannered Perry Omega was convicted only of second-degree rape. Apparently, he entered the home where his victim and her children were sleeping. The victim awoke to find Perry standing over her. When she tried to run he knocked her down and raped her, at knifepoint, multiple times. Sounds sort of premeditated to me. But what do I know? I’m neither a lawyer nor a district attorney. Whatever the charge, he was once on death row.
Omega isn’t boring; you have to give him that. He has committed 18 infractions since he entered prison in 1977. Fighting, verbalizing threats, gambling, weapons, disobeying orders, profane language, general laziness, Perry Omega has tried it all. The party season is upon us. Don’t you know Perry would put the “festive” your festivities?
James Pone is only a second-degree murderer, meaning he intended only to rob taxi driver Neil Purdie in 1978. Pone really didn’t mean to hit Purdie in the head or shoot him in the chest. And I know Pone didn’t mean to leave the hapless cabbie to die in a pool of his own blood.
Pone hasn’t wasted his time in the big house, either. His infractions include fighting, gambling, interfering with prison staff, theft and what might be described as loan sharking. Well, he’s no worse than Bernie Madoff. Why waste his talents? When he’s released he can manage mortgage loans for Fannie Mae.
How about Willie Womble? Womble is surely a hard luck story. No doubt he was wrongly convicted and the shooting that put him in prison for “life” was an accident. Womble was jailed for the 1975 killing of Roy Bullock, who was shot once in the chest and twice in the mouth. Wow, three accidents occurring simultaneously. What are the odds? Talk about your bad luck. And that’s not the only trial Womble experienced. The robbery that was underway at the time of Bullock’s killing must’ve been an accident, too.
Misfortune followed Willie right through the prison gate. Since his incarceration he has been the innocent bystander to riots, fights and assaults. He was also unfortunate enough to have a Class B offense committed in his presence. Class B offenses run the gamut from drugs and property damage to sexual matters, assaults, weapons and arson. Talk about being born under an unlucky star. You’ll help Willie change his destiny, won’t you?
William Baggett, here’s a man who certainly deserves a third chance. Baggett is serving a life sentence for the premeditated murder of James Williams in 1976. But he began his prison career in 1968. That’s why he deserves a third chance; his second chance is all used up.
One thing is for sure. Baggett hasn’t wasted his time in prison. He has been involved in all sorts of extracurricular activity. Unauthorized boxing is his preferred hobby. Seven times he has been involved in some type of fight or assault. Other people’s property means nothing to him, either. And Baggett has also been cited for sexual acts. Oh well, everyone needs a pastime.
If you want your skin to crawl take a look at Willard Warren. This guy has “axe murderer” written all over his face. He’s got a leg up on it anyway. Warren is a former death row inmate who went to prison in 1976 for the murder of Leo Clark. Now, instead of enjoying the fruits of his labor, he could settle on a street near you. And don’t worry about him losing the nerve to kill. He’s racked up quite a list of substance possession violations while in jail. If any pesky qualities--say, conscience, compassion, or remorse--remain in Willard he can dull them pretty quick.
James Alford committed the premeditated rape and robbery of a woman in Winston-Salem, NC more than 30 years ago. If he is released he will be a registered sex offender. In all fairness, Alford hasn’t been quite as notorious in prison as some of the other inmates we’ve met. He might make a quiet and peaceful neighbor. He might be easy to overlook, to forget. But somehow I don’t think Alford’s victim has forgotten the time she spent with him.
James Johnson is another sweetheart. Yes, he too is serving a “life” sentence that doesn’t mean life. What’s life anyway, especially to someone convicted of premeditated murder? James Farley Hall went to his everlasting calling thanks to James Johnson. Furthermore, Johnson is a former death row inmate. Don’t bother asking how a convicted murderer can go from death row to serving less than half of a “life” sentence. You’ll just make your head hurt. And you can’t hold the past against him. That would be judgmental, and we can’t have that it today’s society.
One thing is certain. Johnson couldn’t have earned early parole credits for his good behavior. He has committed twenty-four infractions since he took up residence at the Graybar Apartments. Johnson has possessed banned substances, started fights, been found with weapons and had a little sex on the side. Reformed? Yes sir! He’s all set to be the guest speaker at Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity Church.
Just to look at Porter Manley you might think he’s a likely candidate for a second chance. His prison picture looks like a nice, graying, friendly sort of man. Maybe he’s just a little too friendly, especially when he robs you. You see, it wasn’t enough for Porter to take his victim’s money; he had to take his victim’s physical favors, too. You guessed it; Porter Manley is a rapist. In fact, his conviction was for rape and armed robbery. Just like Andrew Carter, Porter is his own two for one sale.
Since his incarceration he has tallied 11 prison infractions. Some are for substance possession. Some are for weapons violations. But most are for being a general malcontent. I guess, if you’re Porter Manley, you figure what can they do, put you in jail? If you have a loud, obnoxious neighbor on one side, Porter can provide you with a stereophonic experience.
Friends, if you think I’ve been far too harsh in my assessment of the men we’ve mentioned thus far, then I have a deal for you. Allow me to arrange your 17-year old princess’s prom date . . . with Kenneth Mathis. Mathis has been in the can since 1978, perhaps literally. He went to jail for forcing his victim, presumably a woman, into a wooded area where he proceeded to have a high old time. One problem, his “partner” wasn’t the least bit interested in Mathis. Therefore he was charged and convicted of first-degree rape, which proves that his wasn’t a heat of passion mistake.
Has Mathis reformed? Has prison rehabilitated him? Well, maybe, to a point. But not in a way that qualifies him for a job as scoutmaster. In April 1990, Mathis was cited for a sexual act. In June of 2000 he was again cited for a sexual act and a Class A offense, which could mean he kidnapped a fellow inmate or staff member or used a weapon to obtain said sex act. In December of 2005 he was reprimanded for assaulting an inmate with the intent of committing--can’t you guess?--a sexual act.
Let’s see, we have a convicted first-degree rapist who can’t keep his pants zipped in prison. Yeah, he’s reformed. He’s earned a new beginning. Now, what time will your little princess be ready for her date?
Faye Brown is in prison for the first-degree murder of a NC State Trooper following a bank robbery. She was discussed in a previous column so I’ll give her a break. I’m feeling generous at the moment.
John Martin, is he someone who deserves another opportunity? He was sentenced to life, yes. But his crime wasn’t premeditated, thus he was convicted of second-degree rape. The more lenient among us could consider Martin worthy of a break. After all, he didn’t plan the assault. Of course, planned or not the victim was just as raped as if Martin had stalked her all the way home from the supermarket. And the fact that he was 24 or 25-years old at the time proves that he understood what he was doing, premeditated or not.
It also seems that Martin has already used his second chance at freedom. In fact, he’s used his third chance. He got his second chance when he escaped from prison in 1995. The third opportunity came with his “unauthorized leave” in 2001. Frankly, I can only make an educated guess at the difference between an escape and an unauthorized leave. But in either case Mr. Martin wasn’t where he was supposed to be. Finally, 13 of his 20 prison infractions have been for substance possession.
It seems to me that John Martin has spent the last thirty-two years right where he belongs. But you’ll have to decide that for yourself. Feeling benevolent? If so, and if there’s a foreclosure in your neighborhood, put me in touch with your realtor. I’ll pass his number along to John.
Charles Lynch appears to be a different story. He doesn’t seem quite as nefarious as the other murderers and rapists whose “life” sentences are fulfilled somewhere short of life. His crime was second degree burglary. During his time in prison Lynch has received only three infractions, and none of those appear serious. Surely this man is a likely neighbor.
Don’t let your heart bleed for Chuck just yet. Let’s do the Paul Harvey routine. You know, the rest of the story? Lynch’s burglary conviction involved two counts, not just one. He also assaulted his victim with the intent to commit rape. He broke into the home alright, but the female victim wasn’t there. So Lynch, being a patient man, made himself comfortable and waited for her. He had also broken into another home and stolen a necklace. If that isn’t enough, he was suspected of nine other assaults.
Having a guy like Charles Lynch move in next door can drive property values down faster than a Barney Frank sub-prime lending program.
Here’s a guy that you’ll certainly want to take home to momma. Steven C. Wilson received “life” in prison for kidnapping and first-degree rape. It was proven, to the satisfaction of a jury, that Wilson made a conscious choice to abduct his victim and force that person into sexual activity. Oh, I left out one little detail; the victim was a nine-year old girl. Nine years old! Not only is Wilson a kidnapper and rapist, he’s a child molester to boot. Now that’s neighborly, don’t you think?
To confirm Wilson’s qualifications as a good houseguest, consider what he has been up to in the clink. Wilson was involved in 18 prison infractions between 1978 and 2001. Seven of those involved weapons, fighting or otherwise provoking contentious situations. Of his other 11 violations, one involved an offensive condition and another was for assaulting an inmate with sexual intent. Three more were for attempted Class B offenses.
According to the Inmate Booklet provided by the NC Division of Prisons, pages 11 and 12, a Class B offense can mean several things. Combining Wilson’s history with sexual matters and the fact that section B6 in the prison handbook defines a Class B offense as committing, inciting, or soliciting any sexual activity, you have to assume the worst.
Steven Wilson is a kidnapping, raping, child molesting pervert. And he could be moved in next door in time for Thanksgiving. Set an extra place at the table. After dinner he can watch the kids while you ladies chat and the guys watch football. Good deal!
Don’t let this next jewel of humanity fool you. Raymond Dull is anything but obtuse. You could say he’s very exciting. Ray has seen a lot of things in his life, like 33 years in the tank and the business side of death row. He’s witnessed the fear in a woman’s eyes as he kidnaps her at knifepoint and forces her to drive to an unknown destination. He’s seen that face change from fear to the blank realization of the inevitable when he holds that knife against her skin and does God knows what.
Do you feel sorry for Raymond? Do you empathize with his plight? Okay, let him bunk with your wife until he finds a place of his own.
Raymond Dull wasn’t some teenager who got a little carried away with his date in the back seat of Pop’s LTD. He was a man who committed an intentional, violent and premeditated sexual crime. Will he do it again? Who knows? He might come out of prison and be the perfect neighbor. But he might come out of prison and rape someone you love. And he might take vengeance on the woman who reported the assault that landed him in the jug for half his life. In prison he won’t be raping anyone. Well, at least not our wives, daughters or girlfriends.
Now, old Dewey Gray, he’s another case entirely. Old Dewey hasn’t seen unfiltered daylight since 1976. And you know what? He earned every last, stinking minute of it. Take a look at what Young Dewey was up to and see if you think Old Dewey is right where he belongs.
One of Gray’s charges was “AWDWWITKISI”. No, that’s not like “LOL”, “ROFLMAO”, or some other teenage text messaging shorthand. It means Dewey committed assault with a deadly weapon with the intent to kill and inflicted a serious injury. Oh yeah, he was also convicted of first-degree burglary and first-degree rape. Maybe I’m weird, but that doesn’t make me “ROFLMAO”.
Dewey Gray went to his victim’s home armed with a gun and a knife. He forced his way into the victim’s home. He dragged her outside where her raped her, stabbed her and beat her half to death. At least Raymond Dull had the decency to take his victim somewhere private. Dewey Gray took his victim outside where all the neighbors could watch. Not only is he a creep, he’s stupid to boot.
Dewey has shown no signs of changing his attitude while in prison. He’s earned recognition for verbalizing threats, creating offensive conditions and for unauthorized leave. Overall, he’s been a disruptive, disrespectful, uncooperative agitator with a penchant for raping and assaulting at will. Okay, so he’s qualified to run for Congress when he’s released.
At least Cecil Morrison didn’t plan his sexual assault. At least he wasn’t convicted of premeditated rape, like so many of his possible parole mates were. It’s grasping at straws, but maybe he’s simply depraved, not someone who worked hard at perfecting depravity. He’s depraved, though; make no mistake about that.
Morrison began serving his life sentence for second-degree rape in 1977. What sent him to jail? Nothing much. He only abducted his victim, forced her into the woods and raped her at knifepoint, that’s all. Sound familiar? Oh, did I mention that the victim was a 12-year old girl whose provocation was walking home from school? Twelve years old; at least that’s three years better than Steven Wilson.
Not being a man to waste time, Cecil has made the most of his incarceration. Four times he’s been cited for provoking an assault. Twice he’s been caught stealing and twice he’s committed Class B offenses, which as previously discussed can be anything from inhaling intoxicating vapors to tampering with locks to sexual misconduct. Considering the crime that brought Morrison to this point in life don’t you think the Class B offense could be of a sexual nature? And I forgot to mention that he was a “Pre-Sentence Diagnostic.”
“Well, what’s a pre-sentence diagnostic?” you ask.
Glad you did. A pre-sentence diagnostic is an inmate who is committed to the Department of Corrections for an evaluation. You know, mental state, ability to stand trial, that sort of thing. Apparently, Morrison was found perfectly capable to stand trial for raping that little girl. So much for the “he didn’t know what he was doing” argument.
Last but not least, meet the guy who made it possible for you to meet each and every one of these fine, upstanding examples of civil behavior. Allow me to introduce Bobby Bowden. No, some FSU fans might want that Bobby Bowden thrown in jail these days. But this Bobby Bowden is everything that Bobby Bowden isn’t.
This Bobby Bowden began his criminal career with a conviction for common law robbery on February 26, 1973. He began his seven year sentence the same day. According to the NC Department of Corrections Offender Public Information website, Bowden’s projected and actual release date was one and the same, June 11, 1978. But somehow he found time to kill Larry Lovett and Normal Ehrhart in cold blood on August 7, 1975.
What does it even matter that such a discrepancy is possible? All that matters is that Bobby Bowden has argued that his sentence is complete and that he, along with everyone we’ve discussed, is ready to set up housekeeping on your cul-de-sac.
What a fine neighbor he will make. That is, as long as your idea of a fine neighbor is an antagonistic, foul-mouthed vandal. Bowden’s prison record includes them all. He damaged either state property or that of a fellow inmate in 2003. Bowden was caught with weapons in 1980 and 2003. He possessed unauthorized funds in 2005, which could’ve resulted from any sort of unseemly transaction. And during the first eight years of his murder sentence he cussed out everyone in sight and steadfastly refused to follow orders.
Let’s go to the scorecard. All told the North Carolina Department of Correction may soon unleash ten convicted rapists, seven of them first-degree rapists, on the general public. All ten, obviously, will have to register as sex offenders, which sheriff’s deputies will have about as much chance of monitoring as the Washington Nationals have of winning next year’s World Series. Five of those ten rapes involved kidnapping or otherwise abducting the victim and three of them involved the sexual assault of a minor.
Ten first-degree murderers will join them. One of those murderers was fleeing from a bank heist at the time of the killing. Two other murderers killed their victims while committing robberies. Another inmate, not content with a simple killing, committed murder in the course of both an armed robbery and a rape. Last but not least, one murderer sexually molested his victim. Whether it was pre or post-mortem isn’t clear. And who cares?
Most of these inmates had criminal records prior to their murder or rape convictions. And all of them have found trouble, although some offenses were relatively minor, while in prison. Barring unforeseen events these twenty men will be back on the street pretty soon. Like the Bachman Turner Overdrive song, “the boy’s are back in town.”
With the Holiday season fast approaching you’ll need to plan your parties and fill your guest lists. Look at it this way, politicians have done their part. They wrote the laws that could allow these violent convicts to leave prison. The least you can do is invite them to Christmas. You can decorate the tree with condoms and body bags.
Meet John Montgomery. He is a convicted first-degree rapist sentenced to life in prison for having his way with a 15-year old girl. The rape occurred while he was on the lam, having escaped from a Guilford County (NC) prison where he was serving two years for breaking and entering and larceny. Let’s just say that John is no stranger to the slammer.
Be fair; don’t judge John in haste. Montgomery hasn’t been the worst of the worst behind bars. His only infractions, aside from the aforementioned escape, are quitting a community based program, weapon possession and creating an offensive condition. That last one is a bit unnerving. How bad does a person have to be to create an offensive condition inside a prison?
Let’s face it; John Montgomery is a sweetheart. You’re going to love him. I’ll bet you can hardly wait to see his moving van in the driveway next door?
Perhaps you would prefer Alford Jones? You might not have to worry about him raping your daughter. But you will have to worry about him killing her. Alford is a first-degree murderer. He killed William Turner with a shotgun blast to the chest on January 6, 1975 and has been a guest of the state ever since.
Jones is industrious; he’s been a busy man while in stir. Four times he has been cited for substance possession. And that’s the good news. He’s also committed an undefined violation of North Carolina law, been charged for fighting and has assaulted a fellow inmate with sexual intent. It’s doubtful that Alford is housed in the female correctional facility. So, like I said, the wife or daughter can sunbathe in the backyard with a care. You men might want to take notice, however. And he might just kill the whole lot of you.
Andrew Carter is a first-degree murderer who strangled his victim. But that’s not all; he can give you the best of both worlds. He’s two for the price of one, as it were. Andrew sexually molested his victim, too. Whether it was before or after the strangulation isn’t specified. Does it really matter? Maybe. But only in whether his scorecard reads simply homicidal maniac or includes necrophiliac, too.
Carter has also been busy behind bars. He has stolen from other inmates and been caught fighting twice. Also credited to Andrew is one count of provoking an assault and one count of making a verbal threat. Your new neighbor could be a big-mouthed, murdering pervert with an axe to grind who gets his jollies at the morgue. I’ll send him over for a get-to-know-you dinner.
The mild-mannered Perry Omega was convicted only of second-degree rape. Apparently, he entered the home where his victim and her children were sleeping. The victim awoke to find Perry standing over her. When she tried to run he knocked her down and raped her, at knifepoint, multiple times. Sounds sort of premeditated to me. But what do I know? I’m neither a lawyer nor a district attorney. Whatever the charge, he was once on death row.
Omega isn’t boring; you have to give him that. He has committed 18 infractions since he entered prison in 1977. Fighting, verbalizing threats, gambling, weapons, disobeying orders, profane language, general laziness, Perry Omega has tried it all. The party season is upon us. Don’t you know Perry would put the “festive” your festivities?
James Pone is only a second-degree murderer, meaning he intended only to rob taxi driver Neil Purdie in 1978. Pone really didn’t mean to hit Purdie in the head or shoot him in the chest. And I know Pone didn’t mean to leave the hapless cabbie to die in a pool of his own blood.
Pone hasn’t wasted his time in the big house, either. His infractions include fighting, gambling, interfering with prison staff, theft and what might be described as loan sharking. Well, he’s no worse than Bernie Madoff. Why waste his talents? When he’s released he can manage mortgage loans for Fannie Mae.
How about Willie Womble? Womble is surely a hard luck story. No doubt he was wrongly convicted and the shooting that put him in prison for “life” was an accident. Womble was jailed for the 1975 killing of Roy Bullock, who was shot once in the chest and twice in the mouth. Wow, three accidents occurring simultaneously. What are the odds? Talk about your bad luck. And that’s not the only trial Womble experienced. The robbery that was underway at the time of Bullock’s killing must’ve been an accident, too.
Misfortune followed Willie right through the prison gate. Since his incarceration he has been the innocent bystander to riots, fights and assaults. He was also unfortunate enough to have a Class B offense committed in his presence. Class B offenses run the gamut from drugs and property damage to sexual matters, assaults, weapons and arson. Talk about being born under an unlucky star. You’ll help Willie change his destiny, won’t you?
William Baggett, here’s a man who certainly deserves a third chance. Baggett is serving a life sentence for the premeditated murder of James Williams in 1976. But he began his prison career in 1968. That’s why he deserves a third chance; his second chance is all used up.
One thing is for sure. Baggett hasn’t wasted his time in prison. He has been involved in all sorts of extracurricular activity. Unauthorized boxing is his preferred hobby. Seven times he has been involved in some type of fight or assault. Other people’s property means nothing to him, either. And Baggett has also been cited for sexual acts. Oh well, everyone needs a pastime.
If you want your skin to crawl take a look at Willard Warren. This guy has “axe murderer” written all over his face. He’s got a leg up on it anyway. Warren is a former death row inmate who went to prison in 1976 for the murder of Leo Clark. Now, instead of enjoying the fruits of his labor, he could settle on a street near you. And don’t worry about him losing the nerve to kill. He’s racked up quite a list of substance possession violations while in jail. If any pesky qualities--say, conscience, compassion, or remorse--remain in Willard he can dull them pretty quick.
James Alford committed the premeditated rape and robbery of a woman in Winston-Salem, NC more than 30 years ago. If he is released he will be a registered sex offender. In all fairness, Alford hasn’t been quite as notorious in prison as some of the other inmates we’ve met. He might make a quiet and peaceful neighbor. He might be easy to overlook, to forget. But somehow I don’t think Alford’s victim has forgotten the time she spent with him.
James Johnson is another sweetheart. Yes, he too is serving a “life” sentence that doesn’t mean life. What’s life anyway, especially to someone convicted of premeditated murder? James Farley Hall went to his everlasting calling thanks to James Johnson. Furthermore, Johnson is a former death row inmate. Don’t bother asking how a convicted murderer can go from death row to serving less than half of a “life” sentence. You’ll just make your head hurt. And you can’t hold the past against him. That would be judgmental, and we can’t have that it today’s society.
One thing is certain. Johnson couldn’t have earned early parole credits for his good behavior. He has committed twenty-four infractions since he took up residence at the Graybar Apartments. Johnson has possessed banned substances, started fights, been found with weapons and had a little sex on the side. Reformed? Yes sir! He’s all set to be the guest speaker at Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity Church.
Just to look at Porter Manley you might think he’s a likely candidate for a second chance. His prison picture looks like a nice, graying, friendly sort of man. Maybe he’s just a little too friendly, especially when he robs you. You see, it wasn’t enough for Porter to take his victim’s money; he had to take his victim’s physical favors, too. You guessed it; Porter Manley is a rapist. In fact, his conviction was for rape and armed robbery. Just like Andrew Carter, Porter is his own two for one sale.
Since his incarceration he has tallied 11 prison infractions. Some are for substance possession. Some are for weapons violations. But most are for being a general malcontent. I guess, if you’re Porter Manley, you figure what can they do, put you in jail? If you have a loud, obnoxious neighbor on one side, Porter can provide you with a stereophonic experience.
Friends, if you think I’ve been far too harsh in my assessment of the men we’ve mentioned thus far, then I have a deal for you. Allow me to arrange your 17-year old princess’s prom date . . . with Kenneth Mathis. Mathis has been in the can since 1978, perhaps literally. He went to jail for forcing his victim, presumably a woman, into a wooded area where he proceeded to have a high old time. One problem, his “partner” wasn’t the least bit interested in Mathis. Therefore he was charged and convicted of first-degree rape, which proves that his wasn’t a heat of passion mistake.
Has Mathis reformed? Has prison rehabilitated him? Well, maybe, to a point. But not in a way that qualifies him for a job as scoutmaster. In April 1990, Mathis was cited for a sexual act. In June of 2000 he was again cited for a sexual act and a Class A offense, which could mean he kidnapped a fellow inmate or staff member or used a weapon to obtain said sex act. In December of 2005 he was reprimanded for assaulting an inmate with the intent of committing--can’t you guess?--a sexual act.
Let’s see, we have a convicted first-degree rapist who can’t keep his pants zipped in prison. Yeah, he’s reformed. He’s earned a new beginning. Now, what time will your little princess be ready for her date?
Faye Brown is in prison for the first-degree murder of a NC State Trooper following a bank robbery. She was discussed in a previous column so I’ll give her a break. I’m feeling generous at the moment.
John Martin, is he someone who deserves another opportunity? He was sentenced to life, yes. But his crime wasn’t premeditated, thus he was convicted of second-degree rape. The more lenient among us could consider Martin worthy of a break. After all, he didn’t plan the assault. Of course, planned or not the victim was just as raped as if Martin had stalked her all the way home from the supermarket. And the fact that he was 24 or 25-years old at the time proves that he understood what he was doing, premeditated or not.
It also seems that Martin has already used his second chance at freedom. In fact, he’s used his third chance. He got his second chance when he escaped from prison in 1995. The third opportunity came with his “unauthorized leave” in 2001. Frankly, I can only make an educated guess at the difference between an escape and an unauthorized leave. But in either case Mr. Martin wasn’t where he was supposed to be. Finally, 13 of his 20 prison infractions have been for substance possession.
It seems to me that John Martin has spent the last thirty-two years right where he belongs. But you’ll have to decide that for yourself. Feeling benevolent? If so, and if there’s a foreclosure in your neighborhood, put me in touch with your realtor. I’ll pass his number along to John.
Charles Lynch appears to be a different story. He doesn’t seem quite as nefarious as the other murderers and rapists whose “life” sentences are fulfilled somewhere short of life. His crime was second degree burglary. During his time in prison Lynch has received only three infractions, and none of those appear serious. Surely this man is a likely neighbor.
Don’t let your heart bleed for Chuck just yet. Let’s do the Paul Harvey routine. You know, the rest of the story? Lynch’s burglary conviction involved two counts, not just one. He also assaulted his victim with the intent to commit rape. He broke into the home alright, but the female victim wasn’t there. So Lynch, being a patient man, made himself comfortable and waited for her. He had also broken into another home and stolen a necklace. If that isn’t enough, he was suspected of nine other assaults.
Having a guy like Charles Lynch move in next door can drive property values down faster than a Barney Frank sub-prime lending program.
Here’s a guy that you’ll certainly want to take home to momma. Steven C. Wilson received “life” in prison for kidnapping and first-degree rape. It was proven, to the satisfaction of a jury, that Wilson made a conscious choice to abduct his victim and force that person into sexual activity. Oh, I left out one little detail; the victim was a nine-year old girl. Nine years old! Not only is Wilson a kidnapper and rapist, he’s a child molester to boot. Now that’s neighborly, don’t you think?
To confirm Wilson’s qualifications as a good houseguest, consider what he has been up to in the clink. Wilson was involved in 18 prison infractions between 1978 and 2001. Seven of those involved weapons, fighting or otherwise provoking contentious situations. Of his other 11 violations, one involved an offensive condition and another was for assaulting an inmate with sexual intent. Three more were for attempted Class B offenses.
According to the Inmate Booklet provided by the NC Division of Prisons, pages 11 and 12, a Class B offense can mean several things. Combining Wilson’s history with sexual matters and the fact that section B6 in the prison handbook defines a Class B offense as committing, inciting, or soliciting any sexual activity, you have to assume the worst.
Steven Wilson is a kidnapping, raping, child molesting pervert. And he could be moved in next door in time for Thanksgiving. Set an extra place at the table. After dinner he can watch the kids while you ladies chat and the guys watch football. Good deal!
Don’t let this next jewel of humanity fool you. Raymond Dull is anything but obtuse. You could say he’s very exciting. Ray has seen a lot of things in his life, like 33 years in the tank and the business side of death row. He’s witnessed the fear in a woman’s eyes as he kidnaps her at knifepoint and forces her to drive to an unknown destination. He’s seen that face change from fear to the blank realization of the inevitable when he holds that knife against her skin and does God knows what.
Do you feel sorry for Raymond? Do you empathize with his plight? Okay, let him bunk with your wife until he finds a place of his own.
Raymond Dull wasn’t some teenager who got a little carried away with his date in the back seat of Pop’s LTD. He was a man who committed an intentional, violent and premeditated sexual crime. Will he do it again? Who knows? He might come out of prison and be the perfect neighbor. But he might come out of prison and rape someone you love. And he might take vengeance on the woman who reported the assault that landed him in the jug for half his life. In prison he won’t be raping anyone. Well, at least not our wives, daughters or girlfriends.
Now, old Dewey Gray, he’s another case entirely. Old Dewey hasn’t seen unfiltered daylight since 1976. And you know what? He earned every last, stinking minute of it. Take a look at what Young Dewey was up to and see if you think Old Dewey is right where he belongs.
One of Gray’s charges was “AWDWWITKISI”. No, that’s not like “LOL”, “ROFLMAO”, or some other teenage text messaging shorthand. It means Dewey committed assault with a deadly weapon with the intent to kill and inflicted a serious injury. Oh yeah, he was also convicted of first-degree burglary and first-degree rape. Maybe I’m weird, but that doesn’t make me “ROFLMAO”.
Dewey Gray went to his victim’s home armed with a gun and a knife. He forced his way into the victim’s home. He dragged her outside where her raped her, stabbed her and beat her half to death. At least Raymond Dull had the decency to take his victim somewhere private. Dewey Gray took his victim outside where all the neighbors could watch. Not only is he a creep, he’s stupid to boot.
Dewey has shown no signs of changing his attitude while in prison. He’s earned recognition for verbalizing threats, creating offensive conditions and for unauthorized leave. Overall, he’s been a disruptive, disrespectful, uncooperative agitator with a penchant for raping and assaulting at will. Okay, so he’s qualified to run for Congress when he’s released.
At least Cecil Morrison didn’t plan his sexual assault. At least he wasn’t convicted of premeditated rape, like so many of his possible parole mates were. It’s grasping at straws, but maybe he’s simply depraved, not someone who worked hard at perfecting depravity. He’s depraved, though; make no mistake about that.
Morrison began serving his life sentence for second-degree rape in 1977. What sent him to jail? Nothing much. He only abducted his victim, forced her into the woods and raped her at knifepoint, that’s all. Sound familiar? Oh, did I mention that the victim was a 12-year old girl whose provocation was walking home from school? Twelve years old; at least that’s three years better than Steven Wilson.
Not being a man to waste time, Cecil has made the most of his incarceration. Four times he’s been cited for provoking an assault. Twice he’s been caught stealing and twice he’s committed Class B offenses, which as previously discussed can be anything from inhaling intoxicating vapors to tampering with locks to sexual misconduct. Considering the crime that brought Morrison to this point in life don’t you think the Class B offense could be of a sexual nature? And I forgot to mention that he was a “Pre-Sentence Diagnostic.”
“Well, what’s a pre-sentence diagnostic?” you ask.
Glad you did. A pre-sentence diagnostic is an inmate who is committed to the Department of Corrections for an evaluation. You know, mental state, ability to stand trial, that sort of thing. Apparently, Morrison was found perfectly capable to stand trial for raping that little girl. So much for the “he didn’t know what he was doing” argument.
Last but not least, meet the guy who made it possible for you to meet each and every one of these fine, upstanding examples of civil behavior. Allow me to introduce Bobby Bowden. No, some FSU fans might want that Bobby Bowden thrown in jail these days. But this Bobby Bowden is everything that Bobby Bowden isn’t.
This Bobby Bowden began his criminal career with a conviction for common law robbery on February 26, 1973. He began his seven year sentence the same day. According to the NC Department of Corrections Offender Public Information website, Bowden’s projected and actual release date was one and the same, June 11, 1978. But somehow he found time to kill Larry Lovett and Normal Ehrhart in cold blood on August 7, 1975.
What does it even matter that such a discrepancy is possible? All that matters is that Bobby Bowden has argued that his sentence is complete and that he, along with everyone we’ve discussed, is ready to set up housekeeping on your cul-de-sac.
What a fine neighbor he will make. That is, as long as your idea of a fine neighbor is an antagonistic, foul-mouthed vandal. Bowden’s prison record includes them all. He damaged either state property or that of a fellow inmate in 2003. Bowden was caught with weapons in 1980 and 2003. He possessed unauthorized funds in 2005, which could’ve resulted from any sort of unseemly transaction. And during the first eight years of his murder sentence he cussed out everyone in sight and steadfastly refused to follow orders.
Let’s go to the scorecard. All told the North Carolina Department of Correction may soon unleash ten convicted rapists, seven of them first-degree rapists, on the general public. All ten, obviously, will have to register as sex offenders, which sheriff’s deputies will have about as much chance of monitoring as the Washington Nationals have of winning next year’s World Series. Five of those ten rapes involved kidnapping or otherwise abducting the victim and three of them involved the sexual assault of a minor.
Ten first-degree murderers will join them. One of those murderers was fleeing from a bank heist at the time of the killing. Two other murderers killed their victims while committing robberies. Another inmate, not content with a simple killing, committed murder in the course of both an armed robbery and a rape. Last but not least, one murderer sexually molested his victim. Whether it was pre or post-mortem isn’t clear. And who cares?
Most of these inmates had criminal records prior to their murder or rape convictions. And all of them have found trouble, although some offenses were relatively minor, while in prison. Barring unforeseen events these twenty men will be back on the street pretty soon. Like the Bachman Turner Overdrive song, “the boy’s are back in town.”
With the Holiday season fast approaching you’ll need to plan your parties and fill your guest lists. Look at it this way, politicians have done their part. They wrote the laws that could allow these violent convicts to leave prison. The least you can do is invite them to Christmas. You can decorate the tree with condoms and body bags.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Government fails a basic function, again
Ask people to name government’s basic function and you’ll get a multitude of answers. But ask people to name five basic functions of government and I’ll bet the farm that keeping violent criminals in prison will appear on nearly every list. So why is that so difficult for government to do?
Politicians can find money to build a theatre for Dolly Parton’s tenth cousin thrice removed. There are funds aplenty for tea pot museums, sports arenas, light rail systems and pork barrel vote buying. Laws are readily written to suck every expendable dime from your income, to steal your liberty, or to make it virtually impossible to dispose of your household garbage. Yet funds can’t be found and laws can’t be written to keep predatory vermin off the streets?
Get ready, here it comes again, if North Carolina releases twenty violent convicts as currently planned. A 35-year old sentencing law apparently defines life in prison as 80 years. Thus the twenty convicts--led by Bobby Bowden--think they have fulfilled their “life” sentence obligation.
Here’s an oddity; all twenty are still alive, meaning they haven’t served “life” in prison at all. Not a single one of those inmates has served even half of their 80-year “life” sentence. In fact, those 20 inmates owed the civil population 1600 combined years of prison time. Yet, if released as currently planned, they will have served only 644 total years. Somewhere, someone owes us 956 years in the jug.
There is an equitable solution. If politicians are unwilling to require violent offenders to do their time, perhaps those same politicians should do it for them. Obviously that’s a pipe dream, so we’re left to ponder where those missing years went.
Good conduct credits. That’s why a convicted murderer’s or rapist’s 80-year “life” sentence is neither 80 years nor life. However, I’ll bet that Larry Lovett and Normal Ehrhart don’t see their sentences reduced one day. You see, both men died on August 7, 1975 when the aforementioned Bobby Bowden, sans judge or jury, sentenced them to eternity without parole. No amount of good behavior will pull their bodies from the grave. Concern for Bowden’s eternal destiny is valid and admirable. Conversely, for government to have established laws that allow his release from prison is wholly irresponsible.
Now, back to this good conduct business. Even if Bowden isn’t the worst inmate in penal history he hasn’t been a member of the penitentiary scout troop either. Bowden has racked up 17 infractions since he hung out his shingle at Central Prison. He’s been cited for disobeying orders, which could be of either major or minor significance, for damaging property and possessing weapons. But of course he is “reformed” and ready to assume his place in society. Yeah, right.
The other 19 inmates set for release are just as notorious as Bowden. Among their number are first and second degree murderers, rapists of women and children, kidnappers and armed robbers. Every one of them has found trouble in prison, too, ranging from simple possession to fighting to sexual assaults on fellow inmates. They are hardened criminals, not people who have paid their debt to society.
In fairness to elected and appointed officials, passing laws won’t prevent criminal behavior when a person has determined to act criminally. However, it is the prime duty of government to ensure that such criminals can’t repeat their offenses. The fact that the inmates in question can be released is substantive proof that government is fundamentally incapable of performing this basic task.
Worse still--and the greatest indictment against our intelligence--is how the politicians who write our unwieldy and ineffective laws, and create the unmanageable bureaucracies that administer them, can convince us of their insight and understanding each and every election year.
Shouldn’t we be just the least bit tired of their continual malfeasance and campaign pandering?
Politicians can find money to build a theatre for Dolly Parton’s tenth cousin thrice removed. There are funds aplenty for tea pot museums, sports arenas, light rail systems and pork barrel vote buying. Laws are readily written to suck every expendable dime from your income, to steal your liberty, or to make it virtually impossible to dispose of your household garbage. Yet funds can’t be found and laws can’t be written to keep predatory vermin off the streets?
Get ready, here it comes again, if North Carolina releases twenty violent convicts as currently planned. A 35-year old sentencing law apparently defines life in prison as 80 years. Thus the twenty convicts--led by Bobby Bowden--think they have fulfilled their “life” sentence obligation.
Here’s an oddity; all twenty are still alive, meaning they haven’t served “life” in prison at all. Not a single one of those inmates has served even half of their 80-year “life” sentence. In fact, those 20 inmates owed the civil population 1600 combined years of prison time. Yet, if released as currently planned, they will have served only 644 total years. Somewhere, someone owes us 956 years in the jug.
There is an equitable solution. If politicians are unwilling to require violent offenders to do their time, perhaps those same politicians should do it for them. Obviously that’s a pipe dream, so we’re left to ponder where those missing years went.
Good conduct credits. That’s why a convicted murderer’s or rapist’s 80-year “life” sentence is neither 80 years nor life. However, I’ll bet that Larry Lovett and Normal Ehrhart don’t see their sentences reduced one day. You see, both men died on August 7, 1975 when the aforementioned Bobby Bowden, sans judge or jury, sentenced them to eternity without parole. No amount of good behavior will pull their bodies from the grave. Concern for Bowden’s eternal destiny is valid and admirable. Conversely, for government to have established laws that allow his release from prison is wholly irresponsible.
Now, back to this good conduct business. Even if Bowden isn’t the worst inmate in penal history he hasn’t been a member of the penitentiary scout troop either. Bowden has racked up 17 infractions since he hung out his shingle at Central Prison. He’s been cited for disobeying orders, which could be of either major or minor significance, for damaging property and possessing weapons. But of course he is “reformed” and ready to assume his place in society. Yeah, right.
The other 19 inmates set for release are just as notorious as Bowden. Among their number are first and second degree murderers, rapists of women and children, kidnappers and armed robbers. Every one of them has found trouble in prison, too, ranging from simple possession to fighting to sexual assaults on fellow inmates. They are hardened criminals, not people who have paid their debt to society.
In fairness to elected and appointed officials, passing laws won’t prevent criminal behavior when a person has determined to act criminally. However, it is the prime duty of government to ensure that such criminals can’t repeat their offenses. The fact that the inmates in question can be released is substantive proof that government is fundamentally incapable of performing this basic task.
Worse still--and the greatest indictment against our intelligence--is how the politicians who write our unwieldy and ineffective laws, and create the unmanageable bureaucracies that administer them, can convince us of their insight and understanding each and every election year.
Shouldn’t we be just the least bit tired of their continual malfeasance and campaign pandering?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
