Mission statement:

Armed and Safe is a gun rights advocacy blog, with the mission of debunking the "logic" of the enemies of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

I can be reached at 45superman@gmail.com.You can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/45superman.

Saturday, October 31, 2009

Illinois releasing criminals early; law-abiding citizens' ability to defend themselves still not supported

With Illinois in dire financial states (double digit billion dollar dire), I certainly won't complain about the state looking for ways to cut expenses. Still . . .

By releasing those inmates from prison in the next few weeks, Gov. Pat Quinn's administration hopes to save millions of dollars and usher in other alternatives to incarceration. But the cost-cutting early releases are opposed by police, prosecutors and some crime victims.
The idea is that about a thousand inmates will be released, up to a year early, in order to save money.
State officials contend they will release only nonviolent drug and property crime offenders with no previous parole violations and no outstanding warrants or orders of protection taken out against them.
That's somewhat reassuring--I certainly would be more upset if the plan was for early release on violent crime convictions. Also, as an opponent of the "War on (Some) Drugs," I don't believe there should be "drug crimes" (aside from things like drugging people without their knowledge and consent).

On the other hand, because of this long "war," much of the drug culture is intertwined with the gang culture, and the probability that some of these "nonviolent" drug offenders actually have some violent crime in their past has to be, in my estimation, a fair amount above zero. Additionally, the way I read the above, the claim isn't that the convicts have no record of violent crime--only that this incarceration is not for a violent crime. Finally, the Illinois "justice" system is infamously of the revolving-door, "catch-and-release" type, whereby even when there is not an early release, the time spent in prison is rather brief.

I'm not the only one (no--not that kind of "Only One") with concerns:
It is a politically charged issue. Even supporters recognize the potential pitfalls, pointing to the occasional high-profile cases of convicts committing heinous crimes while on electronic monitoring.

Julius Anderson, a sex offender released from prison, was suspected in two brutal rapes last summer while on electronic monitoring. The attorney general's office says Anderson disappeared Aug. 7, but a special agent was not assigned by corrections to find him until Aug. 19.

"They've done their best to eliminate violent offenders, but someone is bound to commit murder, armed robbery or rape," said David Olson, a professor of criminal justice at Loyola University Chicago, who serves on an advisory board to the state Department of Corrections. "It won't do the victim any good to say this was bound to happen even if the person got out one year later."
What especially caught my eye was this:
Most of the inmates will return to Cook County.
And, I'd wager most of those are returning to Chicago, which along with Oak Park (also in Cook County), still bans handguns. Cook County also bans so-called "assault weapons" (not that such a ban make any difference to murderous thugs like Carail Weeks.

Finally, nowhere in Illinois is the right to carry a loaded defensive handgun available to the law-abiding citizen.

In other words, more thugs will be on the streets, unleashed on citizens whose ability to defend themselves from them remains evilly hamstrung. That's Illinois.


vlad said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
vlad said...

Blogger vlad said...
Dr George Beto, director-emeritus TDC, in charge of Criminal Justice studies Sam Houston SU Huntsville TX, remarked in class, "For every one hundred felonies committed there are three arrests and one and one half convictions." I asked, "Sir. What is the point of having prisons?" Dr Beto replied, "Prisons are magnificently irrelevant."
Eat, drink and be wary. For each violent, predatory thug locked in prison there are fifty on the street looking for prey.

9:27 AM, November 01, 2009

Patrick Sperry said...

You would think that with the examples of California and Colorado they would be more than aware that these programs simply don't work.

Gregg said...

It's a way to coerce the public into giving up more $$. The objective is not to save money the objective is to scare or inconvenience the public at large. That way the pork is protected, and more $ flows into the coffers of the corrupt.

Kurt '45superman' Hofmann said...

Anon, I'm not leaving up comments that I can't read.

Anonymous said...

Most violent criminals will re-
offend within days of being released. Our prisons have an
estimated population of 2.5 million people. Release all the non violent prisoners and let them work towards restitution. Keep all
the violent offenders for their full term.
I fear this idea is too simple for the more enlightened of us who surely are in charge of who gets released.
Paul in Texas