Stupid Thief Caught on Camera

Click here for the story from the Associated Press.  A stupid thief in Wisconsin is inadvertantly photographed by his victims.  Add this to the dumb criminal file.

btw, I'm disgusted that Floyd and Warner Get to Live

Last week, two thugs who killed Philadelphia Police Sgt. Steven Liczbinski, were sentenced to Life in Prison.   That's right.  Two of the three men responsible for cowardly taking a police officer's life during the commission of a felony will get three meals and a roof over their heads for the rest of their lives.  All at the expense of the people.  Yep, you and me, and every other tax payer in PA will be contributing to feeding, clothing, entertaining, training, counseling, educating, "rehabilitating", two men who deserve no more than a kick in the teeth and a one way ticket off the face of this earth.

Oh, what a system!

Adult Crime, Adult Punishment

By now, the few readers I might have probably already know that I think our justice system needs a swift kick in the butt.  Most importantly, I think that criminals who commit serious crimes need severe punishments.  To see murderers, robbers, burglars and other violent thugs get light sentences is sickening.  Too often I see or read of some thug getting out of prison after as little as a few months for serious crimes.  Well, add juvenile offenders to my list.  If you commit a serious crime, why should you get a better break just because you are under 18?

I'm reminded of the 17 year old who shot his friend at a drunken party in Edgmont Township a few years ago.  It sickened me to learn that a judge sentenced him as a juvenile, essentially maxing out his punishment when he turned 21, as if turning 21 magically rehabilitates anyone.  All to often juvenile thugs seem to get the undeserved breaks, because they are juveniles.  Moreover, its because we want to BELIEVE that they can be rehabilitated and pointed down the right path.  Well, that fine for non-violent, and less serious crimes, but, as far as I'm concerned, those breaks should not be available to those juvenile thugs who commit serious crimes.  Do we honestly believe as citizens that just because someone is 17, or 16, or 15, that we can change a lifetimes worth of thug-programming and make lemonade out of the criminal lemons?   In my experience, the answer is no.

I've been told that to do this would be to "give up" on these young offenders.  I agree, and I'm tired of wasting taxpayer money to try to save those who don't want to be and / or can't be saved.  Lets give up on the thugs and devote time and energy (and if need be, taxpayers' money) to good people, not criminals.

So at what age do I suggest giving up on young thugs and treating them as adults?  Good question.  15?  14? 11?

Maybe a topic for next time.   

Life or Death for Philly Cop Killers?

The Philadelphia Jury is still out.  In 2008, Philadelphia Police Sgt. Stephen Liczbinski was shot and killed by an escaping bank robber, Howard Cain.  Cain was shot and killed by police.  Cain's accomplices,  Eric DeShann Floyd and Levon T. Warner were apprehended by police.  Two weeks ago, Floyd and Warner were found guilty.  Now, the jury has to decide whether they will be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, or to death.  This case is an interesting one, because neither Floyd nor Warner fired any shots.  They were found guilty of Murder based on the the fact that they were accomplices, in the getaway car together, and they shared in the intent to kill the Police Officer.  

I know that the death penalty is not perfect.  I know that there are a million and one reasons to abolish it.  I also know that Eric DeShann Floyd and Levon T. Warner are reasons to KEEP the death penalty, not abolish it.  Coverage here on Philly.com

Also, click here for info on the last six officers killed in the line of duty in Philadelphia.

SWAT Teams Tend to Take Flak

It happens time after time. A violent or potentially violent situation comes to an end after a SWAT team is deployed, and people stomp their feet that the police used too much force.

Today's headline story is tragic. (dailylocal.com) A young man is dead. It is not a happy ending for anyone. My thoughts are with his family, and I wish them the best. Having said that, from reading the story, the police did exactly what they are trained to do. They did exactly what they are supposed to do. They did exactly what they are expected to do. What would the headline say (and what comments would be made) if the police did not go to the home after being notified by Crisis that the individual posed a danger to himself of others? He lived in a residential community, had roommates, had some sort of mental or emotional issue(s) that Crisis alerted police to, and he had a gun.

The concept of an SWAT team was developed by the LAPD in California years ago. SWAT stands for Special Weapons And Tactics. More commonly today we refer to these teams as ERT (emergency response team). Theses teams are better manned and equipped to handle emergency and violent situations. The point is that a patrol officer is just that - a patrol officer. Liken it to your family doctor. If you go to see your doctor for an earache and h finds out it's a brain tumor, would you prefer a brain surgeon perform surgery or would you just stick with your family doctor?

One reader's comment suggested that because the individual ONLY had a handgun, that the ERT team and their weapons was an over-reaction. That type of comment is ridiculous. Forget what you've seen in movies like "Lethal Weapon" or "Cobra". Police officers - too many police officers - are killed every year by individuals with ONLY handguns.

As tragic and unfortunate as yesterdays events were, it could have gone down like this:

Crisis alerts police to individual who may be a threat to himself or others. Police arrive and speak to individual who needs and wants help for his situation. Individual goes with Crisis and receives help. End of story. It's not the ERT team that altered the course of events.

Again, my thoughts and condolences to the family.

Former Mexican President in Favor of Drug Legalization (in Mexico)

Vicente Fox, the former president of Mexico, has voiced his support for the legalization of drugs in Mexico.  Full Story at CNN.com

Fox makes some strong arguments, and has some good points. 

Gun Control, More or Less

Who carries guns?  Cops and Robbers carry them, and that's about it.  At least that the impression you'd get if you believed the newspapers, TV shows, and movies.  When it comes to gun control, I think politicians believe the newspapers, TV, and movies.  Politicians are generally in one of two camps. They are either "pro gun" and would suggest every citizen own at least three guns, whether they want to or not.  Then there are the anti gunners.  They think that guns are synonymous with Satan, crime, and war.  They use terminology made up solely for the news media like "brandish" and "assault rifle."

While I don't have and Second Amendment tattoos, nor do I say a prayer for Charlton Heston every night, I do wish that more law abiding citizens chose to train and arm themselves.  You may ask why I feel that way.  (of course, you might not care either, and that's fine too!)  Well, read the Dailylocal today.  One of the top stories is about an armed robber/robbers that were recently apprehended by police.  I can't help but wonder two things:

First, what would have happened to this idiots if they would have robbed me, or another armed citizen?

Second, would those idiots, and future wanna be idiots, think twice before robbing someone if they knew there was a likelihood that their would-be victims would be armed?

So, should there be more or less gun control?  I think there should be more to the degree that it should be harder for criminals and ne'er-do-wells to get them.  Moreover, when they are caught with them, they should be punished, really punished.

When it comes to the good citizens, I think there should be less gun control.  Law abiding men and women shouldn't be prohibited from buying ammunition.  They shouldn't be taxed out the wazoo for it either.  Nor should they be prohibited from purchasing a particular sized gun or magazine just because a particular state legislature or city council thinks that 9 bullets are ok, but 10 bullets should be prohibited.

I hope I am never robbed at gunpoint.  If I am, I hope its before politicians say I can't arm myself.